You're still going? To put this
over here? Let's do it. Good
evening, ladies and gentlemen.
The mayor has called the
meeting to order. Mayor Roscoe,
present. Council member. Kaplan.
Present. Council member. Kaplan.
Still here? Council
Councilmember. London. Vice
mayor. Sardinas here. Council
member. Sawyer here.
Councilmember Vazquez here. MR.
Mayor, we do have a quorum.
Please rise for the Pledge of
Allegiance and stay standing
for the invocation afterwards.
Like I pledge allegiance to the
flag. United States of America
and to the Republic for which
it stands. One nation under GOD,
indivisible, with liberty and
justice for all. Pastor. Yes.
Let's bow our heads to pray.
Eternal GOD, we are thankful
for how good you are to all of
us in our families, in this
community. We recognize you as
the one who makes all of this
possible. Each member of this
council is here because you
have ordained them to be here,
and for this we are thankful.
So we gather this evening with
grateful hearts for the
privilege of serving this
beautiful island and its people.
We acknowledge, Father King,
that true leadership is both
the responsibility and the gift.
And we humbly ask for your
guidance as we step into the
important work before you,
before all of us. Ancient of
days, from ocean's Edge to
village green, you have planted
this place and you have called
leaders to rise. Sustain each
of them personally and
professionally. The men and
women you have chosen to lead
this community. Are now ready
to be led by you. Bestow upon
this Council clarity of purpose.
Remind us that every voice
matters and every decision
shapes a future not yet seen.
Father GOD, MAY we lead with
humility and finish with hope.
Bless this chamber and all the
people of GOD. Say amen. Amen
and amen. Thank you. Thank you.
The next item is the mayor's
brief comments by council. I
would. I would like to offer
our condolences for our fallen
police officers. We've had two
in good succession here. I'm
sure the police chief was at
the funeral today representing
us. So. These fortunately were
not from our department. But
obviously we very cognizant of
the fact that these are
outstanding men and women that
protect us at different places.
So our condolences. For those
who didn't hear our state rep,
Vicky Lopez, now goes to the
Miami-Dade County Commission
taking the seat that Eileen
Higgins vacated. So we're going
to be a little bit orphan from
one one side of the the House
of legislature. And so if there
are people that are interested
in running, this is the time to
go, go talk to the speaker and
the Senate PRESIDENT. Any other
comments? I would just like to
make a quick comment. I brought
this up at the police
investiture, but for the
benefit of the general public.
Halloween, although it seems
like ages ago, was a tremendous
success and it was in large
part due to our police presence,
not just at the borders,
keeping everybody safe and a
watchful eye, but passing
amongst all the residents and
all the children. It was truly
heartwarming. Every family
would see an officer and run up
and hug the officer and have a
whole conversation. It was
terrific and it's exactly what
we've always worked for in this
village. So I'm very grateful
and very proud. That's all.
Thank you. Just wanted to thank
my colleagues for expressions
of support recently. Thank you
all. A brief acknowledgment to
wonderful events I had the
opportunity to attend just
recently, one of them being for
the Key Biscayne Film Festival.
Just wanted to thank that group.
What an incredible job they've
done in curating an amazing
lineup. For all the residents
here in Key Biscayne. I would
invite everyone to check it out.
The second one for Bill Baggs
and the Friends of of Cape
Florida, also a wonderful event.
Just watching how community
comes together to really help
to maintain our jewel on this
island. And just to remind
everyone, I was reminded, going
up to the top of the lighthouse,
of what a beautiful sight that
is, the incredible history
behind it, and all the people
that work so hard to maintain
it. So I also invite everybody
to just kind of go back into
into what we have historically
right in our backyard. One more
thing for everyone, hopefully
feels generous to help out.
Terrible hurricane that hit
Jamaica and eastern Cuba. So
keep that in in your keep them
in your prayers. And also if
you could contribute to those
causes that would be great.
With that. MADAM Clerk, the
next item is public comments.
Okay. I have Charles Sherman.
Charles Sherman 324 West
Heather drive. Again, I've come
to praise commend the Council
and the administration. For
years they've been supportive
of the elderly, our senior
citizens and active and
important part of this
community. Recently, as a
policy matter, the free classes
of exercise at the community
center have been. Now the
people have been told they need
to pay $220 for the free
classes. I'm not sure this is a
a great policy change if you
want to be supportive of the
seniors, largely elderly women.
I've been to some of those
classes. There's one lady, 97
years old, Marilyn Kreisberg,
who leads one of these classes.
It's incredibly inspiring. I
urge you to go right, and I
have taken council people there
because this is an amazing
woman. $220. You don't think
it's very much for a community
like Key Biscayne, wealthy
community, that classes have
been halved since that policy
was put in place in OCTOBER. If
you go to those classes now,
they're there a shred of what
they were. So I'd like to
council, I'd like the
administration to give it a
deep think and try to figure
out whether there's a way to
get these ladies back in the
classes. It's not the light
exercise, it's the social
contact. It's the community
coming together. And now
they're not coming together. So
I really urge you to give it a
think. Thank you, thank you. Is
that 220 for a year or a month?
Yeah a year. Yes. That's that's
for a year. But a lot of people
are only on Key Biscayne, as
you know, for six months, four
months, 3 or 4 months. And
that's a lot of money for 2 or
3 months. How many classes a
week do they have? They have
dozens. So really there's a
there's a lady. There's a lady
there named Roxy who is a you
could you could talk to I think
you know her and she's she's
really organized it very well.
And people it's it's an
inspiring thing to go to and to
see these people and they're,
you know, they spend Maryland,
for instance, has an hour long
class. The first 15 minutes,
the ladies are all gathering
around, talking and sharing
whatever they've been doing.
It's a gossip 15 minutes, and
it's really important to them.
Okay. We can take that up at
some point. Thank you. Please
give it a think. Next speaker,
Karen Bieber. I think he's got
a he's got it. Good. I actually
have two separate things I'm
going to mention to you. Karen
Bieber, 788 Crandon. The first
one is I'm speaking as my
position on the Village of Key
Biscayne Sustainability
Advisory Board, and I'm
inviting everyone here to
please join us tomorrow from 2
P.M. To 5 P.M. At what is the
first ever South Florida
Sustainability Summit that is
meant for advisory boards from
municipalities across South
Florida. Most of the summits
are regional or national, and
they really are meant for staff
or elected officials. We are
very specifically speaking to
our counterparts in different
municipalities. About 6 or 8
months ago, we started talking
about our challenges, and we
know that the challenges that
we have here are not unique to
Key Biscayne, but rather are
the same for each municipality.
So why are we working in silos?
It would be so much better if
we can have power in numbers,
if we share successes, share
challenges and share resources.
So we convened a summit. We
invited 12 different
municipalities, again from
across South Florida. We have
three panels. One is how to get
things done, which is really
important, I think, for people
who are volunteers, members of
the community, we actually pay
a play, a very important role
in moving forward goals and in
bringing to you issues in our
community. We have another one
that is about water management,
and we have a third one that's
about waste management. And
that is of course the bigger
issue of waste, but also
recycling events, things like
that. So it should be really
great. We have a happy hour
networking from 5 to 6. So
please join us tomorrow. Okay.
Second thing is speaking to
agenda item ten c on your for
this evening. I'm quite sure
that stamped concrete has a
place somewhere in this country.
But that place is not here. We
no longer have the privilege of
being able to look at or
consider projects just in in
its own little box. We have to
consider the bigger picture.
And does any project that
you're approving does it does
it speak to what we want? Does
it speak to the longevity? Does
it speak to the resiliency? And
does it speak to the health of
Key Biscayne? When we're little,
we get to pick a shirt and we
get to pick shorts and maybe a
shoe and a sock and we can put
it all together. But at a
certain age, we have to look in
the mirror and go, you know,
maybe we really need to
coordinate everything. So
that's the same thing, I think,
in how we need to really
approach these larger projects.
Approved pilot studies, measure.
Right. Just stamped concrete.
Absolutely. Have it be one of
them. But there are so many
options right now where we can
test and measure and make a
good decision on what that
spend is. And I don't believe a
blanket. Let's do the roads and
let's put solid pavement. Maybe
because it's a grant that we
can use, or maybe it's because
it checks the box. I don't
think that's the right thing.
Consider the options, fund a
few pilot projects, get the
data, measure it, and then make
the right decision as we as we
move forward. So thank you,
thank you. Elisa Benac. Elise
Pennock, 772 Ridgewood Road.
Mayor and council members,
village manager I just really
am here on behalf of the
Disability Advisory Board to
say thank you for creating that
new position. We are super
excited. It's, you know,
customer what is it? Resident
experience. Sorry. And we know
that this person will wear many
hats. We know that. You know
one of those will be disability
and inclusion services. And we
are fully committed to
supporting that person. And you
know guiding them in any way
that we can. We we are here for
them and we are incredibly
hopeful about this. So thank
you again. And just know that
we are working really hard.
We're working. I want to say
thank you to Todd because they
bought a beach wheelchair and
we're working with him on that,
and we're working very hard.
And we actually have another
meeting going on right now. So
I'm going to leave and go to
that. But we will keep you
updated. So thank you. Jan.
Good evening, mayor, Council
members and Village Manager Jan
611 Ocean Drive, Key Biscayne.
Thank you for the opportunity
to speak today. I'm the
treasurer of the Key Biscayne
Independent and a resident of
25 years. Though tonight I'm.
Tonight I'm speaking as a
resident. I thoughtfully
request that the council
examine the the new policy,
which imposes an arbitrary fee
for most public records,
request a fee that was adopted
without any public discussion.
Accountability and transparency
cannot be separated from public
records. Charging a fee for
access to information even
before many any documents are
produced was attempted.
Previously in 2023, and it's
frankly an unreasonable policy.
It places unnecessary barriers
between the public and the
information they are entitled
to limiting meeting. Excuse me,
limiting meaningful oversight.
The Florida Center for
Government Accountability has
stated that this policy,
adopted unilaterally by the
administration, MAY not comply
with Florida law. This concern
is especially urgent tonight,
since the council prepares to
vote for a $60 million loan
application for the largest
public works project in the
island's history, imposing new
fees for information when none
had been imposed previously
undermines accountability and
risks eroding public trust. At
the precise moment when
transparency matters most. For
these reasons, I urge the
council to direct the manager
and the clerk to request fees
only when records are truly
voluminous, as described in the
state law. This safeguard is
essential to maintaining
transparency, accountability,
and the public's right to know.
Thank you for your attention
and for considering the
policies that protect
government and and preserve
access to vital information.
Thank you, thank you. Luis de
la Cruz. Luis dela Cruz, 640
Allendale Road. MR. Mayor, MR.
Vice mayor, council. Okay, so
I'm wondering whether maybe I
missed a a meeting of some sort.
I try to I try not to because I
always try to remind you of a
lot of stuff, but I see stuff
on this particular agenda that
just doesn't make sense. You
know, for instance, item nine b,
we're borrowing $60 million for
a project that, as far as I
know, has not been approved.
And we're pledging revenue
sources for that project, and
we're signing loan agreements
for that project. I'm not sure
what's going on here, but, you
know, I mean, I don't think I
missed a meeting, and I don't
think you guys have brought
this up for approval and going
forward and borrowing money and
pledging assets and signing
loan agreements, tells whoever
we're the lender is that we've
approved the project, which we
have not. In fact, there's
another engineer right now
looking at things, and I think
he's going to come up with
something that you're going to
appreciate a lot more than what
we already have. So again,
that's a loan for $60 million.
Then there's the. Line item ten
d a contract with Black and
Veatch not to exceed $373,000.
What is I'm not I'm not sure
what is that for, because, I
mean, they are the ones that
are translating what the
engineers are, are doing for
for us, the engineers, they're
our second set of engineers. I
never really understood that
concept, but why are we signing
another contract for $374,000
with Black and Veatch? I also
heard that we paid them $45,000
or something to fill out the
application for financing,
something that I am absolutely
sure our cfo and Colleen could
do in one afternoon. I just
don't understand what you guys
are doing with our money, and
I'm not accusing the council
because the council is not the
one signing the checks, but
$45,000 to. For what? To
oversee another, you know, to
to fill out an application. And
then there was another $50,000,
I think that that was paid to
Black and Veatch or or thought
to be paid to Black and Veatch
for them to oversee the work
that this new engineer is doing.
How many engineers do we need
in order in order to get this
done? And if we do need an
engineer, then let's hire an
engineer on our staff. If our
Chief Resiliency officer cannot
do the work, he cannot do the
job then, and we have to pass
it along to consultants all the
time. Let's hire the right
person. Okay. This is our money.
Everybody here and everybody
who's listening and people who
don't even listen until they
realize how much money has been
spent and how much, you know,
you guys have to approve and
and millage. But the bottom
line is that I don't want my
money to be spent that way. I
don't want I don't want Black
and Veatch to get $50,000 to
look over the shoulder of
another engineer. I don't want
I don't want them to get
$45,000 for filling out an
application. This has got to be
the best job in the world to be
a consultant to the village of
Key Biscayne. Come on. Please,
guys. One last thing. I am
absolutely 100% in favor of
what? What Karen was talking
about. You know, we should not
be going forward and putting
stamped concrete or or. The
paving that we normally do on,
on our, on those, on those
speed tables that were that
we're fixing and on the streets
without giving a chance to.
What the consulting engineer
who, who we paid very little
money to. And he did a huge
amount of work in a complete
opposite of what normally
happens here. You know, Walter
Walter Rodriguez Meyer, who is
professor at Stanford
University. And he's got some
really good ideas for us to be
holistic in our resilience, not
just to put in huge pipes and
huge pumps, but to make our our
streets resilient, right? Our,
our our traffic circles. Let's
let's try it. Let's try two
traffic circles and let's
measure and let's see if that
works for us. It's a lot better
to be holistic in this and not
just let's make it all paving
and impervious materials. And
let's, let's put the biggest
pumps and the biggest pipes
that we can possibly put
together. Thank you very much.
Thank you. I'll be listening on
tv. Sanchez. Cecile Sanchez,
260 Cypress Drive. I come again
to ask you. You are our elected
officials. One of you, all of
you. Someone has to represent
me and a bunch of us that maybe
they don't show up, but they
sometimes read in the paper or
in the chats or your your your
communications. But it's crazy.
Can you please hold to your
pocket book? Well, the manager
wants. And what staff wants is
one thing, but you're the ones
that have to make the decision.
How long are we going to
continue spending this kind of
money? For what? I don't
understand what Luis says.
Thank you. Thank you. Because
part of it. All right. I just
want to ask about the one time,
a long time ago, I asked our
mayor if maybe he could have a
like, once a month, maybe a
night, that people could come
here and ask questions because
it's very hard. We come here,
we say our piece, but nothing
ever happens afterwards. You
can't answer. There's no give
and take. Is there anything
that maybe can be done? Tweak
once a month? I don't know, I
don't know what could be, but I
think maybe it would make maybe
some people that are reluctant
to come because they say,
what's the point? Why should I
come and waste my time? They
don't listen and I'm sorry, but
that's what people say. It's
not that because they're not
here, they're approving what
you're doing. Not necessarily.
I need to ask, why did we have
a gag policy? I know there's
something going on now that
hasn't been finished, but why
in this community? We needed a
guiding policy. I don't
understand it. I wish someone
would explain it. We're not in
Cuba. Why? Why do we need a
policy? Can we come and say.
Because what is happening? We
don't need to hide? I want to
ask the same thing about the
money, I don't understand. I
try to come to the meetings. I
tried to read and get a little
understanding of what's going
on. If we have a committee of
three that suggested that we
hire an engineer to come and
give us another idea of how to
maybe improve the stormwater,
and we are not on the water.
I've been living here since
1960. I don't think we ever had
a house condemned because of
flooding. So the you know, I if
we need to do whatever we need
to do is one thing, but this is
what is this? Are we giving
money away? It's crazy. It's
crazy I so if we're not sure,
why are we going to apply for a
$6 million loan? I would like
somebody to explain it simply.
Simply as we says. Are we going
gung ho on this or not? Now,
regarding those recovery
residences, you mean that I
might have my neighbor's house
as a rehab place? Is that the
law? That is, we need to obey
that I'm going to have some
recovery. Drug addicts,
whatever, living next to me. I
would like somebody to tell me,
where are we going? Is this
necessary? Do we need to say
yes? What are other
municipalities doing? Can how
about communicating with us and
telling us what is happening,
not just put it that you need
to vote or you need to decide?
I don't understand that part.
Oh, do we have a building code?
Do we have a good building code?
If we have a good building code,
like Brett says, why do we need
to keep on giving variances?
Please? I would like to know if
we were working with Raquel
Regalado and we were going to
kind of give the $950,000. Why
are the friends of the
underlying now are going to
enter into the picture and be
consultants? So traffic circles,
that's another issue. Please. I
remember council was ready. You
can you wrap it up okay.
Council was ready to vote on
putting plastic grass in the
parking when we were
reconfiguring and on on
Fernwood, the the way we parked,
you were all because Staff Jake
Osman came here and said it was
cheaper and you were ready to
vote and say yes. If it wasn't
for Brett Moss, that brought it
again. And Mike Davie, we were
going to have plastic grass for
parking there. So can we just
go slow? Is this an emergency
please? Please. Okay. No more
consultants like you are. A
former council member used to
say thank you. Mike Davie. Yeah.
Son of a mike Davie, 50 Ocean
Lane Drive. First, I do want to
commend. We didn't nobody
brought it up veterans day. I
thought this year was
especially you know we're we
used to when I moved here first
20 something years ago. We had
a lot of older veterans who
were here, and they've gone now
and they've passed. But. Well,
not some of you, but you know,
you're still around, but, you
know, it's just it was a great
event. I thought it was really
well done. Well done. You know,
your team always does a great
job and the vets. So it's a
great I love that event for Key
Biscayne. It's so important
that what we do here I'm here
to talk about two things. I am
really I appreciate that you
funded the position for, for
for special needs, for
disability, you know, for for a
coordinator. I think that's
that's great. I'm really proud
of this council for for moving
forward. I regret that we
didn't do it when I was up
there. Two things I do want to
talk about are the the
revolving credit, the the state,
the freshwater fund. As I
understand it, I'm in support
of it simply because it gives
us a funding source. It doesn't
obligate us to spend any money
on this, doesn't obligate us to
borrow. It just gives us and we
have to stay current for this
fiscal year. We need to be in
the process. So that's why I'm
asking you to support that
moving forward on the
Rickenbacker. We need to get
going. We need we said we'd put
up and we need to do it. So
that's on the agenda tonight. I
would ask that you all move
forward with that. Let's keep
this village going forward. We
need to be moving. It's been
how many years we've been
talking about stormwater and
undergrounding. Let's get going.
You guys have the opportunity.
So thanks very much. Have a
great night. Thank you. Thanks.
Next speaker, Brett Moss. Good
evening, Brett Moss. 152 West
Mashta Drive. Thank you to all
of you. I know this is not easy.
I've sat up there and some of
the hardest parts are listening
to everybody during public
comments because I know all of
you want to respond, but for
time it's difficult to do. I'm
here for two reasons. One of
them. You know, I was not here
when Key Biscayne Incorporated.
I moved here 20 years ago. But
I do think of myself, think to
myself, what's the reason why
we incorporated? And only one
word comes to mind is called
control. We want to control our
destiny. We want to control our
services. We want to control
our assets. So I see on the
agenda that you guys are
talking about the conversion
and transferring our lights to
fpl, and I think you guys need
to think hard about this,
because I think it goes against
what we one of the reasons why
we incorporated, I'm sure there
are other avenues where we can
keep control of our assets,
hire them to maintain them for
us. And I would like to at
least you guys to look into
that. Second, I'm here for the
variances that are being
requested at 640 South Mashta.
I know that you guys asked the
Zork to look at it. I am the
chair of the Zork currently. We
did take a deep dive into it.
We went through everything. It
was unanimous that we were all
against the variance. We we
know that this is on a large
lot. It's a regular sized lot.
It first of all, a higher
ceilings is not, to us a
justifiable reason why you
would ask for variance. And
they they said it's
unacceptable. High ceilings
which they're a couple feet
higher than my ceilings in my
house. The way our code is
designed for height is that you
can achieve those ceiling
heights that you want, but it's
a trade off. By pushing the
walls inwards, they would have
to move it in about 18in on
each side. They would achieve
it. It's easy to be done. They
have to go back and redesign it,
do it like everybody else does
it. There's no reason or any
justification. They also asked
for increasing the height of
the rear yard. It's something
that we're still discussing as
a board, but we have not come
down to whether we're going to
recommend to you guys to
increase it or not. We MAY we
don't know how much it's going
to be. So our strong feeling is
that if they do want to do that,
they should wait until you guys
make a decision. This is not
something that should go
through the variance process.
That is what we looked at. I
have to go pick up my son if
you want me to come back. If
you want to ask questions
during the hearing portion, I
can come back. If not, just let
me know. All right. Thank you,
thank you, thank you for coming.
Next. Speaker Gene Stearns.
Three minutes. I got 30 minutes.
MR. Mayor, council members. MR.
Manager, MADAM Clerk, 250 k
Florida Drive. Gene stearns,
thank you for everything you do.
I think it we're so fortunate
to live in this island. It's
not just that it's an island.
It's a community. Police and
fire rescue are phenomenal. Our
public area maintenance is
phenomenal. It's not perfect,
but darn near close to perfect.
And the care and attention that
is paid in this village is
absolutely appreciated. And I
have to always remind people
when I listen to the concerns
that are expressed, that let
people have legitimate concerns,
we continue to have the lowest
tax rate of any municipality in
Dade County. I believe that MR.
London has done a good job at
looking at every nickel that's
being spent unwisely, and
reminds us all about it, and
that's important because
otherwise you're not hearing
what needs to be heard. But one
of the things that I think it's
frustrating, any of us who've
lived here a long time and I've
lived here 53 years, is that
we're surrounded by parks. And
to get here, we have to go over
a causeway. And that causeway
has been poorly maintained for
every year that I've been here.
The causeway fund has been
appropriated for other county
purposes. Historically, they
didn't spend money on
maintenance. That left the
Bearcat Bridge in a point of
near failure, frankly, was
close to failure when they
discovered it, and it would be
wonderful if the county paid
better attention to our needs
and the needs of the people
that want to access the public
parks on Key Biscayne, because
our interest is is clear. We
live here, but in a sense,
we're also stewards of what we
see around us. What's happening
in Cape Florida, what's
happening in that state park,
what's happening in Crandon
Park, what's happening on the
Causeway. And if we wait for
the county to do what it's
supposed to do, I'll be long
gone. MR. London will be long
gone. The money that he's saved
will not be spent. And and we
have to do it because they're
not going to do it. We can
whine about it. We can complain
about it. We can say they
should do it. But left to their
own devices, they would
recreate on Rickenbacker
Causeway what we see going over
on on the islands, going to to
the beach on Watson Island, a
road that is mindlessly stupid.
I mean, there's no other way to
say it and frankly, paved from
one end to the other. And
that's what the county was
planning for Virginia Key.
Asphalt and concrete, and then
requiring all kinds of
expensive stormwater removal
systems because the dirt is
going to be gone. It's just
going to be asphalt. So
frustrated with this, a fellow
came to see me who who was
going to develop some land on
Key Biscayne and named David
Martin. I didn't know David,
and he asked me if I'd get
involved. I said, I don't do I
never appear in front of the
council and anything about
anything that's not pro bono.
And I don't help developers do
anything. And I didn't know him.
And but he's a nice gentleman.
And on the way out he said, is
there something I can do for
Key Biscayne? I said, sure, how
a bunch of really good
engineers and design a causeway
because the county isn't doing
it. And that was a flippant
comment. And the next thing I
know, he did it. And so he
hired some really, really
bright people and spent a lot
of time coming up with a design
for the Causeway that has the
misfortune of making sense. It
not only provides access for us
to get to and from the island,
it provides our role. Frankly,
it looking what's going on in
the state park in Crandon Park
to provide access to the people
who own that land, that are
entitled to use it without
having to spend a day getting
home. And so this plan just
frankly just makes sense. And
what it also does, and I give
an awful lot of credit to our
county commissioner, Raquel
Regalado, who who is just
really taking charge and
identified the problem and has
brought into the project the
underlying and the funding
mechanism for the underlying
and the process that they've
been involved in, and called
this part of the project the
shoreline. And I invite you all
if you haven't done it, when
you go in Virginia, key count
the traffic lanes of asphalt
that are on Virginia Key today.
In some places, you have nine
lanes of asphalt road. The plan
that David Martin's engineers
came up with turns all of that
into a park, all of it, and
provides access for us free,
unencumbered access. It
provides for bicyclists no
conflict between cars and
cyclists, because the access
and egress for cars is on the
inside lane, and the cyclists
can stay either down or
Virginia Key, or on the outside
lanes and go straight through.
It is something that if we
don't do it, it is going to be
a problem for us. It's unfair
to ask anybody, David Martin or
anyone else to keep funding it.
And so that work is to the
point where it can be funded.
We just need to do it, because
if we don't do it, nobody is
and we're going to end up with
a mess. So I urge you to do it.
And I thank you for considering
it. And I can tell you how
important it is to this
community. Thank you, thank you.
Okay, MADAM Clerk, that's all
cards I have. The next item is
the agenda. Approval, deferrals,
additions, deletions,
substitutions and withdrawals.
I'd like to pull 12 g. Roll g.
G g g g g g. Okay. I got
excited when I heard g. Because
I'd like to suggest that we not
deal tonight with nine g and
with the discussion item on
next part nine g. I think
there's a lot of frustrations
about variances, policies and
procedures. These have to be
addressed, I think, more
comprehensively. These measures
I don't think address what's
really going on. And the cause
that we're so concerned about
for so long. So I'd rather I'd
rather deal with this, you know,
with Chad in a more
comprehensive way than to adopt
these measures or even waste
time discussing them. Frankly,
tonight, isn't there a deadline
for the state for JANUARY 1st?
Chad. I think that's nine d. I
think what I'm talking about,
the advisory board to deal with
variances, that's nine g, nine
g I'm sorry. That's my
suggestion. You're asking to
defer. Yep. Well. I don't know
that we need to vote on it
tonight. But I certainly would
like to have some discussion. I
think it needs to come out on
nine g. Because just deferring
it to what. Why don't we. We'll
have a discussion item on mayor
and council reports. The
ex-parte part I want to deal
with this, but I don't think
these are the right way to deal
with the problem. There is a
problem. These aren't the
solution, and I don't think
they can be well, okay. You
would like to add a discussion
item. That's right. Yeah, yeah.
Hold on. Have a discussion item.
We have a discussion item on ex
parte communications. Yeah,
yeah. Frank on your item nine g.
Are you willing to defer it? No,
no not at this time I would I
would like to have a discussion
on it. We don't have we maybe
we MAY defer on it after we
discuss it. But I would like to
have a discussion on it okay.
Thank you. Frank. Frank, can I
ask you a question? Your
concern for the ordinance of.
Thank you, Oscar, you're
concerned about the ordinances
is to just discuss this. The
all the the all the zoning
issues is one, one complete
group specifically variances.
Yeah. For for many years, we
simply didn't deal with
variances. They never came
forward. And now we're dealing
with them repeatedly. Right.
And the point that Brett made
earlier about justification is
really is a problem for us. So
we don't have. But in our
current code we don't have any
issue with a hardship. Now
we're having a discussion
without being able to have the
benefit of having the
discussion. So either we should,
I think, defer it or not defer
it. I'm in support of having
the conversation. Okay. All
right. We'll have a
conversation and we'll we'll
see where it goes. All right,
MADAM Clerk, all those in favor
of the agenda as amended? No,
I've got a couple I want to do.
Excuse me, I want to I want to
take ten b, ten c and ten d and
move those to a workshop. I'm
sorry. Ten b, ten b, ten c and
ten d and move those into an
infrastructure workshop. I
don't believe we can address
these this time. There's these
are super complicated issues d
d b, ten b, c and d okay. And
move those to an infrastructure
workshop. Good. Where what
workshop would that be. We'll
create one. So you want to
create an infrastructure
workshop. Yeah okay. Not a
committee. It's just a workshop.
Workshop. Committee workshop.
Is that a motion? Yes. Second.
I'll second. Great. So for the
record, the request was as part
of deferrals would be ten b, c
and d and then there to be a
workshop on those items. Yes.
Right. Just I know there's
other items too, but I mean
just for purposes of those
three. Those three. Yes, sir.
Just to understand ten b, ten c
and ten d and ten d I don't
think I mean my, I think we
should talk about I don't mind
ten b and ten c but ten d I
think that's a subject to
discuss today. I'd like to have
that ready for discussion.
That's a that's already been
discussed at a workshop,
already been discussed at ad
hoc. So there's no need to go
back to an infrastructure
workshop. It doesn't make sense.
I mean, clearly it's on the
record, clearly what the
position is prepared to be
reported. So in my opinion, I
don't think ten d merits a
workshop. It's already been
approved. You're talking about
ten d ten d yeah, that's why i
asked ten d it's been, it's I
just heard ten b no it's b c
and d right. So ten d has
already gone through a workshop
has already been discussed ad
nauseam at the last ad hoc
committee. I don't think it
merits an additional what are
we going to talk about. This is
something that's already been
discussed. It's something that
is prepared to be voted on and
to defer to a workshop. I just
don't see the logic behind that.
I'm good with your analysis.
Thank you. I agree, I agree
with Mike. So there was a
motion and a second. Yeah. So
we vote on ten b, c and d. You
those that wish to defer it say
I. Aye those opposed. No no nay
Councilmember Kaplan and
Councilmember Bosco and what
happened. It's deferred.
Deferred. Deferred motion
carries three. Okay. I have a
question for your item. Nine g.
Would you be okay with treating
it the same way and creating a
workshop around that to go a
little bit deeper on the
variances, or do you still want
to have that discussion? Well,
this is because you mentioned
you want to have a discussion
workshop would allow that,
right? My issue is, yeah, this
has been brewing now I've been
on council for a year. This has
been brewing for a year and I
don't know. Now we're getting
to Thanksgiving, Christmas
where we're going to have a
workshop and I think we need to
discuss it. It I don't know if
we need to make a decision on
today, but I think we need to
discuss what's going on. I'm
discussing I support discussion,
okay. Anything else? All right.
All those in favor of the
agenda changes, I I'm sorry.
Was there an objection? No.
Okay. Motion carries. The next
item is a special recognition
for Officer Gordon r Spitler.
Good evening. Mayor, Council
manager, before we start with
the special recognition, I just
want to thank the mayor for
acknowledging the last week in
Dade County has been extremely
difficult for law enforcement.
And we did have members at both
services, including today. So
thank you for acknowledging
that. But let's celebrate some
good stuff, because we don't
get to do that often. And it's
with great pride that I stand
here before you today to
formally recognize Officer
Gordon Spitler for his
exemplary actions on Friday,
OCTOBER 17th of this year, we
received a request from
Miami-Dade Sheriff's Office
with an emergency at Hovey
Beach involving an overturned
kayak and two distressed
swimmers. And at the time,
Miami-Dade Sheriff's Office
didn't have available vessels
to respond. Officer Spitler was
dispatched and promptly arrived
in the area, and he was
directed to where the victim's
location was. Upon locating
both individuals who were in
the water, he observed that
they were visibly in distress
and struggling to stay afloat,
and despite operating as a one
man unit, he demonstrated
exceptional composure, decisive
action under pressure as he
positioned his vessel to safely
render immediate aid. He
immediately recognized one of
the swimmers was in severe
distress, but he maneuvered
closer and successfully brought
that individual aboard by
physically hoisting him from
the water. Despite the victim's
exhaustion and lack of mobility,
he immediately placed the
individual into a recovery
position and began to monitor
their condition while
simultaneously coordinating the
rescue of the second swimmer.
Through his calm leadership
sound judgment, both victims
were safely recovered and
transported to the dock area at
Miami, Seaquarium, for medical
assistance. His quick response,
courage, and prompt execution
of his duties directly resulted
in the preservation of two
lives. His actions exemplify
the highest standards of public
service and bring great credit
upon himself and the Key
Biscayne community. Therefore,
I am extremely proud to award
Officer Gordon Spitler with the
agency's Lifesaving Award for
his heroic actions and
dedication to duty. During this
incident. Gordon.
He's afraid
to have you talk, so I'm just
going to do it anyways. I just
want to tell you, and for the
people here, we're a community
and it starts from the
residents here because I've
been doing this for 30 years.
You can see all the stripes
even more than the chief has
there. So it starts from the
community. You're supporting
the village council and making
these village council people
who then pick a great chief and
the chief then supports us. And
with your budget, you guys make
it so he's able to give us the
best training that departments
get. And with that training
that we get and the equipment
we get, we're able to go out
there and help the community
and do rescues that we do out
here for the village. And
always, as the village manager
says, you know, we keep this
place safe and secure. So thank
you for your support always and
what you do for us. Thank you,
thank you. Thanks, Tom. Gordon,
on behalf of this community, we
want to thank you for your
service here. Great job. Thank
you. MADAM Clerk. I'd like to
move up since our commissioner
is here, let's move ten a
forward. Okay. A resolution of
the village council of the
Village of Key Biscayne,
Florida, approving a memorandum
of understanding with the
friends of the underline.
Underline, Inc. For advisory
services relating to the
Rickenbacker Causeway in an
amount not to exceed $950,000,
providing for waiver of
competitive bidding, providing
for authorization, and
providing for an effective date
move moved second properly
before us. MR. Manager, you
want to lead us off? Yes, MR.
Mayor, and yes, MR. Mayor and
Council members, I do want to
recognize. I do believe the
commissioner is here. I'm sorry.
There she is. We also have with
us also the ceo of the friends
of the Underline, as well as
the, we hope, the team from
Serbia who's going to be doing
with us. So what we have before
you and what we brought
together is a memorandum of
understanding, as well as the
proposal to execute this
project. This is something
we've been working on very
closely with the friends of The
Underline, as well as the
consultants that are bringing
on. Some people MAY ask, why
are we bringing on the
underlying? We're bringing them
on because of their expertise,
their experience, and also
their access to these
consultants. We believe the Mou
we put together reflects both
the village's priorities
primarily, as well as creating
what MR. Stearns talked about
before, an opportunity to
create a regional destination.
So the work has been done, the
money has been set aside, and
now we have in front of you is
the opportunity to make the
decision to move forward with
this project any time.
Questions on the board. Steve.
Question if we. Comparative
analysis study based on the
last page of the project budget.
Can you give me an idea of what
it would be? The cost would be
to basically do the design
comparable for what the county
is going to going to do this
proposing and what Rigoletto's
plan is proposing. I'm not I'm
not sure I'm getting what
you're saying. Okay. So I was
just trying to understand if in
the in the budget line items
here, you got task one through
through seven, is there a
specific task there that's
doing a comparison between what
the county's plan would cost
and what their plan would cost?
No, there is not, because I
don't think the county's plan
is far enough along in order
for it to make sense. But in a
big scheme, big course it is.
Yeah. There's no there. There's
no way to get a baseline for
those two. Maybe, maybe Raquel
can address that. I'm happy to
respond to that. Yeah. So the
so the county does have a plan
for Burkhardt. And as you know,
we've talked about how we've
kind of put a pin in the Nepa
and we did extend it
geographically, but the county
does not have in the budget
anything for the complete redo
of the Rickenbacker. What they
have is some funding that we've
set aside for immediate fixes
that we've talked about, and
we've had other public meetings
about and we're actively
working on, but there is no
funding for the Rickenbacker.
We did ensure in the last
budget that the money that is
being collected for the tolls,
and I spoke about that when I
was here last time, was going
to pay all the debt for the
William Powell, because I want
to make sure as we reset the
Nepa, that we can go out for a
bigger bond to do all of the
Rickenbacker, including the
bear cut. So that is already
baked in. But in the county
budget, there is no money for
the Rickenbacker post. The
immediate changes that we're
making now, and that's why we
didn't have a comparison. I
have met with our state and
federal partners about changes
to the Nepa, and they're open
to that. And as we discussed
last time, the county really
has not moved forward on the
Nepa. They're waiting for us to
do this planning so we can all
kind of catch up together.
Happy to take any other
questions. Brief question.
Commissioner, thank you for
always. Thank you for coming
over with the the investment
that we're making. I fully
concur that it's duly necessary.
We have to move forward with
this. We have to provide our
own input on it. And but in the
process of evaluating and
seeing and doing our due
diligence, one of the things
that I'm always concerned about
is what is it that can we do
that is not infrastructure
related, but that provides more
cohesion between the different
agencies? When we have big
events or big issues. So we can
we can do it better. I don't
know what that solution is, but
it seems to me. So that's part
of our working on right now
plan. And we have several
meetings on that. And we are
counting cars. We are getting
the zip code information. We
are meeting with the
stakeholders and your manager's
part of those meetings. So yes,
council member and I believe I
sent out an update about two
weeks ago. I'll forward it to
you. It's actually moving
pretty quickly. They've
committed to have a
transportation maintenance plan
or management plan in place by
the beginning of the season. By
JANUARY, we've asked them to
put that in place. It'll help
us communicate, coordinate any
events or peak season traffic,
and also find short term, as
you mentioned, short term
infrastructure solutions that
will reduce the impact on my
return on investment that are
looking for on my end. My staff
has been working and we are
purchasing the signs. So we
have worked with fdot and we
are making the purchase of the
signs. So we'll go back. We
have talked to fdot. They're
going to let us put some
information on the signage that
already exists, but we were
told by the state that we could
not put information regarding
the closure of Crandon or the
closure of Bill Baggs on their
signage. They can only put
information on street closures
on their signage. So we're
going to go ahead and we're
going to be purchasing those
signs with the county and
placing them in different parts,
because again, we're going into
high season, we need to give
people a heads up. So we're
going to be making that
investment and listen on
unrelated but related, right? I
have been working on some
issues with sargassum, and I've
met with your manager, and we
are going to be bringing you a
plan to save you some money on
sargassum side. So we were able
to to move some things around
there, and I'll bring that to
you in the next two months. So
and I've also made requests to
private donors to help us with
this plan. So we're we're open
to that. We have a few people
that have said that they have
an interest, and I'm going to
keep working on that. So as
soon as we if as soon as we get
those commitments, we'll, we'll
take we'll lower this amount as
much as possible. So. Yeah, I'm
glad that you brought that up
because I think that that has
been certainly been my attempt
to, to take on this situation
here. And one, as I've always
said, there's a short term fix
because this infrastructure
project is not going to happen
overnight. So there's a short
term fix which is doing the
kinds of things that we're
doing to understand the traffic
patterns and to have a better
maintenance of traffic plans
that are in place. And and
those are with the county and
the city and working together.
And then there is what we're
talking about here tonight,
which is, as someone said, no
one's going to do this for us.
Nobody nobody's going to do
this for us. Nobody's going to
step up. This is this is Key
Biscayne issue. So if it's Key
Biscayne issue, we got to put
Key Biscayne money in it to try
to, to to find what those
solutions are. And those
solutions have to do with our
being able to get in and out of
our homes. Okay. And nobody
really pardon me, MADAM
Commissioner, but nobody really
cares about about our issue.
Okay. So this is our attempt to
go forward and do something to
figure out whether this this
dream is feasible. If the dream
is not feasible, we'll go to
plan b. But but this is a good,
good start. And this is what we
need to do to get to the to the
next phase of of solving in on
a long term basis. We're
working on the short term, but
we're also working on the long
term. And I want to say I've
also brought an item to the tpo
and we're working on that. And
we should roll that out
hopefully by the beginning of
the year. Also for some busses.
So one of the things that we're
doing is we're going to be
counting cars at the different
locations, and then we're going
to be working with the city and
private vendors to do busses
for these events. And we're
going to have people park at
our Metrorail stations and then
bus them in and out. So we are
looking at finding a way to
limit the cars in whatever way
possible. We are planning on
using that same system for Art
Basel. So it's not this is not
the only place that it's going
to be used, but I think here it
would be very impactful. Okay.
So seemingly you're getting
some good feedback from all the
stakeholders. The county
willingness to slow down the
Nepa with the bare cut. That's
a good sign. Now you're talking
about potentially looking at
events and transportation.
That's certainly to me is an
update from the last time we
spoke. Anything else that you
could shed on feeling how
you're feeling about those
stakeholders and their take on
all of this? I know the county
had a plan then I was looking
at ours or I say ours. But what
about Miami? What about the
city? I've met with several.
Obviously we're waiting for the
City of Miami election, right?
But yes, I've met with the the
elected officials at the city
of Miami that are staying post
this election. And they've all
first, they have a relationship
already existing with the
underline. And I think that's
important. And secondly, they
are interested in a solution. I
have also been talking to them
about the convergence. So we
have also been talking about
potentially working on the
convergence and a connector. So,
you know, we're also talking
about just connecting trails
and bikeways in generally. And
that's been something that's
been very positive. There were
some folks on the city count,
the city commission that were
anti, you know, that kind of
thing. They're not there
anymore. So so I think that all
helps. And we have been talking
to them about Virginia Key and
their plans for Virginia Key
and obviously the Marine
Stadium. I actually worked with
the city of Miami on the
memorandum of transit that was
embedded in the rfp for the
Marine Stadium, but that has
fallen through. So we now have
to regroup with them. And we
have been meeting with the
sheriff on this issue, because
now there's another party
involved in this. We have been
we've spoken to we've spoken to
noaa. So all along, you know,
the you know, the Rickenbacker,
we've reached out to everyone
and everyone's excited about it.
I can tell you in terms of
update at the federal level and
at the state level, there is
interest in this idea of
reclaiming the road. And I
think there's a lot of interest
by private fundraisers. Also,
like private foundations are
interested in this idea of
resiliency and reclaiming. So I
think, as I said before, as a
stormwater project and as a
resiliency project, I think it
really has potential to get
funding through that venue. And
we're continually working on
that. Raquel, can you share any,
any numbers as far as private
donations? The hours that I've
made. Right. So the asset I've
made to date is 165 is what
I've asked for. So I have
people working on that. So that
would that would go against the
950. Yes. Okay. Okay. As we
work on memorializing Mo, we've
certainly had a lot of
experience with what doesn't
work. So let's please keep in
mind lessons learned as we as
we work on that. I agree with
the redevelopment of the
Seaquarium. Maybe it's time to
relook at the water taxi
connecting to Bayside and and
maybe the Grove. There is going
to be. There is a submerged
land piece that goes with that,
and there is going to be some
dredging because obviously
there's going to be a Marina.
So that's something that we can
look into. The issue with that
in the past has been the
manatees. However, that manatee
map is being redone, so I'm
happy to talk to the state
about that again. That's one of
the things that's supposed to
come back to the county soon.
Great. Yes, I will say on that.
And again, this this aquarium
item went to committee and it
goes before the full board, the
Marina and the dry dock there,
I think will also help us in
the future with some of the
boat traffic. So, I mean, I
think that's one of the, one of
the things that that I focused
on on that piece is there
really is a tremendous need. So
I think that will help us
somewhat. And that's something
that we can we can plan for. I
think when we now as we know
more about how this aquarium is
going to be used, we need to
put that into our system in
terms of the counting and the
humans. Right. And when they're
coming. But the programing of
that space is going to be all
the time. It's not going to be
at peak times, which is the
issue that we have with the
Marine Stadium and with
Virginia Key. Is there going to
be a it MAY not be determined
yet, but is there going to be a
launch in that Marina? Yes.
Okay. There is a launch in that
Marina. Once upon a time, this
aquarium did have a little boat
that used to go around that
area. So this aquarium lease
and what I'm presenting to the
Board of County commissioners
doesn't have any new uses. It
only has augmented of the
existing uses. So because there
was a dock and a boat, there is
how we get to a Marina and a
dry dock, because those things
existed in a smaller form. So.
I think the project is
fantastic. I think it's
beautiful. I think the
elevation, the viaduct, I think
additional beach, I think all
of it's fantastic. And more
importantly, we have you and I
think really Key Biscayne is
very fortunate to have a
commissioner like you. And when
you feel the same way, you're
going to be the best mayor we
have in the county. I think
you're bright, you're dynamic,
you're persuasive, you're
diligent, you're forward
thinking, you're creative, and
you're one hell of a saleswoman.
Okay? One hell of a saleswoman.
And you've basically convinced
these people. I mean, I'm
probably the only person you
haven't convinced to give you
$250,000. Well, for 11 years,
I've been examining budgets,
trying in vain to make the
village more efficient. Most of
my efforts have been in vain.
They've been failures. We
continued over budget, over
staff and over expend. But I
don't know of anything we've
done or have thought of doing
with the information we have.
There's a bigger waste of
$950,000, and I can think of
and I'll tell you why. First of
all, to go ahead and pay the
engineers to continue, the
engineers, the architects,
everybody for you to do the
outreach for you to do the
license. I think that's great,
except and I think, as Mike
said, we have no idea if
financially this can make any
possible sense. And the reason
I say that is because we don't
have a ballpark estimate, not a
detailed line estimate with
10,000 lines and saying down to
the last yard of concrete and a
ton of steel, it's going to
cost this versus the project
we've seen the county wants to
do, which is like, well, humps
and lumps basically have humps
go over things and people go
underneath good and cheap and
no comparison to this. But
there's a cost factor. And
since I know you probably all
convinced to give the 950 at
this point, consider this.
Consider what Mike was saying.
Consider the fact that let's
give an amount of money that we
can go ahead and get a ballpark
estimate for the two things.
Come back with adult to see
what that cost. And is that
practical? Is that possible? Is
that feasible? Can it be
financeable? Can the money be
raised before we go forward?
Because, as you said, we
shouldn't have said this.
Rachel, you said this is my
first ask. It's not my last,
it's the first ask. And you
know what? City of Miami is not
paying a penny to this. Dade
County is not putting a penny
to this. The state of Florida
with the park is not putting a
penny to this. The federal
government with Noah and the
fisheries, they're not putting
pennies. Now, of course, we
have more money than all they
do, but we have more money than
they do. And so we're being
asked to do it. And you know
what? I don't mind doing some
of the stuff. And if the whole
thing makes sense, if
dynamically we can look at it
and say, hey, you know what,
it's next to $200 million, $200
million over 30 years, 8
million, $9 million a year.
That's a doable number. So
let's go ahead and move forward
and let's spend the money,
because once we do that, we
have to convince the county and
everybody else involved that
it's feasible. Now, if we know
what it's going to cost, we can
do that. But if we have no idea
and we don't know what's going
to happen, I mean, I you're
much better salesperson than me,
but let me tell you, I've been
selling vacuum cleaners,
encyclopedias and every other
damn thing my whole life. And
when you get the facts, it's
really easy to sell things. And
we don't have the facts. We
don't have the major fact,
which is the cost differential
between the two things. At the
end of the project, will we
have estimates? That's the
point. Yes. We will have a cost
estimate. Well, once we have a
cost estimate we can decide
where to go. That's what I'm
saying. Pay for the cost
estimate. So how you want to
get there. Well you don't want
to get because you have enough
information now to do both. You
don't need any more okay. Not a
line by line, a ballpark
estimate. Okay. You might be
off by 20 or $30 million, but
that doesn't matter in the
scheme of things. The scheme of
things is if we if this thing
can work, I'm 100% for it. But
we got to know what the numbers
are, how many millions or
hundreds of millions of dollars
difference is going to be, and
then how are you going to
finance it for 30 years and
then move forward? So I'm
proposing, since I know if I
don't propose this, you're
going to give the 950 to give
an amount of money to go ahead
and get a ballpark estimate for
the county, the bumps and lumps
system and this beautiful,
fantastic system. So if you
allow me and respectfully, I'll
tell you anything you want.
Thank you. I see your point.
And I will tell you, as someone
who's been doing this for a
while, the problem with your
approach is that that has not
given us results in the past.
The underline is a perfect
example of how a planning
project that included outreach
because it included outreach,
community buy in and built with
the community wanted. That is
what moved the needle with the
state and with the county. The
underline is the first project
to be done on time and on
budget at the county for over
35 years, and it was done this
way, and it's had a tremendous
impact and success. We could
sit with some planners and come
up with a sketch and give you a
number, but if it doesn't have
community buy in, if it's not
building what people want, if
it can't tell the stakeholders
that this is what their voters
want to see, then I can't get
the money at the state level
and at the county level and at
the federal level. And if it
isn't layered in a way that
allows us to take different
buckets of funding, then I only
have one ask to one entity, you
know, and the underlying we
have bioswales, you know, we
have stormwater, we have
transit, we have trail, we have
park. This is a very similar
and and more complex plan. And
that's why it has a
multi-layered approach that
requires a level of
sophistication in the planning
for us to take it to the next
step. Now, I you have my word
that I am working on all the
financing vehicles available to
the county in order to make
this happen. I'm buying down
the debt, you know, so that we
can bond and and we're putting
a pin on the bear cut. Because
what I don't want is for the
county to move forward. Not
with the Rickenbacker fix, but
with the bear cut and shut the
Rickenbacker down right for
four years, which is
essentially what could happen.
What happened to us before with
the William Powell. So there is
an economic impact there for
Key Biscayne. There was in the
past, and there will be if we
continue to follow the county's
path. I am not a conventional
commissioner. I do not do
things conventionally. I do not
do it the county way. But I
have a track record of success,
you know, and when I stood
before you in 2010, when Frank
was here and I said we would do
Master Academy, you know, it
was a very difficult sell and
we did it. And there it is. So
I stand here with my track
record and you have my word not
because I'm a good salesperson,
but because I'm someone that
maybe, but because I keep my
word. I've put the time in on
this. And the county also
believes that I have the
ability to move this forward.
And I think the team that we
put together is a stellar one.
And you have accountability
every month. You can call us in
here whenever you want to call
us in here on this mou and ask
us to provide details on
exactly what we're doing with
this funding. And I'm happy to
provide you with that
accountability. It is actually
baked into the plan. I have a
quick question with you. I'm
asking you to do it any way
different. Okay. Just you know,
your business. You know how to
do things, you know how to get
things done. That's why you're
going to be a great mayor. And
I'm 100% behind you. But I
still think before we go
forward, you can still do all
those things. But when you have
the number, what the ballpark
is to do the two things, and
now you do it and you tell all
these people that it's a viable
thing, it's financially viable.
It makes your sale that much
easier. That's all. That's
where I'm coming from. MR.
Mayor, I have a quick question.
I don't know if that was
brought up or not. Briefly. How
are we doing with the P.D.A?
The P.D.A start already. So it
started. We had like the first
meeting, but that's all that's
happened. Like, right. But I
mean, is it fair, is it fair to
state that this possible
alternative that you're
evaluating would have to be
part of that? P.D.A. Yes.
That's why the rush to get it
done. Right. Exactly. So
sometimes we we, we fault
ourselves for trying to divine
projects and trying to get
ahead of the curve. And that's
what you just heard right now.
And but, but, but the fact is
that there's a logistical
component. I'd like to remind
the council and the public, too,
that there's a logistical
component that we have to
understand what this shoreline,
this viaduct is going to look
like in order not to stall the
federal funding, the possible
federal funding that would be
tied to Bear Cut Bridge. So
you're being sold one side of
the story and you're not really
being told the real logistical
component and the troubled by
us not currently investing what
we need to invest. I see this
more as an imperative to get it
done rather than a, you know,
we're coughing up 950,000.
We're losing money. We're not
losing money, folks. We're
actually, you know, trying to
trying to make sure that we
don't lose money in the future
and that we have a real good
bridge, bear cut bridge, and a
design, a complete design that
ties in to the Rickenbacker. So
thank you, mayor, Commissioner,
for all. Thank you, thank you.
Okay, Joe, one last question.
One last question, I apologize.
Can you explain how you're
going to work on this project
and run for mayor at the same
time? Because just I just I
mean, I just logistically I
don't, you know, I'm not I'm
not a politician. I don't
really understand how all this
works, but and I and by the way,
I'm really well, I'm really
surprised I run for mayor
before. So I have some
experience. 2016. But yes, I
mean, look, we have a great
team. We're going to we're
going to move quickly on this
the mayor's races in 2028. So
there's there's plenty of time
but no worries. And will be
your campaign manager and will
have the first sign any time.
Be a pleasure. All right, MADAM
Clerk. All those in favor? Aye.
Opposed? Aye. Motion carries.
Thank you. Thank you very much.
All right. Thank you. Go to the
consent agenda. You go to nine
a. Oh, we didn't do the consent
agenda, MR. Mayor. What do you
mean we didn't we? If we
accepted the the agenda, it's
done. No, no. The consent
agenda. Consent. Yeah. We
haven't done the consent agenda
yet. Okay. Does anyone want to
pull the. Hold on? Oh. Thank
you, MR. London pnc. Oh, you
want to pull items from the
consent agenda? I have
questions, okay. Which one said
b and c? What number? That's
eight b and 88b and c. Consent
agenda. Okay. Say it again,
MADAM Clerk. She's pulling a, b
and c I need a councilmember.
London wanted to pull items
eight b and eight c from the
consent agenda. That's okay,
that's fine. Do I have a motion
for the consent agenda as
amended? So moved second. Thank
you. All those in favor? Aye.
Opposed. Motion carries. I will
read 8ba capital project
authorizing resolution of the
village council of the Village
of Key Biscayne, Florida,
authorizing the village manager
to issue a work order to Con
Mac Inc for replacement of
community center hvac systems
in an amount not to exceed
$237,900, and providing for an
effective date. Move it. Second.
Thank you. Joe, a question you
pull it, you go with it. There
have been a bid on this or did
we just give these people the
contract without a bid? There
was a bid. They were the low
bidder. Yes. They were okay.
Thank you, thank you. That was
it. I wanted to see at the same
time that same question. No.
All those in favor of eight,
please, I opposed motion
carries. The next item is a
capital project authorizing
resolution of the village
council of the Village of Key
Biscayne, Florida, approving
the purchase of replacement
fitness equipment for the
community center from Centurion
Partners Health and Fitness,
llc, dba Fitness Smith, in an
amount not to exceed
$152,037.24, providing for
authorization, declaring
certain equipment as surplus
property. Authorizing the sale
or disposition of surplus
property. Providing for
implementation and providing
for an effective date move.
Good evening and thank you.
Yeah. Questions, Scott I mean
Scott, Todd. Fred. Todd. You
said one of the reasons you do
this, because the maintenance
costs are getting out of line
for these things. Yeah, that's
the thing you have here. The
maintenance costs do increase
over time. Okay. Well, I went
ahead and checked the
maintenance costs for 24 and 25
and 24. There were 61, 64. That
went down by 10% in 25 to 5591.
And in neither case is it more
than 4% of the purchase price
of new equipment. And why? I'm
wondering. I mean, how do
dumbbells get old? I go to the
gym all the time. I can't lift
them all, but the ones I can
lift look just fine. The racks,
the non-mechanical equipment.
How does all that stuff get bad?
And second of all, why the hell
are we going to give them all
that equipment for 8500 bucks?
I mean, I'm sure people in the
village would buy the damn
thing or whatever else, but to
me, I'm. And one piece of
equipment, your free motion,
whatever the hell that is,
that's basically 20% of your
maintenance cost of your total,
of all your pieces of equipment.
That one piece is 20% of your
maintenance cost two years
running. So to me, do you
really need this thing or you
just want new stuff? I'll give
you a couple of options. So the
average lifespan for an average
lifespan I use the equipment.
It works fine. So not average
lifespan. You're paying for
preventive maintenance $190 a
month. You're servicing it and
I can see what's going bad. A
lot of the stuff that has very
few mechanical parts are not
even doing anything. Steel does
not usually wear out ten, 15,
or 50 years. I mean, you if you
were there, you saw the lat
pulldown. I can't hear you. The
lat pulldown actually snapped.
Yeah. And that was wrapped in
because the system just gave
out over time. So this is do we
need all this new equipment? Do
we need some new equipment. Do
we need new dumbbell racks?
They're pretty beaten up. I
actually looked at him today.
If you look at him, all the I
wasn't there, but I was there
two days ago. All the labeling
is gone. All the labels, all
the labels. They're beginning
to rust. You need new labels,
okay? They're beginning to rust.
They are all the. All the bolts
is beginning. Okay. I walk
through it today. You can see
all the bolts are beginning to
rust. I mean, what we're
talking about is hundred and
$50,000. Yes. Yeah. I mean, if
you want some new equipment
because it's better or whatever
else to replace them, I got no
problem with that. But to go
ahead and replace everything,
I'll say. Fine. It's old. Get
rid of it all if it's fine. I
mean, I guess maybe I have this
feeling because I don't want
people to get rid of me because
I'm old. Okay? So, I mean, just
because I'm past my useful life.
I think you're looking at part
of this project, not the whole
project. The whole project is
to replace the flooring, to
paint the walls. I read the
whole believe me. Yeah. So this
is the whole thing. This is a
whole, you know, re
rehabilitation of that. The
fitness center, which is one of
the main drivers of our
membership revenue. I probably
use it more than anybody here
in council. So I love the
fitness center. I love the idea
that having good equipment, I
just hate the idea of wasting
money. I don't think you're
wasting money. I think when you
increased the membership fees
that passed in council in JULY
and was implemented in OCTOBER,
I think it's a reasonable
assumption for the members that
are now paying more to see
improvements in one of the
facilities that is primarily
used by our members, and that's
the the Fitness and Wellness
Center. You can sell your $220
fee went over with the older
people they're paying to. Not
only did we increase the fees,
we expanded those that paid to
it, and I think they envisioned
that they should see some
benefit from that in the
facility that they use
frequently. As it stands now,
I'm against if you bring back
something as reasonable that
has to be replaced, I'll be all
for it. Over here. Anybody? I
have a comment. Go ahead. When
it's my turn. I can't find it
right now. I know you know
where it is. I read somewhere
here that the Centurion
Partners agreement includes
$2,328.15 for tariff. Yes,
ma'am. You're going to be so
proud of me. I would like the
contract somehow to be amended
so that if the government is
ultimately required to refund
those tariffs, that when that
vendor gets that tariff refund,
that they have to give it back
to us instead of keeping it,
because that's that's my new
pet peeve. All these vendors
are going to get the money back.
And and the people who actually
paid the money aren't going to
get it. So we should get our
2300 back. Is there a way to do
that, Chad? Of course, yes,
sure. I mean, we'll write it
back. I don't know if they'll
agree to it, but we'll write it
in and bring it up to their
attention. Just fyi, I think we
should do that in every
contract that that we have now
that we're, we're acquiring
things that are charging
tariffs for sure. Good point.
Very good point. Excellent
answer okay. I, I was like
thinking like Ed this morning
when I reread this thing. And
so I took the field trip to, to
the, to the weight room. And
yeah, there is stuff there that
is rusted there. There is a
floor that needs to be done,
the walls that need to be done
because, you know, it gets it
gets a lot of activity. You are
you are there. I agree with all
that. Yeah. I'm just saying not
replacing blank everything.
Replace what has to be done. Do
the work, do the floor. Okay.
So so I'm glad you mentioned
that. So one of the discussions
we've had up here is the
village doesn't do a good
enough job of maintenance. Okay.
So now they set a policy. And
you know maybe you want to redo
the policy. But the policy says
ten years. There are ten years.
They want to replace the
equipment. I mean, what what do
you I mean, you know, what do
you want? I want to be forget
the policy. What should. No no
no no no. When I say the policy,
it doesn't make sense. Because
if you tell me something wears
out in ten years. Two more
years. No, no, three more years.
Some. No. Some stuff, maybe ten
years is fine. Other stuff is
25 years. That's what I'm
saying to you. The point being
is whatever needs to be
replaced. I'm saying replaced.
The floors have to be done. The
walls. I'm all for all that
stuff. But stuff that's
strictly fine not to do that,
that's all. And then to go
ahead with sell everything to
these people. $8,500. I think
that's crazy. Also, I'm going
to disagree with you on one
point. We want our parks to be
beautiful. We want our
community center to be
beautiful. There's some value,
some in the quality of
experience. And after ten years,
maybe we need bright and shiny
and new and the cost of and the
time involved in trying to sell
off piece by piece and figure
out what piece we need. What
piece. It's just not worth it.
It's just not worth it. I'd
rather give the money to
charity than have these guys
date that you said. We can't do
that. I said I can. You said I
can personally do that. All
right, move along. All right,
MADAM, call it. Sorry. An
amendment to the contract for
the tariff. Yeah, yeah. Okay.
Consensus of Council for the
amendment. Amend it to not
consider selling the property
stuff to somebody else or
donating it. Sure, sure. I
thought you were going to buy
it and then donate it. Oh, okay.
So I'm sorry, what was the you
were going to sell it to Ed for
$10,000 of this obsolete
equipment? We've done it before.
It's the task. And the people
that do take it call you when
it breaks and expect you to.
Hey, I bought this from you
three months ago. This happened.
I don't carry a warranty. I
don't have maintenance staff.
It it didn't go well last time
we did this. Okay. So did you
get those two things? To be
clear, the resolution gives the
manager the ability to surplus
it. It doesn't have to be to
these people. But then that
would affect the purchase price.
So there's the authorities are
already there. If the direction
is for the manager to examine
all options, that's already in
here. It's just if you can do
better, let's do better. Of
course, I'm under the
impression from our
conversation that there's a
nuisance that's alleviated by
simply having someone come and
pick it up and take it away.
Yeah, we do want to keep the
facility closed for the
shortest time period possible.
So that means that we're going
to have the new equipment
delivered and the floor
installed and the old equipment
removed in a tight sequence.
Trying to sell one piece here,
one piece there. We have no
storage space for this
equipment while it waits for
new equipment. About 90 days.
So there's 90 days to make a
decision. See what we can do.
Right. Thank you. Okay, MADAM
Clerk, as amended here. All
those in favor of the
resolution, as amended, opposed
by motion, carries. When you
draft the tariff language, will
you send it around? Sure. So
just quickly, Nancy, you wanted
to incorporate that into all of
our contract? I do I think it's
a good idea. So is that
something that that we've got
consensus to do? Sure.
Consensus for what? To
incorporate all tariff. Sure.
Great idea Nance okay. No
problem. You were right. He's
proud I know I know he's going
to encourage you to run for
county mayor. Council nine a an
ordinance of the village, an
ordinance on second reading, an
ordinance of the village of Key
Biscayne, Florida, amending
section two dash ten advisory
boards of chapter two of the
Village Code of Ordinances
relating to Advisory Board
administration and board member
requirements. Providing for
severability. Providing for
codification, providing for
conflicts and providing for an
effective date move. Second,
this is. Thank you 9a9a okay,
I'm happy with are we are we at
discussion here. Yeah go ahead
I'm happy with it. I would like
to make an amendment though. I
would like to add a
subparagraph eight that says
upon its own initiative, a
board MAY present to council a
report, resolution, request or
advisement. Because this talks
about mandatory. Reports.
You're talking about something
additional, right. If they want
additional. Yes. Yes. Can you
please what do we mean by a
board. Any of these advisory
boards create a board. No no no
any of the existing boards.
This talks about this talks
about the obligation of
advisory boards to report to us
that that's what we're that's
what this is about. And what it
talks about are the mandatory
reporting obligations. But it
doesn't talk about voluntary.
And I don't want it to be
interpreted that there there is
not the ability to come before
council with requests.
Suggestions, Advisements I want
I just would like to clarify
that by adding in language that
that any board can come before
us on their own initiative. I'm
sorry, Council member, can you
repeat the amendment? But is
there something suggesting that
they can't? Well, you just want
to make it. I just want to make
it clear because this says what
you have to do. Okay. So right.
Let's think about it a little
bit. If you is that like by by
their consensus by or is it
like anybody can just come up
and the board the board has to
act like a board okay. The
language doesn't authorize
anyone. Any individual doesn't
change any of the operations.
No. That's that's really
important because, you know,
absolutely 10,000 people coming
up that aren't speaking for the
behalf of the board. Right?
Right. MR. Mayor, I would
suggest for procedural process
purposes that it would be
brought to the council liaison
in order to place it on the
agenda, because we have to make
sure that's a process.
Otherwise, they really have no
way or no one to come to to put
it on the agenda. They can call
the clerk, why can't they call
the clerk? And I do think
elsewhere in the code, it I
think actually in the, in the
code where it describes the,
the responsibilities of the, of
the boards, it talks about them
bringing this forward and I
don't I don't have a problem
bringing forward anything by
liaison. Yeah. I'm not sure
we've ever done that Chad. Got
to go through some I believe
that the board members, through
their liaison, has requested
the boards to come to give
presentations. Yeah, I believe
that's happened in the past.
Here's an example. In one of
the zorks, the purview did not
include docs. Yes. There was a
series of issues that were doc
related. The board came back to
council and suggested that the
purview be expanded to deal
with docs. Yeah, I think that
the the issue is we've never
allowed the boards to just pop
up on the agenda. There's
always been a request through
the manager or through liaison.
I think that if the request can
come through the liaison. Yeah,
I think that makes sense. And
we can we can make that clear
that the board, through its
liaison, MAY present, if that's
something that council Member
stoner wants. I mean, that's
not a problem. Is that okay
with you? My only question
would be if you have a liaison
that's not participating that
much. Or they're not interested
in the issue, I know this whole
thing with that. We just went
through with the disability
board. They wanted to make a
presentation, and I do believe
they they contacted the clerk
who put it on the agenda. I
just don't want to make
obstacles. But personally, I
don't have a problem ever with
with bringing forward. We could
always say the liaison or the
manager. I mean, either one.
Okay, or any council member,
really. I mean, you could do
any council member. But again,
you know, the way these were
set up is really the boards
obviously report to the council.
There's an extension of the
council that's liaison to try
to interface. But I mean, I
don't think it's really that
big of an issue. I mean any
liaison is going to I would
think, right, accommodate any
request, whether they agree
with the issue coming forward
or not, but liaison or the
mayor. And that way you write
the reason why I bring it up,
you know, and you hear a number
of times speak, people speak on
behalf of or that they're a
member of a board, and that MAY
not be with a full backing of
the board. So yeah, that's what
I said before. Yeah. Just to be
clear, my my language said upon
its own initiative, a board,
not a board member, a board.
And no one, I think through the,
the, the pamphlet you're giving
out now and all the initiation
education that board members
get, they are told they're not
allowed to act independently.
They have to act as and, you
know, council members, I'm
fully supportive. I just want
to make sure the procedures in
place so that I understand, you
know, the steps, not not just
because that we're limiting.
They also know how to do it.
Right? Right. Because a lot of
folks do ask me, how do we do
this, right? You know, you were
at that meeting together and
they ask they actually asked
the question and not to get
into, can you say the board as
a body. It says the board. But
if you want if you do, you want
me to amend my language, say
through there, through the
through council, through their
liaison council. Liaison. Is
that is that what everybody's
talking about? I think it's
fine. Okay. Do you want me to
repeat the the language upon
its own initiative? A board
that would be a capital b.
Comma through its council
liaison comma MAY present to
council a report resolution
request or advisement. Report
resolution or request or
advisement. Okay. You got it,
Chad? Yep. Are you good with it?
I'm fine with it. Okay.
Consensus of council for the
amendment. Yes, yes, yes. This
is nine a we'll need a public
hearing on second reading.
Mayor. Public hearings now open
on nine a advisory boards
seeing no one come forward.
Public hearing is now closed.
Council member London yes. Vice
mayor. Yes. Yes. Council member.
Stoner. Yes. Council member.
Vazquez. Yes. Mayor. Roscoe.
Yes. Councilmember. Bracken.
Yes. Council member. Kaplan.
Yes. The ordinance is adopted,
as amended, on second reading.
Can. Let's skip to nine c an
ordinance of an ordinance on
first reading. An ordinance of
the Village Council of the
Village of Key Biscayne,
Florida, amending chapter 23
retirement. Article two police
officers and firefighters
retirement plan of the Village
of Key Biscayne. Code of
ordinances regarding the
retirement plan for police
officers and firefighters of
the Village of Key Biscayne,
specifically amending section
2347 c of the village Code to
permit retired police officers
hired on a part time status to
receive in-service distribution,
providing for conflicts,
providing for severability,
providing for codification, and
providing for an effective date.
Go ahead chief, anyone needs to
move. Moved. Second. Thank you.
Good evening. Mayor. Council
members, we're bringing this
forward because we recently had
two long tenured police
officers retire and indicated
that they'd like to maintain
reserve status, something that
we haven't been able to do in
the past because of the
requirements under our
accreditation for training. In
order to do this and compensate
them for their time, it does
require a pension ordinance
change. And that's what we're
coming before before you
tonight asking, we do have a
policy that we're in draft
right now. We've met with the
collective bargaining groups
and explained it to them. This
does not replace police
officers. They're not going to
be supervisors over anyone.
They're just going to have the
ability to assist in road
patrol, special events or
things that we have and get
compensated for it. They have
to work a minimum of 12 hours a
month and not exceed 30 hours a
month. Okay. Great idea chief.
I commend you questions on
first reading. Question is why
are we limiting the 30 hours?
Because there was a reserve
program here in the past that
was not successful. So there
was a reserve program in the
past here that was not
successful. So we established
this at this point to see how
successful it goes. If if we
see that it's better at that
point, we MAY increase it. We
MAY not. There's also a concern
from the collective bargaining
groups about taking
opportunities away from the
police officers. I also chief,
I believe it's federal law, the
part time workers, they can't
work more than 30 hours a week.
No, I know, but he's asking why
we're limiting it to 30 hours a
month or a month. Yeah, I would
like to amend the ordinance to
say that to be limited by the
limit of the collective
bargaining agreement is subject
to the chief's discretion, so
that if, in fact, we can have
more than 30 hours and you're
happy with more than 30 hours,
and some people want to work
more than 30 hours, why limit
it? I think we will receive
challenges from the union, I
said subject to them like this,
but it's subject to them
approving. Why don't we do this?
It's first reading. We're in
active discussions with the
union for second reading. We'll
we'll have a report back if
they would agree. Fine. Good. I
can do that. We're sending them
the policy tomorrow. So. Great.
All right, MADAM Clerk. Thank
you. Council member. Stoner.
Yes. Councilor. Vazquez. Yes.
Mayor. Roscoe. Yes. Council
member. Bracken. Yes. Council
member. Kaplan. Yes. Council
member. London. Yes. And vice
mayor. Sardinia's. Yes. Yours
is approved on first reading.
Thank you. Okay. Nine d. D as
in David, right? Yes. Oh, sassy.
You're going to MISS The
discussion now. Well, yeah. An
ordinance on first reading. An
ordinance of the village of Key
Biscayne, Florida, amending
section 30 Dash 11 definitions
and creating section 30 Dash 39
certified Recovery residences
of the village. Code of
Ordinances relating to Review
and approval procedures for
certified recovery residences.
Providing for severability.
Providing for complex.
Providing for codification and
providing for an effective date.
Move. Second. Thank you. You
want to give us a background?
Sure. Good evening. CHAIRMAN,
building, zoning and planning
Director. So this ordinance is
really in response to a state
bill, sb 954, I believe it was,
which requires municipalities
to create a process for
certified recovery residences
to be included in the community.
You mean you didn't come up
with this by yourself? This was
not out of a workshop, nor my
own head. This was really close
collaboration with White Sirota,
who I believe is writing these
ordinances for municipalities
all over the place. And so this
really creates a definition of
adopting certain state language
about what a certified recovery
residence is. It's, you know, I
think in Parliament, but be
more explicit. The state law
mandates us to do this. We must
we must have this in place by
the end of the year.
Essentially, there's no that's
I think Chad can speak to that,
that this is not negotiable. We
have to comply with the law.
Yeah. The law says JANUARY 1st.
We are to have this in place.
There's no penalties. But, you
know, in the spirit of the law,
we as many governments are
trying to comply. Miami-Dade
County heard this on first
reading today at the county
commission, for example. All
this is doing is procedural.
And it's it's a process that
even if it wasn't in our code,
if we were if the request was
made, we would put them through
a very similar procedure under
the Fair Housing Act. So but
we're limited very much by Ada,
Ada and all that kind of that's
what this is all about. Yeah.
Correct. Yeah. Fair housing
right. Yes. So but are you
making it more. Wait wait wait.
She's not finished. I just want
to ask a couple questions. Did,
did, is this language you're
drafting or is this. Basically
copying of of what is actually
required of us. So my question
is, is can we amend it at all
or not? I'll answer that. First
of all, the statute expressly
provides requirements that the
ordinance has to have. So a lot
of this language comes straight
out of that. Also, the language
here follows the Department of
Justice guidance with the
criteria that we need to follow.
If we have to make these types
of decisions, yes, we can make
tweaks. I would prefer if
through first and second
reading, if you guys want to
call me and we can work through
them, we have a couple of
tweaks we still want to make
that. I'm going to propose on
second reading myself because
this is still, you know, I
think it we're close, but i
still want to tweak a couple of
the language. So. Okay, so
you'd rather that we call you.
And I would prefer just because
of this, you know, these types
of matters. Ten, ten, 12 years
ago, there was massive amount
of a massive amount of
litigation around the state. It
wasn't until our federal
representatives, as well as
representatives in California,
came together and started to
work with the Department of
Justice and then the state of
Florida, in fact, adopted
certain regulations. So I would
prefer if we talk individually,
speak with me. And on second
reading we can have a robust
discussion. So. So so are you
advising us not to ask
questions? You can if you want.
I'm happy to take your comments,
but getting into any fact
specific situations I will not.
Okay. You know, but if it's
just general comments that's
fine. But you should know that
I am going to come back on
second reading with some tweaks
of my own. This is just for the
record. This is another
instance of the state usurping
our self, our our right to
self-govern. I'm not really
worried about this particular,
its procedural, but yeah, but
it's another it's another
instance of that. Can I, can I
talk to Nancy? Right. What
Nancy is if we make this, can
we make this more restrictive
or as a question under your
opinion, not his. I'm asking
you. Yeah, as it were. I don't
know if we can make it more
restrictive because it matters.
So the law says at a minimum,
we have to have certain things.
We can be more restrictive. The
criteria is set that you look
at, okay. But there are certain
things we can ask other
governments have more robust
procedures. So again, you know,
if you want to make it more
restrictive, I'm happy to hear
some of your thoughts. But yes,
this is the minimum. I think
your question are we
inadvertently paving the road
for this possibly happening in
our. No, I don't I don't I
don't think so. I, I think that
well. Again, 1012 years ago,
Boca Raton, Delray Beach, all
these beach cities, they were
dealing with this a lot. It
didn't come here. It doesn't
mean it can't. But we could
definitely look and make it
more restrictive. Do you have
some ideas? But we are confined
by what we can do through the
Fair Housing Act. Okay, thanks.
Well, it sounds like you're
going to be working on this
anyway. And you have some ideas.
Yeah, yeah. We and again, some
of my ideas came from speaking
with Council Member Stone
already. I've talked with a
couple of other council members
also. Also, we are seeing what
other like what Miami-Dade
County did for example. So
today. So we're we're
monitoring what all the
different governments are doing.
So we're going to come back
with with some changes. I have
a question. Sure. How many
occupants can be in these
recovery residences. It depends.
It depends on their license and
the type of facilities. Well,
the the maximum in the law, I
believe 90, 50 or 90 I read. No,
I think it's larger. Hold on, i
can't. That's not a single
family house for. They talk
about how many people you have
to have supervising and working
there the ratios. But I didn't
see us at based on the size of
the property, the number of
beds, the number of rooms. I
didn't see anything in there.
So that's why I'm asking under
under the level four. It it
says that the residence is
managed, is approved for 100
residents and is wholly owned
and controlled by a licensed
service provider, electing to
manage up to 300 residents. So
my question is, could you take
a 75 100 foot lot and go build
a ten story building and put
100 people in there? No, it's
based upon zoning. Still, one
of the criteria that you would
look at is whether the
requested accommodation would
require a fundamental
alteration in the nature of
land use and zoning regulations
that comes out of the doj
standards. So the answer is no.
So basically, if we for
argument's sake, I think 75 100
foot lot with a 0.47 F.A.R
gives you about 3525ft!S, our
standard, I'm assuming. Were
you talking about single family
areas? No. Under the what I
just said is that the if if the
request would, would require a
fundamental alteration in the
nature of the land use and
zoning, then that wouldn't be a
reasonable accommodation. That
would be this is not a
residential then. No, it could
be. Your example is to go high,
build a building, but someone
can come in to a home and do
this. Okay. So say we build a
standard home 3525ft!S. How many
people could we have housing
there? It depends on their
licensing and the spacing. I
mean, there's a lot of
different factors. Okay. Yeah.
I mean, this is an operating
business, isn't it? Then again,
I guess my next question then
becomes, is there anything we
can do in our zoning code which
is reasonable and
nondiscriminatory, of course,
to limit the number of people
that would be in these recovery
residences. I think you just
said the magic words. You can't
be discriminatory, and it has
to be reasonable. So there MAY
be things that we can look at
that other governments have
done. But again, you need to be
cautious of this because this
could turn into a fair Housing
Act issue. So but I'm happy to
talk to you, like I said, and
hear some of your ideas. And,
you know, we've done a lot of
these across the state over the
years. How does Live Oak Live
Local affect potentially affect
this? Live local does not
affect us. This is separate. So
so live local developer
couldn't come in and do
workforce housing and also
attach one of these and then
violate all those. Push through
zoning is well live local is
not permitted in single family
first of all. So it would be in
commercial, industrial or mixed
use. You don't have industrial,
so it would be limiting if they
were to come in and do a live
local project. It has to be
income restricted, which is
interesting because typically
what you see is these homes are
actually very wealthy people
that are from the north that
come down here to rehab. So
it's a little different. And
they're transient. They're not
rental. These are transient
living type facilities. So I
don't really see the there's no
connection. The connection.
Could someone be creative?
Maybe. But they also would have
to go through the licensing
process. And it just doesn't
make sense to me. It would have
to be a full rental. I mean, it
seems difficult. Yeah. Just
asking the general question.
Thank you. So again, please, I
mean, I'm happy to reach out to
you guys in between, like I
typically try to check in, but
if you have anything, call me.
And on second reading we can.
I'm happy to have a robust
discussion. Okay. Okay. So. I
think that covers it on first
reading, MADAM Clerk,
Councilmember Vasquez. Yes.
Mayor. Roscoe. Yes.
Councilmember. Yes.
Councilmember. Kaplan. Yes.
Councilmember. London. Yes.
Vice mayor. Yes. And
Councilmember. Stoner. Yes.
Approved on first reading. 90.
MR. Mayor 90. Okay. An
ordinance of the Village of Key
Biscayne, Florida, amending
section 30 Dash 104,
Institutional district of the
village Code of Ordinances to
provide development regulations
for properties that are
10,000ft!S or less. Providing for
severability. Providing for
codification, providing for
conflicts, and providing for an
effective date. So moved.
Second. Second. Thank you. I'd
like to make an amendment to
this. Well, first tell people
what's going on to do here. We
have well this is the general.
This is there are two parts to
this. Yeah. This is the general
changing of the code to
accommodate a property that is
smaller than what is typically
our institutional size property.
Usually the institutional size
properties are like
Presbyterian Church, Saint
Agnes, they're large properties.
But we have for example, Chabad,
which is in a much smaller
property. And the institution,
first of all. This is to allow
a smaller size property to be
classified as institutional.
That's that's the first step of
the process. It's a kind of
unique situation because we
have, for example, Chabad,
which is right, or most all of
the houses of worship are and
it's functioning under a an
order that gives a lot of
restrictions. But that's not
really what this particular one
is about. This is about
allowing this. This item is
about allowing smaller
properties to be fall within
institutional provided for as
an institutional zoning. So it
excuse me, but it is creating a,
a classification to allow
smaller properties to be
institutional and and Nancy why
why why do we need to do this?
I read I read this and I,
honest to GOD did not
understand it. It's too much
for me. So why is this helping
us or restricting us? Why would
we do this just as a well, for
example, right now we have
Chabad, right? Which doesn't
have institutional. It doesn't
have the benefits of
institutional. Zoning, and it
doesn't have the obligations
and restrictions of, of, of
institutional zoning. But it is
a house of worship, and it's
right where it should be, where
all the houses of worship are.
So it's trying to bring them
under the same umbrella as all
the other houses of worship.
Okay. And particularly to allow
them to have some kind of
signage. Well, that's one of
the issues that that it came up,
this whole issue came up with
the signage because we didn't
know what to do with them
because they weren't
institutional. They were an
outlier on that issue. Is that
the only issue? They're under a
development order? One reason I
don't know why we would want to
do this is the conversation we
just had about live local, and
I don't know why we would want
to create institutional
opportunities where the
neighborhood isn't houses of
worship. The local doesn't
concern institutional. It does.
No it doesn't commercial,
definitely industrial. Let me
check. Institutional. No, but
let me check the new changes to
see if it changes it recently.
Well, let me just say that my
amendment was not only going to
be for properties less than
10,000ft!S in size and contiguous
with existing institutional
uses, so it couldn't be in the
middle of the island. Some
house wants to. It has to be.
That's a helpful. That's so
just an answer to the live
local question. It's.
Commercial, industrial, mixed
use or any portion or or mixed
use and in portions of any
flexibly, flexibly zoned areas,
such as a planned unit
development permitted for
commercial, industrial or mixed
use. Now there are new
definitions for for those terms.
Now to that we need to look at.
The. There was an amendment in
2025 that would allow
municipalities to allow
additional development in
church properties, but it
doesn't require it. It doesn't
mandate it. Yeah, yeah. With
the addition that that Nancy
suggested, which I think is
important, is contiguous means
attached to our comp plan
speaks to the same issue. Yes.
This would be essentially
taking something like, for
instance, somebody could apply
to rezone a single family home
to commercial. We would not
support that. The comp plan
doesn't support it. So I think
if someone wanted to build a
church on Satinwood, right,
it's the comp plan would not
support that as well. I think
making it explicit into the
into the code is helpful though.
The only place to the zoning
ordinance. We talked about this
in our preview meeting. The
only other place that I could
think of that would work would
be contiguous to the community
church, because that's
institutional. So it's also
Fernwood. So we had this
discussion not too long ago
about the undesirability of
establishing a footprint that
would affect the Fernwood
neighborhood. So back to what
exists. And and I think what
provoked some critical thinking
about Chabad specifically is
the menorah in the front lawn.
Well, let let me just go back
and say the order under which
Chabad is functioning is
astounding. There are like 20
restrictions. You can't do this.
You can't do that. You can't.
It is. And I think it happened
because at the time, 20 or so
years ago, no one really
understood what Chabad was.
Never one was probably a little
nervous and put all these
restrictions and now that
history has has unfolded, it's
everything's fine. And that was
just that. That order is just
overkill. Overkill and
discriminatory in some respects.
It's discriminatory. It's
ridiculous. Can we can we back
off on that, Nancy? Can we
revise the order so that. Well,
it seems it just seems silly
that it seems silly that it
wouldn't just be institutional
and that why don't you make
that amendment to your thing
that this is it's less than
10,000ft in adjacent or
contiguous to the existing
institutional use, and that way
it limits it really to that
neighborhood. Jan, are we on
the straight and narrow? It
depends on, you know, adjacency.
I guess it would mean across
the street. Yeah. Okay. We MAY
have to define that, but we
could probably. Yeah. We know
that's worse. Okay. Yeah.
Contiguous is touching.
Adjacent is sometimes defined
as across the street. Sometimes
it's not Frank's point. So if
someone would decide that they
wanted to do this on another
piece of property on Fernwood,
would that are we opening up
this situation so we allow
another possible facility on
Fernwood. So we should remember
that this allows somebody to
ask for a rezoning application.
It does not guarantee that they
would be getting a rezoning for
that. And we still apply
elements of the comprehensive
plan that. Does it make sense
there? That sort of thing. But
if they're but if they're a
religious institution, doesn't
matter which religious
institution they are and they
just they make an application
and we reject that application.
What merits are we rejecting
the application on neighborhood
compatibility? You know, if if
we already have a we already
have a church on firmly. That's
my point. But if it's in, say,
Fernwood houses facing away
from it, even though the
property is adjacent and it's
out of character for the rest
of the street, like there's a
number of reasons to continue
to reject that that are valid.
I can foresee a weak position
on the part of our successor
council. Yeah, it sounds like a
lawsuit waiting to happen to me.
I mean, if we want to, if we
want to narrow it further, even
to the northwest quadrant of
the city, I mean, of the
village, just because I can see
one saying that. I mean, look,
if you look at the zoning map,
I'm looking at it now on my
screen. I mean, there's a lot
of blue in that area, which is
institutional. You know, one
can reason that that's where
you're limiting, you know, uses
to go because of the
compatibility issues. So maybe
that will cure the Fernwood
concern somewhat. I mean, I
know Fernwood is right there on
the North, but still, if you
limit to the north west
quadrant that can we do that is
community church school problem,
I think. I think we can draft
we can draft something that's
more narrow. Yeah. Not
presently, but you know it. If
things get more popular,
potentially we can we can
definitely draft something
that's more narrow to tie it to
that area. And we and we can
even draft it even tighter. And
defining adjacency to that to I
think that that would. Help.
Okay. As opposed to amending
the development order, which is
another way to do this. I mean,
I'm in full support to, to to
do whatever we need to do to
make the institution feel like
they're part of the community.
So whatever we need to do that
to make it happen, I'm
supportive. I just want to make
sure we're not opening up
Pandora's Box and causing
another open up Pandora's box.
Yeah, let me work with Council
Member stoner and come back in
narrowing the geographic area a
little bit for you, and then we
can come back on second reading
and see if you guys think that
that's. And will you please,
please think a little deeper
about the implications? I will
I will study it to make sure
that we're not getting tripped
up there and ironclad on the
comp plan. Well, I can tell you
that the comp plan for single
family residential includes
religious facilities to.
They're an allowed use in the.
They are an allowed use. But
we're back to compatibility
correct. So it MAY not be
permitted everywhere I
understand that. But just so
you knew that that it is
allowed as a permitted use in
the future land use category
for the single family district.
So but we'll Jeremy's looked at
the comp plan issue. We'll look
at it again. I mean obviously
our elders, our land
development regulations have to
be consistent with our comp
plan. So we'll we'll ensure
just comp comp plan. Can you
give a definition Chad. What
comp plan? The definition. I'm
sorry, are you both hold on one
second. The development the
comprehensive development plan
that's in place. Say it again
I'm sorry. The comp plan. So
the comprehensive plan is our
growth management plan. It's
mandated under Florida law,
which is our constitution for
land use planning. The zoning
code implements the comp plan.
So each property has a
comprehensive plan designation
and each plan is comprehensive
plan. Yes. Yes. I was just
looking for the comprehensive
plan, and I'm sorry,
Councilmember, you had a thanks.
Thanks. Yes. The Galleria
shopping center. Jeremy, I'm
sorry. I had a quick question.
Did you had mentioned using the
word contiguous, meaning
clusters of worship, and we're
getting rid of that. We're
getting rid of contiguous. Like
we'll need to define contiguous
as attached. Well no, but we'll
need to define the term no but
okay. So I don't mean
necessarily contiguous from the
standpoint of attached but but
by defining an area of worship,
not necessarily one house after
the next 1 or 1, but more from
I mean, it's part of the
fundamental layout of the
village of Key Biscayne that it
has a clearly defined
commercial district. The
churches are clustered in a
particular way. That was way
the way, you know, the Mackle
brothers laid it out initially.
They preserve those large lots
for religious institutions,
right? Yes. Same. Okay. Okay.
My friend, I guess we weren't
able to put these two together,
right? So and so should we vote
on this one? Yeah. Go ahead on
90 as amended. Mayor Roscoe.
Yes. Councilmember Bracken. Yes.
Councilmember Kaplan. Yes.
Councilmember. London. Yes.
Vice mayor Sardinia's. Yes.
Councilmember. Stoner. Yes.
Councilmember. Vasquez. Yes.
The ordinance is approved on
first reading. The next item is
nine f an ordinance on first
reading an ordinance of the
Village of Key Biscayne,
Florida. Rezoning the property
located located at 101 Harbor
Drive. Property folio number
2442 32 0060230 from the
village residential district to
the institutional I district,
providing for severability,
providing for conflicts, and
providing for an effective date.
So moved mayor. This is a quasi
judicial hearing technically,
so we should open up the public
hearing. If anybody wants to
speak, they'd have to be sworn
in. Do we need a second? Yeah,
somebody needs to. Is there a
second? Wait. I'm sorry. One
second. Councilmember Kaplan in
London already moved the item.
Okay. Please stand and raise
your right hand. Who's that?
Would that be? Probably only
Jeremy. Jeremy? Oh, yes. Thank
you. Sorry. Do you swear and
affirm that the testimony you
give this evening is the truth?
Yes. Thank you. Probably should
have put his hand on a Bible.
And then, for the record, I
think, mayor, if you want to
call the public hearing, I
don't see anybody. And then we
can open and close it. Call.
Public hearing is now open on
9e9f9f only nine f seeing no
one come forward. Public
hearing is now closed. Okay.
Okay. So this is this is the
ordinance to change to rezone
the location where the Chabad
is now to institutional. So
this is first reading. So
presumably this comes back on
second reading. And if we pass
the the prior ordinance then we
would pass this. If we don't
pass the prior ordinance then
we'll probably won't pass this.
If we don't pass the prior
ordinance, then this will not
be heard. Yes, on second
reading, I don't really know if
we need to have too much
discussion. Same caveats, but
the justification here, it
seems to me, is just completely
contrary to our history and
reality. This whole point was
to accommodate the Chabad, not
to encourage additional houses
of worship anywhere in the
island. That's just not right.
So that justification on page
one of the memo, in my opinion.
Well, I wish you would read the
order under which they're
functioning now, because you
might change your mind. I have
read it. It's been a long time.
Yeah. And I participated at the
time. I really encouraged that
council to approve that use.
There were there were many
points of controversy, one of
which was, you know, parking
and traffic, pointing out that
Orthodox people don't drive,
but that didn't really sway the
argument. No, didn't. I will
tell you that the next door
neighbor had a lot of
reservations about it at the
time. Yeah, but they are very
happy with their neighbor now.
Yeah, yeah. So I mean, if this
doesn't if this isn't the best
solution to actually
institutionalize that site
while preserving zoning
integrity elsewhere, including
Fernwood, I'm all about fixing
whatever the problems are
either way. But I think the
discussion that we just had on
the prior ordinance helps. Okay,
okay, let's see if we can bring
it home. Councilmember Bracken.
Councilmember Kaplan. Yes.
Councilmember. London. Yes.
Vice mayor Sardinia's. Yes.
Councilmember. Stoner. Yes.
Councilmember. Vasquez. Yes.
Mayor Roscoe. Yes is approved
on first reading. Okay, let's
have a conversation on nine g.
An ordinance on first reading,
an ordinance of the Village of
Key Biscayne, Florida, amending
chapter. Chapter 30, Zoning and
Land Development Regulations of
the village code of ordinances
by creating section 3062 to
establish an advisory board to
review regulatory variances.
Amending section 3063 variance
procedures and section 3066 and
regulatory variances relating
to the Advisory Board providing
for severability, providing for
conflicts, and providing for an
effective date so moved. Second.
Thank you. Okay, since I've
been the one year that I've
been serving on council, we've
had many variance requests come
before us. And in order to
understand the application,
it's extremely time consuming.
It's very technical. Even the
application is is technical.
And it has happened on occasion
that we've had applications
that are incomplete and it
comes before us. We don't even
realize they're incomplete. And
my my feeling is that if we
have a board of architects,
primarily architects and other
people familiar with the code
and in the in the land use
business, they could go over,
it would be an advisory board.
They could go over the
application. They could make
sure that it was complete, that
it would fit, that it that it
was. A a viable variance. We're
getting variances now just
because people want them.
There's not even a reason, this
one that we're going to look at
later tonight wants higher
ceilings. There's not even a
reason. It's ridiculous. We
have a code. We have a code.
And since I've been on council
we are having code by variance.
Everyone comes in for variance.
We have a code for a reason.
It's supposed. It's supposed to
establish rules that everyone
abides by. And if you want to
certain concessions, then you
have to make certain
concessions. And we're not
having that. And this, this
body is not taking the time or
having the capacity to do an
in-depth analysis of these
applications that come before
us and, and, and, and Jeremy
and his staff do a fine job,
but it's not fine enough in
terms of we need more eyes on
it. And I think that if we had
a board that would make
recommendations to us, we could
take that under consideration.
As well as Jeremy's
department's recommendations.
You will see, as we consider
later on tonight, the variance
request, that Jeremy's
interpretation is far different,
and his recommendation is
diametrically opposed to what
the Zork and those were all
most all architects were their
recommendation on those same
those same applications. So I
think we need help on this. And
I think more information and
more full information is better.
So what are you suggesting I'm
suggesting I'm suggesting that
we have a an advisory board to
review variance applications,
that they review applications,
that they make recommendations
and they either present to us,
along with Jeremy and his
department or they present.
They give it to Jeremy, and
Jeremy presents it to us.
Question. Question. Go ahead.
Wait wait wait. Go. Go ahead.
Mike. So how do we avoid
conflict of interest when we
have architects that are they
recuse? Just like we recuse? No,
just hear me out. So if we have
architects that are on the
board, but they're also
employed to do work on the
island they're in, how are we
going to get people to do this?
Because, you know, if we ask
them, just for example, let's
say we asked Tom Weber to be on
the board. He's doing a he's
doing a project on the island.
How how. So he would have to
recuse himself on every time he
would be looking at his own
property. Yes, absolutely. Just
like when I was sitting on
magistrates, people who my firm
represent came before special
magistrate and I had to recuse.
Just like you have to recuse
when when Martin when Martin's
development comes. Question. So
even if it's not their own
development, which that's
obvious to recuse, what if
they're it's a completely
different development they're
working on, but they're working
on this variance that they
foresee. They might set a
precedent here that might allow
him to get a precedent on his
development. So they're working
with the code. No, no. Okay. So
I'm on the board. I'm going to
recommend this variance because
at some future point in time, I
might be working on another
project that might request that
same variance. And I could use
this variance as PRESIDENT On
why to get that variance. Well,
I'm just saying I mean, that's
going kind of deep. But why,
why, why create that? The other
part is when we talk about
variances, and we had a
discussion and I was thinking
about this particular variance
that you brought up that we're
going to see today. And part of
the criteria of how we look at
these variances is not a
requirement for hardship.
That's that's what I want. And
so maybe we just change that.
Let me tell you about that. And
if we change to add that
criteria to say, hey, if there
is no hardship, if you can't
prove any type of hardship,
this isn't even getting to the
next step. If I can just before
it's just subjective. No, no,
we can have the discussion, I
just but let's just refrain
from speaking about the
variance items we're hearing
later on tonight. The stage is
out of general high level,
please. Thank you. As far as
first of all, as far as this
hardship discussion is
concerned, it's I understand it.
I think it's a great idea
theoretically, but under sb 180,
I don't think we can even add
that right now. Number one.
Number two, our own section
1048 conditions for issuance of
a variance. Subsection one
submission by the applicant of
a showing of good and
sufficient cause that the
unique characteristics of the
size, configuration or
topography of the site limit
compliance with the provision.
That's hardship, that's
hardship. That's what that
means. But not but doesn't
cover all hardships. This is
saying that the code, the
reason for this is we have a
code that in general applies to
everybody. And there are
circumstances that are unique
to a property where the code.
Okay, but what if what if that
property is not just just add
one clarification?
Councilmember stoner, I believe
you referenced chapter ten.
That's actually relating to
variances underneath the
National Flood Insurance
program. Right? Okay. Which is
different than chapter 30. So
those are flood variances,
which are that's the standard
under federal law that that we
adopt. So I was confused
because I looked and I and I
wasn't sure maybe let's go back
to the original one. So we
don't talk about the other
variants. Just this whole
thought of recusing and how do
we find people in this
community that effectively will
never work in this community,
because otherwise they MAY have
to recuse themselves on some
level or another. Well,
someone's not going to someone
would not not hire an architect
because they serve on the board.
No, but the archetype would
have to recuse himself. Right.
But we have we have more than
five architects on this on this
island. We have a lot of
architects, Nancy. And it's not
only architects. A couple of
things right now, Jeremy has
criteria and he analyzes each
criteria. He gives us analysis.
We can agree or disagree with
his analysis. Are you saying we
should have different criteria
than Jeremy has for the
advisory board? No, I'm not
saying we should have different
criteria. Yes. So they're going
to basically see if they agree
with Jeremy's analysis. They're
going to do it their own
analysis. So basically see if
they agree or disagree. They
disagree. They'll tell based on
the exact same criteria. Right.
That's what. So so then and the
basis of everything is our our
chapter 30 whatever the hell it
is. Okay. Our code. Now the
next thing you want to say why
I'm against your thing. Because
you want architects to do this.
And my experience at this
village in 2013, I proposed
that the bfe was ten feet and I
said we should raise the Bfv or
permit to be raised because we
didn't even permit to build at
a higher bfe without penalizing
10% of the F.A.R. And the
village architects all came
here and they said the village
would look terrible. We don't
like the architecture. It's not
going to be. We don't really
care. It doesn't matter, I said.
But you really caring about the
sustainability and resilience
and then, you know, but it's
more important you can't raise
it. So basically they went
along with the architects and
you know what happened. We now
have bfe plus one. So everybody
at that point in time now
because those architects. So
architects are artists. Excuse
me. Architects are artists.
Yeah okay. They're not
technicians. They're not
lawyers. I have no problem with
your thing. As long as it does
not involve architects. The
mayor appoints people, whoever
he thinks is qualified. We
agree or we disagree with those
people. And that's it. They
might be an architect. It might
be a contractor. They might
just be an attorney. They might
be an intelligent individual
who knows how to read. Okay,
anybody, but not limited to
architects. If he has an
architect, fine. That's all.
Which takes care of your
problem, Oscar, with appointing
architects, you might have a
conflict if you're a developer
or fear whatever. There's a lot
of other people you and I both
know that. Look, reading these
plans, you need, you need. Not
everyone has to be an architect,
but you need technically, what
I was thinking when you brought
this up is is this similar to
like, a site site plan review,
which we talked about and I
think when Brett was on on
council as well, he spoke about
the need for this and I didn't
know how that would look. But I
see something brewing here. But
I want to be really careful
that just it's not just
architects, it could be a gc
too. But also yeah, that also
has some interest in
constructing here at one point
and now sees an opportunity to
create a very dangerous
precedent that he could later
use at a time. And I'm not
saying people are going to do
that, but it could happen. But
the point is, they're supposed
to be. But isn't that checking
against the code? I understand
checking against the code.
They're not making policy.
They're checking against the
code. They should be doing what
Jeremy and his staff are doing.
But this but this is more us.
Isn't the issue really that
we're not? That the people are
coming before us and they're
not showing any hardship. Okay,
so so no, that's not this issue.
But to me, okay. Well by the
same token, if we know that
we're going to raise the bfr,
more than likely the bfr, like
we're talking about, even our
drainage program, we say as
soon to be if is going to be
bfr plus three, right. Because
our engineers and yet we're
saying Vaf plus one right now.
And someone comes to the plan
now that's b plus two for
argument's sake. That doesn't
comply with it doesn't comply
with our code. But we know
already that we're going to be
changing that because we're
already telling we're designing
something. We just did that
saying, I'm going to buy a sofa,
right? And you say to the
salesman, it's going to go on
sale in five months, so give me
the sale price. Now, we don't
know. We have a code now. We've
already told people that our
engineers to design our
stormwater based on an increase
in bfr. We haven't changed the
code. Okay, well, you see,
that's when cases like that
come is why you have variances.
Because people have to be
reasonable and say, you know
what, why would you have
somebody do something when you
know you're going to change it?
But we just did that. We just
did that for a house on I'm
just saying exactly. Not on
Harbor. I'm, I'm saying that's
why you have variances.
Everybody can't be variance. We
don't need a code because it's
code by variance. Come on. Okay,
Frank. I you've articulated a
problem. Yeah. There's no doubt
that that's a problem. Yeah.
The the process for correcting
the problem, in my opinion, is
not even in the neighborhood of
this interposing another board
and another layer of.
Bureaucracy vesting in a group
of people, a technical
responsibility. That is our job,
relying on that department,
which in my opinion needs to do
a better job. That's where the
big problem can start to be
fixed. If these memos are both
number one, discouraged in
inappropriate cases, and number
two, done better, inappropriate
cases. And if we had an
opportunity, say, for two
readings instead of one to deal
with these. So they're just not
coming at us out of left field.
So we have a process, time to
digest all the information,
recognizing that it is
technical in nature. And if we
were to maybe not necessarily
use the word hardship, but
think in terms of a real
justification that's rooted in
something more like the flood
language, a unique condition or
a circumstance that augurs for
an adjustment because it's
equitable and it's
inconsequential to the
neighbors, that'd be a better
standard than what we have now.
But even with what we have now,
I don't think we're bringing
these forward appropriately
because they're supposed to be.
The result is supposed to be
consistent with our regulations
and these variances that we've
been confronted with are simply
based on the fact that someone
doesn't want to comply with the
code as written. But we are
getting recommendations from
our staff to approve them. So
two parts to that. One is I
think staff needs to do a
better job in making sure
compliance and conditions are
all checked. All the boxes are
checked. Secondly, I agree with
some of these recommendations
without being specific about
which ones. Because of what I
just said. At the very least,
the result is supposed to be
consistent with the regulations.
Our regulations are very
specific about height and slope
and such, and thus to simply
not want to comply with it is
not a justification to me. Do
you think there is room to
adjust the criteria? Sure. To
help in that manner? I think
now you mentioned not use the
word hardship maybe. Well,
hardship would what would be
what would be language that I
think the language is
instructive. And the reason
that I'm a little bit shy about
hardship is because hardship is
so maybe impossible to really
prove it's objective. Bad, bad,
bad way to go. So if I could,
under general zoning law,
there's really three different
types of variances standards.
You have hardship which is the
most strenuous. You have
compatibility which is the most
flexible. And they have one
that's called practical
difficulties, which is like a
blend of the two, which is
similar to what you heard in
the flood criteria that
Councilmember Stoner was
mentioning. So. Happy to
present you all three standards.
You can look at what they look
like, the criteria, and go from
there. You could also build off
the compatibility and add more
criteria if you wanted to, to
the only one that is really set
historically is the hardship.
And there are certain criteria
in there that is very term of
art. That again is extremely
difficult to meet. So I'm happy
to provide that information to
you so you can review it. It's
not obviously in here, but it
could be for a future code
amendment. I have a comment and
I have a suggestion. Well, I
have a question, a suggestion
and a question. Can we even
amend our code under sb 180? So
I think that we someone could
say that changing your code to
add a hardship is more
restrictive or burdensome.
Whether or not other types of
changes we'd have to look at
and see. Mike and my my
suggestion is, which would be
yes. No, we couldn't do it. But
there's there's a piece of
illogic in lumping variance
with sb 180, because a variance
is a deviation from code. Right.
But the the sb 180 has a
provision that says that until
20th OCTOBER of 2027, we can't
adopt procedures that are more
restrictive or burdensome. But
we're not we're not trying to
make it more restrictive than
the current code. We're just
trying to make it within our
code, which I understand here.
But I think what Councilmember
Stoner was trying to say, if we
changed our variance criteria,
though, to add restrictive, to
add like a hardship, that's
going to make it more stringent.
We don't have hardship in our
code than our current code and
what we currently have. No than
what our current code. Not in
this ordinance. What's being
proposed? If we amended our
zoning code to to add criteria
to ensure that we stay within
our code, not making it more
restrictive. That's not that's
not what the question the
question was, if we were to add
a hardship standard, okay, for
variance in our code, that
would be more restrictive than
our current code. So is is
there is there other
municipalities obviously that
are facing this problem that
are clients of yours? Okay,
that you could maybe say, hey,
like for example, Golden Beach,
okay, or City of Surfside or
who have some more restrictive
language that we could
potentially bring into our
situation and healthfully and
not have to reinvent the wheel?
No, we wouldn't reinvent the
wheel. I've definitely done
when I have rewarding codes,
avoid reinventing. I will look,
but I'm pretty sure that I
personally have a. A comparison
of the different zoning
variants standards with
criteria that I'll look and see.
Okay, let me, let me let me
jump in, folks, because we're
we're going all over the place.
So Nancy, I love you, but I
think, you know, maybe you
bring this back. Well, what I
was going to say is, can we and
rather than take a vote, can we
defer and call the Zork before
us to talk to us about their,
their. So, so let's let's defer
it. But we got into two
discussions. We got into a
variance discussion which would
lead us somewhere else. And
this is about an an advisory
panel. Right. So you know let's
separate those two because that
that was a worthwhile
conversation. And we need to
keep going in that area. But.
Yes. Last comment. In all due
respect, do you hear me? I
think you do an excellent job
of analyzing, comparing,
considering and coming down
with recommendations, which are
very easy for, I think, for
most people to understand and
decide whether we agree with
your logic or we don't agree
with your logic. I don't
understand the problem because
I don't see the complications
involved. But if in fact that
is the case, then maybe we can
make it a simple way for him to
define his criteria or to
explain it to people. If you
don't think that what he does
is simple enough for people to
understand. When I say people,
I mean our council understand.
But otherwise I think and I've
been around a lot of zoning in
different places and everything
else, and I have very thorough,
complete point by point job
with a conclusion which you
might agree with, you might not
disagree with. But he certainly
gives you the reasons why he
does agree with it or disagrees
with it. And then we can make
our own decisions. Okay, let's.
If we permission and defer the
I'm moving to defer this to
defer we have a second second.
All those in all those in favor.
Aye. Opposed. Motion carries.
Okay. Let's go to the real
variances and not the ones that
we were. Let's go to ten e.
1616 I think. Is it 16. I think
it's tab 1616. Yeah okay. Okay.
So again these are going to be
quasi judicial hearings. So
after the titles are read and
you can read both at the same
time and have one hearing mayor
if you want okay let's do that.
Just two separate votes. Two
separate votes. But the next
item is a resolution of the
village council of the Village
of Key Biscayne, Florida,
approving a variance request to
allow a maximum rear zone lot
elevation of nine feet and six
inches above base flood
elevation on property located
at 640 South Match to Drive,
where eight feet and six inches
above base flood elevation is
otherwise required. Providing
for findings, providing for
conditions, providing for
recording and providing for an
effective date move second.
Second. Thank you. Yeah. Read
the other title also. Yes, a
resolution of the village
council of the Village of Key
Biscayne, Florida, approving a
variance request to allow a
maximum exterior wall height of
23ft and six inches above base
flood elevation on property
located at 640 South Master
Drive, where a maximum exterior
wall height of 22ft and six
inches above base flood
elevation is otherwise
permitted. Providing for
findings, providing for
recording and providing for an
effective date moved second.
Thank you. Okay, do we need the
applicant? Give the applicant.
Sure. First swear in anybody
who's going to speak. And then
we can let the applicant
present and staff please stand
and raise your right hand. Do
you swear and affirm that the
testimony you give this evening
is the truth? Yes. Thank you. I
don't see any other members
from the public that are here
to speak. So. And then we'll
have to just open a public
hearing at public hearing is
now open on ten e and ten f.
Seeing no one come forward.
Public hearing is now closed.
Okay. We need to give the
applicant the sufficient time
to present their case. Sure.
Yes. Okay. It's important to
know how much time do you need?
Go under our government.
Agendas and minutes. Said 5 or
10 minutes. Five. Ten minutes.
Agenda packet. So we're just
we're just pulling up the
agenda packet for visuals. Yeah.
But just so you all know, this
is this is two separate
variance requests that are
similar. So I think we can
discuss them at the same time.
One is for wall height on the
property. The overall height of
the building is within the 35ft
limit. So this is a1a request
for one foot of additional wall
height on the perimeter wall. I
think notable in this case.
This is a building with a
sloped roof, which is generally
well received from from council
in the past. It gives an
impression overall of a lower
lower height compared to the
more rectilinear buildings. The
other in addition they have.
The massing of the building. Is
that the second floor, where
this variance request is being
asked for, is well set back
from the street you have single
storey massing on the on the
street side. So the and then
you have a very large setback
on the south side. So the two
sides that are most impacted by
this are the ocean side and the
north property, which
coincidentally the architect
also designed. And that's an
existing two story building. So
the second variance request is
for one foot of additional
height in the rear sort of back
patio pool area. And then it
steps back down to the property
line. What's the design purpose
on the on the rear lot? I'm
going to let the applicant
speak to that in terms of in
terms of purpose. The house
across the street from the side,
that's about 10 foot or 5 foot
higher than this house over
here. You can design that one.
Who built that one? Wow. Yes.
Great. Yeah. That's fine. So
again, it comes to the view of
everything that the city. So
and I will make sure no matter
how the. 17 people. So we'll do
this in two ways. Smart smart
man. So how much cheaper. So
he's coming over. What happens
when you read encyclopedias.
But. You're going to. Have we
should have the it would appear
in OCTOBER as well because the
the backup files are there. So
we can cheat that way. By the
way this particular thing we
OCTOBER 1st. Yeah. Let's go
ahead and pull that up. He's
talking about raising the dirt
okay. So search for 640 the
dirt and the whole island
because of the reason we had
the whole thing because it's
too low. So we really haven't
changed. But it'll be the same
problem. That's the problem
because we should have changed
the color. Ready to raise the
dirt. Okay, I'm just trying.
I've been pushed. I just pushed
what I've been told what? We
can get there from here because
this was deferred. You're
making the change. So the
drawing should be in the
OCTOBER that the island's going
to know they are. They're going
to find the well the agenda on.
Shut up. You be quiet. You be
quiet too. But but but we can
use that one. That was fine.
Yes. Okay. You're becoming a
pain. Yes. I love you, though.
Listen, nobody can protect me
from myself. You should know
that by now. I don't give a
damn, I know. I don't give a
damn. I'll go eat the pizza.
Okay? Yeah. Are we on a okay? I
need to make this thing. This
is. This is a perfect example.
I think it's time. What time?
Is it? Nice. Yeah. You did.
Okay. Let's get it done. Now.
It's 11. Okay. Ten. Okay, I'll
go down there. You have to
raise it. You raise in the dirt.
And what is it? Ten e. Okay, so
it'll be time. I'm worried
about it. No no no. Sorry. 16.
Okay, I understand why we have
technical difficulties. Oh,
okay. The big agenda did you
get. I went to 16. Yeah. Okay.
Okay. You want to scroll down
to the drawing? The drawings?
Are there any days instead of
one we're going to go to 1030.
Yeah. So I need to. Know okay.
There you go. All right. Yeah.
All right. That's a good start.
Yeah. Then there we go. Indiana.
Indiana was like, hold on, hold
on a minute. Yeah. Michael I
open every day. That's cool.
That's great. I've done a lot
of road trips like that. That's
fun I love it I love driving.
Yeah I mean, we got it. All
right, let's go. There. Let's
go. Well, I, you know, my wife,
my wife and I were married in
the. We still have we got
married and she's like okay.
Yeah we still have. We still
have something in here. And
then we have a family house on
on Lake Starnberg. Oh my GOD, I
love that. Very same. All right,
we got it. Yes. Sorry about
that. Oh, but you found it.
This package? Yes. Nice. Anyway.
Let's go. Oh, yeah. So with
your permission, I'll just set
the scene a little bit for the
applicant. So this is the
existing property at South
Mashta Drive. This is the home
that's currently under
construction at 630 South
Mashta next door, right next
door. And then this is the
existing home to the to the
north side. This was built in
2001. And then this is the
location on on the Island. You
didn't show the one across the
street? I did not show the one
across the street. Yours wasn't
built with permitting. Yeah,
well they have permit for one
of them has was having work
done right now and it is being
done with a permit. So this is
a survey. And then I'm going to
let the, let the applicant, the
applicant's representative take
it from here. So okay. My name
is Rafael Portuondo from Puerto
Perotti Architects. We do a lot
of work in here in Key Biscayne.
We actually we did the house to
the right of it back in. 2012.
Right. For at the time, one of
the things before starting, one
of the things that has come up,
which I think is somewhat
problematic for architects, is
the fact that we're dealing
with flood, Criteria's and
Coral Gables Palm Beach are all
dealing with flood criteria's.
And then the one thing that I'm
going to talk about today is
I'm part of the Classical
Institute of Architecture and
Art. I'm a board member there.
And one of the things that we
push is classical architecture
between and it's also a dialog
between gardens and landscaping.
Right. One of the problems that
you're all going to have, and
you're all having right now, is
the fact that we're the streets
that are probably like 5.1 and
we're going up to elevation 11.
One of the things that you're
going to see, and it's
happening already in the
village of Key Biscayne, is
you're getting monumental homes
with 12 steps to get to the
front door because of what's
happening. Right. And so how do
you manage that as an architect?
How do you manage such a
discrepancy? Back in the day
when you looked at, you know,
the houses that were being
built, you would go up two
steps to go to the front door
and you would be two steps to
the back door. And now let's
suppose I'm going to use your
criteria for you just real
quick. We're at elevation 11
and we're asking for our rear
yard to be at elevation 9.5.
And the code is 8.5. Right. But
what happens if it goes to 14?
Does that mean you're going to
have 12 steps to go from your
house to the to the 8.5? In
other words, part of the give
and take of any design that
we're working on is not making
these are homes. These are not
municipal buildings. Right. So
there's a there's a comfort
zone of most homes that you
want to manage that. So having
said that I guess we can start.
I'm going to go to the, to the
hopefully the rendered
elevations that are here.
Is it
possible to make the screen
smaller? Sure. Just just with
that plus and minus. There's a
little lag on it though. Okay.
So one of the responsibilities
we all have as architects is to
make sure that the house feels
like a home, doesn't feel like
an apartment building. And one
of the goals that we had in
this particular project is if
you see the gate that we the
entrance we have here, it's
actually the entrance to a
series of stairs that go
through a pergola, which takes
us to an upper courtyard. Right.
So we're managing that stairway
on the interior part of the
diagram, as opposed to the
exterior part of the diagram,
which gives it a scale of a
human scale. And that's
important with anything you do
in any town, in any
municipality. The other thing
that we did is we worked
closely with zoning in, in
terms of managing the bonus
points, right? So what you see
in the house next door and
other houses you see in Key
Biscayne is that there's a big
facade right on the street and
you're managing, you know, ins
and outs. But in this
particular case, we have from
the from the gates that go up
to the front door, a 20 foot
setback. So we're really
stepping the house. So it's
really much more sculptural on
the street. And so one of the
one of one of the goals that we
have is that it doesn't look
like a massive house. If you
look at the house that we did
in 2000, 2 or 2012, our house
is actually lower than the
house next door. And so one of
the things that we're looking
at is a sense of scale. And
also the other thing that we're
looking at is gardens. So if
you look at and I'm going to
take you to the floorplans in a
second, but when I want to
start off with is how the
architecture can actually be
beautiful to the street and not
monumental to the street. Part
of this is also working with
zoning and making sure that
we're also doing the things
that are correct. I think it's
stuck. Just as a frozen. So
just you can navigate here.
Where's that? What are you
pointing just oh yeah. So are
you trying to get to a side
elevation. That's fine. I just
want to show. The rear. You
should be able to navigate with
the arrows now. Okay. So I'm
not the most technical guy just
putting it out there. But the
other thing too is in regards
to the rear facade is a lot of
times, like for example,
bulkheads used to be at 4.5,
now they're at 7.5. So how do
you deal with that. So these
are not hardships that you
would say this is a hardship.
We're dealing with hardships in
general. And how do we solve
them? We're doing it the most
responsible way we can. So. In
this particular case here we
are at 11. We come down a step,
we come down two steps and then
we're at we raised it a foot
and we're at 9.5, 9.5 from 8.5
is never going to be noticed
from anyone ever. But as a home,
we don't have five steps coming
down to the rear yard. I'm
going to show you the site plan
in a second, because part of
dealing with the zoning code
and the bonuses is if you step
back x amount, then you get a
bonus. If you step back x
amount more, you get more bonus.
So what happens is it actually
starts pushing the house back.
And by pushing the house back,
there's less space between the
house and actually the bulkhead.
So instead of adding more steps
and more steps and encroaching
more and more into the rear
yard, we actually asked for the
foot to go up. Right? So this
is the rear facade. You can see
how it's actually very
compatible. It's very classical
in terms of a Florida type of
architecture. And the idea
behind it is that it's we
believe that strongly in
classical orders and classical
architecture, and we feel that
it's going to be appropriate
for the village of Key Biscayne.
And so having said that. Okay,
here we go. So the other thing
that we also didn't do is a
roundabout driveway, because we
really believe in green space
and architecture and gardens
and the whole thing. So here
you actually drive in two car
garage. You have a path that
goes in through this pergola.
So this is our our stairs that
are going up. You come to an
elevated garden, you walk to
your front door. You have a
path that goes all the way to
the rear yard, all the way to
the water. You have living room,
dining room. Back of house, bar,
kitchen, family room. So you
have the family room,
underwater dining on the water,
living on the water and his
office on the water. By by
giving this much garden space
to the street. We've actually
actually created a tighter area
in the back. But in order to
get the the larger, grander
spaces giving back to the
street without a fortified
facade, we've actually created
a ton of green space, not only
on the ground plane, but also
on the entrance. And we have a
structure on each side. And the
main house is actually probably
50ft from the street, if not
more so when you get to the
rear yard. We have a choice.
Either we add more steps, which
is another three steps, and you
can see how that's going to
encroach. So one of the things
that architects do, which is
the artistic part of it, is
what are we giving back to the
to the village of Key Biscayne.
That is an architecturally
significant move, right? And
we're giving up a lot of green
space and a lot of house that's
set back, which is a lot
different than a lot of the
houses that are going up right
now in density. So that's one
of the things that we're that
we're doing. So when it when it
comes to the hardship, it isn't
that the fact that there's a
that the lot is a wedge lot or
the lot is doing something
different. It's the fact that
we're managing flood criteria,
we're managing that. And how do
you do something beautiful and
look residential without having
such changes of level? And so
we thought that the more
responsible way and the less
monumental way is to have three
steps down from the house to
your garden, and as opposed to
six steps down from your house
to the garden, which would
encroach further into the rear
yard. So we've given up a lot
of elements, a lot of
architecture and gardens to the
street in order to, to to
achieve all the bonus points,
which is part of working in Key
Biscayne. And then. The other
thing that we deal with a lot
is hurricane having having
clients that have. To be able
to insure their property the
best way possible. And a lot of
that is having concrete roofs.
So when we when we deal with a
concrete roof and we're dealing
with a classical classical
style, which has to do with
eaves and all these other
things, we have to manage how
that system works with all the
rafters and everything else.
It's easy to say, just make
your house 18in smaller all the
way around and you can solve
that. But that's not really a
realistic solution. So we're
asking for a one foot variance
in order to make the house.
Something with Florida details,
large overhangs and all these
things. But the way we have to
fasten it is not always that
easy because we have to do like
clamps and bolts and all these
other things. The other thing
that happens is that when you
start to do that and you and
you were to lower it and it
creates a series of other
problems. But what happens more
importantly is when you're
dealing with balconies and
actually softer elements of the
house, then those raft, those
beams that come down actually
compress the line of sight. So
one of the things that also the
village of Cubicin has is
modern contemporary homes,
which have the 22 six plus
parapet, which makes them
probably close to 26 or 27ft
high. Right. So in your code
you have style. So there are
certain styles that allow you
to have a high parapet because
they're contemporary. And then
there are certain styles where
they're more classical that
have a little bit more of a
restriction, but we're not
exceeding our maximum height in
terms of our ridge. That's
still within the 35ft. We're
just saying that in order to do
something that is more a
Florida Florida classical style
and dealing with the the
criterias of insurances,
concrete roofs, flood criterias
that you're discussing changing
anyway. But I agree with Nancy
in a way. It's not it's not a
variance that you're saying
there's a there's a problem.
The problem is built into all
the things that we're having to
deal with in terms of the noise,
the flood criterias, which is
not normal problems. These are
problems that are thrust upon
the architects to try to solve
in the most meaningful way. And
so when we come to you for
something fairly insignificant
in the overall things that we
have to solve, I'm saying to
you that I'd rather have the
house more residential looking
than monumental looking. And so,
by the way, I can solve that is
by the same way that they
solved it in Key Biscayne in
1961, 1957 is you have three
steps up, you have two three
steps down, as opposed to a lot
of the houses that I'm seeing,
Biscayne that have ten steps up
and then ten steps down. And
that to me starts losing the
characteristics of a home. And
I think that's problematic. So
the architects that look into
the softness of homes, I think
I think that at least that's
what my goal is, is that it's
not something that you can say,
you know, I want to have no
fill and I want to have seven
steps down in the rear and
seven steps to the front. So
I'm trying to manage a lot of
moving parts, including your
code and including the esthetic.
And so I think that we've we've
come a long way in terms of, of
having a home that feels like a
home doesn't feel like an
apartment building. And I think
that what we're asking for in
terms of assistance, to make
sure that we're doing the right
thing, is a one foot variance
in terms of height, in terms of
fill, and a one foot variance
in terms of height, in terms of
how to manage a concrete roof
in an environment where clients
are asking for a lot of things.
So to make sure that they have
the least. Expensive insurances.
And so in working with, with
the staff, they've, they've,
they've done a great job
guiding us. And I think that
it's a home that I'm super
proud of. And it's for some
it's for the end user. And they
are Key Biscayne residents and
they're very happy and proud of
their home. That's basically
that. Do you have any questions?
I can answer them. How about
the the the the wall, the wall
variance that you're looking
for. That's the height I
thought I thought there was a
screening wall that you were
looking for. No, it's really
the 22 6 to 23 six okay. What's
the assumption you're making
for bv in the future in terms
of what it should be or what
we're going to have here in the
village? You're designing homes,
you're designing them at bfi
plus one and bf at bf plus one.
Okay. And for example Coral
Gables gives you bf plus three.
They're up to three plus three.
They're already. Yeah. And so
is Palm Beach and so is
everyone else. So and these are
also things that help you in
your insurances like no I
understand above. I'm just so
how do you manage plus three.
How do you manage plus three
with a with a code that says
8.5 it's impossible. So when
you're using bf now and which
is ten plus one is 11 plus two
and a half, right. That's eight
and a half. You want to do nine
and a half. We're doing nine
and nine and a half. It's eight
and a half now you're doing
eight and a half and you want
to do nine and a half. Correct.
So you're saying you want to
raise the one one one foot
which is bf plus 12 would be bf
minus two and a half. Right. So
if we went to bf plus two not
plus three you'd still be fine
then, right? But because we're
still bf plus one you're not.
And of course we have gone to
bf plus three like the other
people for telling our
engineers that's how to design
our storm sewer system and how
Key Biscayne will be, which
would then make you find bf
where you are, right? Plus two.
I think your other point is
this one and this is Nancy's
point as well. Let's say that
you went to bf plus three. That
doesn't affect your maximum
height. No, but the point is we
have now saying you can't be
more than 2.5ft below the below
that, correct? Correct. But the
other thing is this bf plus
three means you're going to be
from elevation eight to
elevation 13. I'm not. I'm
right. So in other words, how
are you going to make how are
you going to mitigate that.
Which is a bigger problem. You
know you're arguing with the
wrong guy. I'm supporting you.
Okay. So no, but I'm just
saying I'm trying to tell you
is what you're doing is
something why we have variances?
Because we haven't changed yet.
Although we've made changes and
tell people we're going to
change. We're designing things
to change. But we haven't
gotten around to actually doing
the change. So that's when a
variance comes in because it's
something we are definitely
changing. Everybody's changing.
But you're you're doing it
today before the change is done.
So that's why you're asking for
a variance that makes all the
sense in the world to me. Don't
say anything else. Questions I
have a quick question. How do
we how do we stop this from
becoming a PRESIDENT? By change,
by changing, by going ahead. We
said, plus three. Let's change
our code. Make it bf plus three.
I mean, that's all. I'll just
say that variances are not they
don't set a precedent, but they
could be persuasive. But each
one stands on its own. Yeah.
Okay. Well true. We're
experiencing owners
understanding this is
precedential. And they're
coming more frequently than
historically seeking variances
for all kinds of reasons.
There's no doubt that everyone
that gets approved, they will
stand up here and say that the
council approved, you know, one
here or there. But legally
speaking, they each stand on
their own. But I, I understand
your point. Would you help me
understand the wall height
justification? You talked about
roof construction and material.
I'm not sure I fully grasp the
complication that that presents
in terms of. One of the things
we're dealing with today is the
thought of concrete roofs. So
the concrete roofs, like 8 to
10in of concrete. I'm sorry, I
can't hear you either, can I?
So we're dealing with concrete
roofs, which are requests from
clients that are typically 8 to
10in of concrete, plus 8 to
10in of styrofoam and structure.
So you're dealing with a large
build up of, of concrete and,
and insulation and steel and
the whole thing. I don't
understand that being more
specific. Okay. If you
typically have a rafter, it's
like for a wood rafter, like a
truss, the top chord is like
four inches, six inches, 4 to
6in, right? When you're dealing
with a concrete roof, you're
dealing with about 12 to 14in.
No, no. What's what kind of
span are you talking about? Can
I can I jump in because I think
I think I understand the
question. So, you know,
historically it's not about the
it's not about the spans or the
trusses. This is about
insurance carriers greatly
prefer that you have a concrete
roof structure, whether it's
sloped or flat. Yeah. You get
mitigation credits for it. And
the idea is if you have a
penetration through the
membrane, through the
waterproof membrane, when
that's a concrete substructure,
the structure doesn't fail.
When it's a wood substructure,
you get rot. You get an
eventual failure of the
structure from a leak that you
don't. You're not as vulnerable
with with a concrete structure.
So but as you can imagine, you
know, a wood rafter has that
has a certain dimension
structural dimensions for wood
versus concrete for long spans
isn't that different. But when
you go up from there, from the
inside to the outside, that's
where the concrete structure is
a lot thicker. You know, a wood
structure, you have plywood
sheathing and then you really
very quickly after that you
have the waterproof membrane
with the concrete, you have a
thicker layer and then you have
the insulation, everything else
too. So you tend to have a
thicker overall dimension for
concrete roof. But how does
that affect the overall height?
How does that affect anything?
Oh okay. Let him take it. So
what happens is that. If we
take it if we if we take it out
of the house, we'd be going
down a foot and a half or a
foot. What if we, if we, if we
push that down to, to actually
become like a truss. The end
rafter of a truss is about six
inches. Right. And that sits
right on top of the concrete
beam, the the rafter. The truss
sits right on top of the sits
on top of the truss, not the
upper court. The top court.
Let's see. Yeah okay okay. And
so that dimension is six with
concrete. It's more like like
12 to 14 depending on the size
of of the span and your house.
There's no way it's going to be
more than an eight inch.
Shouldn't be more than an eight
inch thick. So okay. So let me
just take a little bit further.
The way the concrete roof
systems work is that there is a
steel. Let's say partitioned
like a, like an aluminum
partition with 6 to 8in of
styrofoam. The aluminum
partition that holds up the
styrofoam. The styrofoam is
what the concrete is poured on
top of. And so you're dealing
with a thick assembly in order
to make that concrete roof work.
Right? Isn't it? Isn't like
truss is an icynene. It's it's
the, the the 6 to 8in of
styrofoam is what supports the
concrete pour on top. So if we
were to push all that down to
be like a truss, we would be
going down probably like ten
inches, 12in. I understand
correctly, you're saying that
you're using styrofoam. As for
material, styrofoam with steel
in between the styrofoam panels
come like every 3 or 4ft. So
these so these frame it in
steel. So insulation panels now.
Yes it's it's built into the
insulation as well. My
translation of this if I have
this accurately is because the
structure that sits underneath
the concrete is so thick
compared to a regular roof.
You're you're delving down into
the dimension of the house. And
so you want extra height to
mitigate that effect. Correct.
Is that is that a fair. That's
exactly right. And you're using
that instead of using sprayed
cell foam insulation between
the rafters. Correct. Right.
The styrofoam is the insulation.
Yeah. But I mean yes, but
you're getting all this extra I
mean to me again I'm all for
your first variance. But you
haven't said a damn thing on
this one. That makes me think
you need the second variance
based on this, because there's
other construction methods to
use in insulating the house
that you don't have to go with
it. Now, of course you want to
use that method. That's fine. I
don't disagree with you. Maybe
that's the best method for you,
but it's certainly not the only
method where you would not have
to add any, any height to the
to the property. So I would say
in the last eight out of ten
homes we've done with concrete
roofs. Yeah. And the reason why
the clients are requiring or
requesting it is because it it
actually lowers their
insurances. And you don't get
that with, with trusses. And so
part of the issue is that all
due respect you're wrong. Well
then we should talk to eight of
my clients. So and let me ask
you this. Why are you saying
that? You're right. Because
basically you get a credit for
the connection between the
concrete roof and the wall
structure. You don't get a
credit for the for the
horizontal vertical areas, okay?
That they're you're getting
your credit connection and
concrete that you have there.
That's what you're getting your
mitigation credits for okay.
And you made your mitigation
credit still is basically
windows and doors. I don't
agree with that okay. So so the
driver here is not interior
wall height to ceiling. It's
roof structure through
structure so as not to
penetrate down into the
dimension of the house itself.
Correct. You're not using roof
trusses, right? No. It's all
poured concrete with insulation
which is built into the system.
It's like you're buying a
system, right? So if you if you
would not raise the the height
of the, the the. Structure, how
what would the difference in
height be. Would it be a foot
basically. Right. Right. Okay.
So so how what is the ceiling
height on the second level from
slab to finish fourth. I'm, I'm
thinking I remember it being
like nine feet. So if it would
go down it would go down to
like about eight. And to be
honest with you on your drawing.
Right. I mean, just have to
pull it in. Yeah, but let me
see if I can. Let me see if it
can be clear. Let me see.
Jeremy, can you help me pull
that in? Is it possible to
mitigation credits for
insurance for Florida residents?
It's the section b right there,
right? Hey, Siri, what is the
list of mitigation credits for
insurance for section homes?
There you go. Right there. Are.
Zoom in on zoom in as needed.
It might take a moment to for
the resolution to come in. Yeah,
but. It's there. So it's so the
top of the. Looks like it's ten
ten feet two right. Yeah.
That's ten feet two to the top
of the concrete. Right. So
right. It's probably so if you
elevation nine. So if you lose
a foot there the ceiling would
only be nine feet. It would go
lower than nine at that point.
Yeah. Yeah. With nine. Well
it's ten two now. So if you
take a foot out it would be
nine two. Right. Well ten foot
two is to the, to the top of
the, to the top of the beam.
Right. Top of the roof. Right,
right. So there's really only
nine. Well that's to the and
you have a vaulted section.
Yeah. So what we what we. So if
you notice with the concrete
roof there is no trusses. So we
can actually at that point go
up a little bit with the
ceilings. Yeah. But our spring
point would be like at nine in
the main area. So but the lower
the whatever that is bedroom
area there is where the shower
bathroom is. It looks like
that's nine feet. Right. And
you can see where the edge of
the, of the styrofoam, it's
right at the bottom of the
insulation. And if you were to
have trusses, you would have
all that space up. Yeah. So so
they've got this massive
insulation. How many inches of,
of styrofoam you have. Looks
like about it. It all depends
on the r rating, but I think
it's about 8 or 9in. Yeah.
What's required are 30. Yeah.
But when you have like rigid
insulation it's actually. No
but what's required Arthur.
Arthur. So the other thing
that's important, Edward, is
this, that the insulation by
the styrofoam is part of the
insulation. I understand, but
it's actually sometimes thicker
because it's also somewhat
structural. In other words,
it's it's actually like a thick
enough, dense enough styrofoam
that it's actually going to
hold the, the metal channels
that are holding it in place.
Mayor and a vice mayor.
Designated survivor. The the
lower level is what that looks
like. It's 12 two. I don't know
where you're reading. Where are
you reading? Look at the
section on the on the side
there's there's a section view.
I can't read that. Okay. Well,
it's pretty tough to read. Yeah.
It's to it's to actually top of
top of slab. Oh yeah. There's
12. There's on the side. Yeah
I'm trying to do that. How are
you doing. I'm fine. Pulling
over to the side. With two
fingers. Oh great. Let me just
do this. Oh I'll just go to the
side. There you go. A little
farther. There. There we go.
Okay. So 13 three. So I mean,
well that's that's from slap
slap. Yeah. So we have a ten
foot ceilings inside. Well a
couple of thoughts occur to me
design wise, one of the
challenges that you've
described are indeed challenges.
Everybody's affected by them. I
think our considerations
include somewhat trying to
control the metastasis of sugar
cubes, the replication of the
same contemporary design over
and over and over again. This
does that. The height of the
visual of the door being so
elevated and creating a sense
of verticality is a problem.
You've addressed that. And you
know, it's a it's an esthetic
design with lots of landscaping.
So congratulations on all of
that. We're obviously wrestling
with these, by the way. You
should all be wrestling with it
because we're all wrestling
with it. And and the question
you have to ask yourself is
what kind of designs are. So
let's say that I did know front
yard know garden. And I had six
feet of steps. Here's a little
mitigation credits. In this
particular case we're hiding
the steps within the gardens.
Yeah he doesn't need it. So one
of the things that I give
lectures on is the dialog
between gardens and
architecture. And so one of the
things that I hope you see is
that there is a there's a huge
combination of gardens and
architecture. And I think that
that's what makes it feel like
a home, because it sits on the
ground as opposed to five feet
up. Looks great. We see that in
theory, we see too little of it
in actuality, right. All right,
folks, we got. Let's do ten
first. That's looks a little
bit easier. That's the that's
the rear lot. Make a motion for
approval. I'm sorry. It's
already been moved. Already
moved. Mayor Roscoe, are you
ready to vote? Oh, sorry. We
are. We got it. You. Second,
Councilmember Kaplan moves the
item, and Councilmember London
had seconded. And there are no
changes that I. Okay on any
mayor Roscoe. Yes.
Councilmember. Bracken. Yes.
Councilmember. Kaplan. Yes.
Councilmember. London. Yes.
Vice mayor. Yes. Councilmember.
Stoner. Yes. Councilmember.
Vazquez. Yes. The resolution is
approved. Motion carries the
next item ten f okay. Any
further discussion on ten out.
If you would take the height
out of the lower level and just
shrink the the the the ceiling
on the on the first floor, what
would that do to your design.
Well, we end up having. Eight
foot doors, which is normal for
a house like this. And so we
have I think. Ten foot ceilings
inside. So because we have all
the cavities for ac ducts and
everything else. So it would
start to limit ceiling designs
and all these other things. Ten
foot ceilings is is probably
low for a lot of the houses in
Key Biscayne. So I think it's a
normal ceiling height that we
would want in a house like this.
Quick question. Are you ready?
I'm ready. All right. Council
member Bracken. No.
Councilmember Kaplan. Yes.
Councilmember. London. Yes.
Vice mayor Sardinia's. No.
Councilmember. Stoner. No.
Councilmember. Vazquez. Yes.
Mayor. Roscoe. Yes. Motion
carries. Thank you very much.
And just so you hear it from my
side, I think that you're
questioning all these things is
actually a great thing. And I
think hopefully today I gave
you some insight on what we're
going through as well. So thank
you. Thank you sir. Thank you.
Thanks. Design. Beautiful
design. Yeah. Okay. Let's go
back to nine b the mitigation
credits I know exactly which
ones okay. Ordinance on second
reading, an ordinance of the
village of Key Biscayne,
Florida, concerning the
village's stormwater project
relating to the Clean Water
State Revolving Fund Loan
program, making findings,
authorizing the loan
application, authorizing the
loan agreement, establishing
pledged revenues, designating
authorized representatives,
providing assurances. Providing
for conflict, providing for
severability, and providing for
an effective date move. Second.
Thank you. Questions to Colleen.
Colleen, how do you think the
state will feel about us
submitting an application for
something we might not build,
and then come back later and
say, oh, we made a mistake.
We're not going to build it,
even though in the application
basically says in the
resolution, I'm not mistaken,
go back to tab six, was it?
Fine, tab six somewhere. It
says on the. Whereas such
stormwater improvements include
they tell you what we're going
to do but which really means we
approved it right to do that.
So back in 2023 sorry. Back in
back in 2023, there was a
resolution before council to
adopt what was called the
facilities plan. That was for
this project. So we've already
approved this project. No we
haven't, no not to construct.
But the facilities plan was to
submit to the state revolving
fund for our design loan, and
they required that to be able
to do the design loan. That
facilities plan carries forward
into the construction loan
process. This is a normal
process for the srf as far as
whether we use the money or not.
It is not uncommon for
communities to have something
happen where they can't do the
project or they decide not to
do the project. It become too
expensive and they can't use
the loan dollars they've been
given. If we end up doing that,
there's no penalty. They think
that's fine. I can't speak for
them. I'm telling you that
there's no penalty. Okay? In
addition to there being no
penalty, there's also a
procedure to vet whatever plan
we do decide to do and if it's
sufficiently compatible. Right.
The if there are changes to the
plan, there's a process by
which we would amend the
facilities plan. We can pursue
that process and we can get
more details about what that
would look like. But it is
possible. And that doesn't mean
that we can't use those loan
dollars. That is up to the
extent of the changes that we
would end up making, but major
changes. I don't know what
major means. No, but you had
said to before that it can't it
has to be substantially the
same plan. It can't be a
different project. What they
look like, what they look at in
the facilities plan, is a
review of the environmental
impact that your project is
going to have, the historical
impact. There's a species
analysis. So when it comes to
changing the plan, if there's a
change to what the
environmental impact would be,
they would want to know that we
might have to redo the
environmental portion of the
facilities plan. For example. I
haven't gotten into the details
with them about what
constitutes a major change.
They were reticent to give me
any specifics on that because
it's so variable from one
project to the next. What
constitutes that? What they did
say is, if we do change it
beyond the point that it can
just be adopted as more or less
the same as what we're doing,
then they would go through an
amendment process with us where
we'd have to basically update
our facilities plan. But
basically the proposed plan
would understand the other
engineer is doing it is
significantly different than
this plan. This plan here is
like gravity with a pump into
the base system. And he's doing
a hybrid system, which is
basically utilizing our
existing drainage wells,
putting a shallow injection
wells, small pumps. How do we
know all that? Because that's
what he said anyway. He didn't
say that. Okay. When did he say
that? That's what I heard him
say. Maybe my hearing is bad.
No, no, I mean, you're I'm
sorry. Let me finish. Okay,
then you will. Then I will ask
for a point of privilege. I
assume that's the case. Is that
a substantial change? I can't
speak for Fdep. I'm not an
engineer either. Okay, fine.
Thank you. So, point of
privilege, mayor. Okay, okay.
I'm hearing already. It's a
done deal here. We got a design
going on, and I'm already
hearing details about a design
that this council has not heard.
I'm hearing mixed signals about
the program manager. I'm
hearing mixed signals about
reviews, about moving forward
with the design hearing, moving
forward, and tabling a critical
discussion about a program
manager into a workshop. I'm
sorry, I don't I'm staying. I'm
trying really to stay on point
here because it's important,
because this will affect what
you're doing. The financing
that we're currently evaluating
without any clarity on the
project delivery and the
management structure, is
woefully inadequate. From my
perspective. Logically, we have
just tabled a critical item
which has to do with the
program manager and going like
that, we're taking this project
off the rails. Mayor and
council, I can tell you from 35
years of experience I have seen
this before. I have seen it
over and over again. We have a
lot of money at stake here, you
know, and I'm seeing patterns
that are really concerning.
Number one, I'm seeing a
complete criticism of staff, a
devaluation of the existing
design without any merits. I
have received a lot of
criticism, not only just
criticism. I've been playing
threats about this moving
forward. I have the text and I
am. I am very concerned about
how this council is moving
forward with this project. This
is a significant public purpose
project. It is a project that
was committed to this community.
It is a project that I ran on a
platform, and now I'm hearing a
council member talking
specifics specifically, just
specifically said we don't need
a gravity system. We can use
some pump stations. How did he
figure that out? Who's talking
with I'm sorry, sir, there is
one thing I want to say here.
There's $90 million at stake,
mayor. 90 million? That's a lot
of money. And one thing that I
have seen in the public sector
is when you have a lot of money
like that, first it discredit
comes in, then the hijack comes
in. And what we're witnessing
here is a complete hijack of
this project with a pretext
that they don't want to do it
or do the undergrounding or do
whatever. But we're talking
about something that really
concerns me, and this council
needs to be aware that we're
not moving in the right
direction. We're trying to take
up Black and Veatch when the
program management, the project
is off the rails. Now we have a
council member who's not a
professional engineer quoting
designs. This council needs to
take this very seriously. We're
committing a lot of money and
there's a lot of money at stake.
I'm wondering who's interested
in this money. All right. What
we're talking about is nine b
and it's an ordinance. No, it's
it's a that will help us if we
decide to go with this design
that we can get the best bang
for our buck in terms of the
financial aspect of it. Correct.
That's all we're doing here at
this time. We're not committing
to any funds. We're not doing
anything different than what
was pretended that we put
together a plan. And if we go
forward with that plan, we have
the best, the best financing
and loan agreement that we can
get out there. And what I'm
hearing tonight, which is a
little bit different, I think,
is that there's a possibility
that we could, if we go with a
plan b or design b, that we
could apply this loan to that.
What you're saying. No, she's
she's not promising that. What
she's saying is that there is a
process to go through, that
it's a rigorous process. But
you know this. No one's told
her this, but no, but that that
doesn't mean that whatever we
choose to come up with, whether
it is the plan as it stands,
whether it is a value
engineered plan, whether it's a
modified plan, whether it
perhaps is even a different
plan, you know, that would all
go through a certain process.
What what what I'm hearing is
that this could be this could
be used for something else to
do to achieve the same goals. I
don't think I don't think we
want to make that statement. I
think what we're really trying
to say is we're giving
ourselves financial flexibility.
And if we truly are doing an
alternative analysis that we
have one of the alternatives
standing by that is ready to be
procured, ready to be financed
so that we can do a true
evaluation between the two
projects. Just earlier tonight,
we asked about whether there
was another project available
for the Rickenbacker Causeway
to do the same exact thing. So
I would hope we would be
consistent on doing it within
ourselves as well. To have two
alternatives to evaluate when
it finishes their project. It
MAY be helpful to remember our
meeting and tally with the
gentleman that was the head of
this, this department, because
we broached the subject of the
possibility of a change, and he
spoke about a process to
respond to whatever it is that
we come up with. And Colleen
said he hesitated because I
think they don't want to commit
to something, but that doesn't
mean it's off the table. But I
think the real the real thing,
the real question in place
right now is we are just
locking in a financing
mechanism, that's all we're
doing. Nothing more. Question.
Colleen, could you elaborate on
any additional cost that would
be required at this time from,
let's say, your if we assume
that we're not moving forward
with this, is there if there is
there additional cost that you
would have to add under the on
your current current criteria
to put put forth this thing to
the state. So, so I guess to
clarify, are you asking if we
say no tonight? No, I'm just
saying if are there any
additional costs you have to
add right now if we approve, if
you if you approve, what other
costs do we have to add? I
think last time I checked we've
used about two thirds of the
work order. So about 20,000 or
so has been used for the
support from Black and Beach. I
think the next week would be
like $2,000. So. So just to
make sure you're clear, I'm
clear there's an all all we're
talking about is an additional
$2,000 to to to put the
application in place more or
less all the fees, banking fees,
everything associated with the
project. The application is not
executing the loan. But yes,
the application for the loan is
we're basically there. How are
we going to manage this
application process or
modifications into any design
without a program manager? This
item has been tabled. Are you
referring to if we change? No.
We are point of privilege. We
we still are. We're talking
about the program. I know you
want to talk about this, but
you're. But but we've tabled
the program manager and I want
to understand why we're tabling
a program manager. When you are
trying to move forward and
trying to manage, you know,
you're asking for a loan,
you're asking for a loan, and
we're going to have to maintain
that, and we're going to have
to try to keep it in a way that
we can, that we can retain that
loan. How are we going to do
that without a program manager
project? That's right. I
appreciate that question. But
that's not fair to ask her
tonight, because that was just
a decision that was made about
a bit ago. Okay. Understand
that's a condition she asked
for. Look, I think I think
we'll be able to pull it pull
it off ourselves. We do have
the capability. I think after
tonight's decision, we are
going to have to make a major
decision on what projects we're
going to do. Priorities,
timelines. You know, this
decision could impact the
capital plan, but that's
something. But I want to be
able to look at tonight but
still have a major impact. I'm
sorry, but I want to understand
why we're tabling the program
manager. That's not what's
before us right now. It is sir.
No it isn't. We have already
tabled it. We? Well, I'm making
well, I'll come back on that.
The table in the program
manager. But staff is trying to
move forward with a project and
the financing. And at the same
time, you're tabling the
program manager without any
logic whatsoever that that MAY
be. But we are still on only on.
Let's see. So let's get let's
get past this. Okay. And you
can have that other discussion.
Okay sir. Yes. Okay. I have my
recollection of when this came
up at last meeting and we went
over this the other day. I have
in my mind this the, this whole
application process was going
to cost approximately $30,000.
And, and now you're saying
we're approximately 20 into it.
So maybe maybe we have ten left
to go and not two. I it doesn't
matter. I just want to make
sure that our record is clear
and that we're not committing
to something. It's not. No. The
work orders for about $33,000.
I just spoke to the program
manager, Mike, about how much
they've used so far. It's about
two thirds they've used. And
they said, you know, they don't
anticipate using the full
remainder, right? Okay. Right.
And so I'm doing a guesstimate
knowing how far we've taken it,
knowing that Benjamin is
putting in the financials. And
I'm going to ask for the legal
opinion. And it's more or less
putting everything together and
sending it off. I just did
ballpark estimates for number
of hours that would take. We
don't have any more
coordination calls. You know I
understand it's simple. And
then my other my other point of
clarification is because I
think we're a little fuzzy on
whether we could use these
funds for something else. My my
understanding is that this
these funds would be given on
the basis of the permit we had.
That was part of the
application. Right? So if we go
to a different plan entirely,
it's going to it's going to be
something with a different
permit, because we can't use
this permit unless it's value
engineered or there is a
substantial. Right. So so I
just want to make that clear.
Having said that, we're already
there. We've already spent the
money. We've already we've
already committed everything we
have to commit in order to get
the loan. I'm not sure why we
wouldn't do that at this point.
And if we don't take the money,
we don't take the money, right?
Correct. All right, MADAM Clerk,
is there needs to be a public
hearing. Second reading, second
reading. Okay. Public hearing
is now open. Seeing no one come
forward. Public hearing. I got
a question in the already. We
gave him $20,000 to fill out
this loan application, right?
Yes. Why don't we have a copy
of it? It's in draft form.
Sorry. The loan application
itself is actually not that
long. It's all the attachments
and the amendments or not, the
amendments, the attachments to
it. I'm looking at the thing.
So why don't we have a copy of
it? It's in draft form okay.
And we we didn't change the
attachment because it's a
second reading of the first
reading. You keep the first
reading it was a It was the
loan application as a blank
document because we hadn't we
hadn't filled anything out.
More or less. It hasn't been
filled out yet. We have a draft.
It has been filled out. I
believe there was a public
records request that received
it, could I have a copy? Of
course. Thank you. We'll send
it to you. Let's go. Vice mayor.
Yes. Council member. Stoner.
Yes. Councilmember. Vasquez.
Yes. Mayor. Roscoe. Yes.
Councilmember. Bracken. Yes.
Councilmember. Kaplan. Yes.
Councilmember. London. No. The
ordinance is adopted on second
reading. Okay. We've got a
number of important items here
under 12 b okay. I'm putting
forward fellow by the name of
Federico Flores to this
Miami-Dade County Aircraft
Noise Abatement Advisory Board.
Good suggestion. Next. All
right. Consensus council. Yes,
sir. Consensus. Consensus.
Let's see. 12. Let me let me
take something that we've
already talked about. 12 e 12 e
okay, okay. Acceptable uses
within institutional zoning.
Yes. So one of the things that
that we've found out recently
is that there is some
differences or discrepancy or
it's not clear that within the
institutional you could do
something as the farmers market.
Okay. So I wanted to bring this
to your attention and see, you
know, do we want to go ahead
and make that change to allow
for that to happen or not?
Jeremy, can you give a little
bit of backdrop on this? I can
the so we have the existing
farmers market that was that
has a btr that we've been doing
at the community church for
some time that isn't strictly
in line with the allowed uses
on the property. By my
understanding, there could be
an amendment to allow sort of a
like a special use district or
something creating that as an,
as an ancillary use or an
additional use that's permitted
under certain conditions. And
it sort of falls was approved.
Something was approved. They
have a btr for that property.
It happened before my time when
when we had for instance sorry.
Thank you. Business tax receipt.
So the we had an application
this summer for a temporary
move while they were repaving
the community church, it moved
over to the Presbyterian Church.
The I had them fill out a
special event permit because
that's the proper way to do
this. You know, special event
permit is only use only
available for a single day. So
I think they did two because
they had two weeks where the
where the event was over there.
But there's there's other I'm
sure Chad can comment as well.
But there's other
municipalities that come up
with additional permit types
when you have a recurring event
and that goes through a little
bit more rigorous review
because you know you're
expecting it to be every week
or, or longer than one day, and
you make sure that it has the
appropriate facilities to
accommodate it. Chad. Chad, you
got anything to add? There's
definitely models on the
farmer's market. Typically you
get into the type of products,
how often they usually have
like insurance requirements
plan. I mean there's we have
examples that we can provide if
we want to get real detailed on
it. So it's something we could
bring back. Okay. As far as I
can tell. You know, the
farmer's market has worked well.
People like it. The types of
things that they sell there are,
are not usually found
everywhere on the island. So I
would be in favor of getting
our attorney to to codify this.
If it's, you know, something,
you guys think it's worthwhile,
I agree. Okay. All right, Chad,
bring us on back and give us
more time. Just a quick
question on is the Christmas
tree sale and the pumpkin patch,
are they similar? I think that
that's not as it's not
reoccurring. You know, that's
more of like the special event
or I don't know how you issue
them temporary or the like, but
that's this my understanding is
the farm market is going to be
weekly, right? Right. It is and
it is weekly has been going on.
It's very popular. It's great.
We want to encourage it. Right.
No, I know the existing one.
But I mean the legislation that
we would that we would put
forward would allow for
something more on a regular
basis. I'd like to do that
because it's a it's a good
thing. Okay. You got marching
orders. Consensus. Has have all
of you looked at the scheduling?
Workshops and the schedule for
2026? No, no. No, it's two
different items. Yeah. Yeah
okay. Quite aware. So I've got
a couple of changes that I
would suggest we'll have. We'll
have Jocelyn circle back with
with with the schedule for the
village. Now for the proposed
workshops. Main, main what they
are. So I'm sorry, MR. Mayor,
you wanted to go over the 2026
council schedule first? Yeah.
Council meeting. I heard that
they haven't looked at it in a
lot of detail. So let's not
waste time talking about
something that they haven't
really had a chance to look at.
So you would like me to bring
this back for DECEMBER? Yes.
Okay. And then now look at the
workshops that are proposed,
the tabs that. Yes. Where the
workshops they propose
tentative workshop DECEMBER
10th zone one alternative
analysis and plan, MR. Manager.
Yeah, if I MAY. At the last ad
hoc committee, I believe, and I
sent it out to them for
approval today. They asked for
a preview or a pre-meeting,
whatever we want to call it, in
advance of a full council
workshop for the alternative
plan, so that MAY adjust that
date. I know, council member,
I'm not sure if you had a
chance to read that plan that I
sent you, Councilmember Vazquez,
but you might not been able to
absorb it yet. I don't know
completely. No, not considering
all the stuff that we have.
Right. So I think but I guess,
generally speaking, would you
prefer to have an ad hoc
meeting before it goes to full
council? Because that would
adjust this date that she's
mentioning right now? I was
just trying to firm up the
dates, and if they agreed with
everyone's schedule and all the
other proposed workshop dates.
That means to me it's six one
half the other doesn't matter.
We're having ad hoc meetings
and we're tabling items, so I
don't I don't get the sense of
it. Okay. So DECEMBER. The 10th
is not a good date anyway.
Mayor. That's also in the
that's a best practices. Yeah.
It's. Yeah, exactly. It's the
day after our regular meeting
so correct. I also heard
tonight there might be an
interest in having a zoning
workshop. And I also heard the
interest of perhaps an
infrastructure workshop. And
then if the ad hoc committee
wants to have those three
workshops in advance of the
council workshops, this kind of
throws this calendar up in the
air. And perhaps maybe me and
Jocelyn can sit down and okay,
let's do this. Mike, why don't
why don't you. Decide what
meetings you're going to need
the ad hoc and then say, okay,
after we finish this one and
this one, then we want to do a,
a full workshop so that we can
then be on that on that page.
Yeah, I'll work with Steve and
Jocelyn, develop dates. Okay.
Other workshops. Another one we
have on there. Again
tentatively again we can work
it through is JANUARY 8th. Is
the undergrounding workshop
okay. Back to you with a
recommendation. Is everybody is
that JANUARY for JANUARY 8th.
Yep. Thank you. Okay everybody
good on that one then. Yep yep
okay. Yep. And then we have a
recommendation for Zork.
Workshop on MARCH 4th. Thanks.
That will do. We come back with
all the resilience related.
MARCH 4th recommendations.
That's okay with me okay. You
want to put these together I
will okay. So there's consensus
for MARCH 4th. These evening
workshops day workshops.
Evening should be evening.
Evening. Yeah. MARCH 4th is
okay with me. The next before.
Okay. And I think the zone one
alternatives for the full
council. Council member I mean
mayor, I think we need to wait
till we talk to the ad hoc
committee to figure out how
we're going to. Yes. Sounds
like it'll get pushed until
JANUARY. You're trying to fit
in three meetings. And there
there was another workshop that
we talked about a number of
months back, about the swales
that we we need to address. And
with that, if you all indulge
me, I'd like to go to 12 d b d
as in dog d okay. Yes. I've got
our former mayor Festa. And
what I wanted to do is I. Yeah,
I have an issue with code
enforcement. It seems like
there are some restrictions
that are code enforcement. Body
seems to have or there's some
where someone says that they
need direction on this issue,
and we need to have a a small
conversation on it tonight is,
is this you know, I understood
it. And Chad you can help. Here
is we have a code if if our
code enforcement is following
that code, then they cannot
pursue some investigations or
what what is the what is the
point on this. Well, our my
understanding is in talking
with you is that there MAY be
certain code provisions
specifically relating to the
swale that our code enforcement
officers feel are not clear
enough for them to enforce
certain aspects based on the
existing code, based on the
existing code. Yes, and there
MAY be a need to update that to
give the code compliance
officers comfort inciting
homeowners or property owners
that are not consistent with
the code, as maybe what the
village would like to see. So I
mean, underneath our code, if
they have personal knowledge or
they they see a violation, they
can cite somebody. However it
sounds in speaking with you
that they're uncomfortable with
the current language and are
looking for guidance. Okay,
Jeremy, can you shed light on
that? Yeah. So the the
applicable codes are sections
of the Public Works Ordinance.
That and and the applicability
to Swales is always a bit
tricky because it's something
that is it's not owned. But we
manage the right of way. The
village effectively owns the
right of way. But the
homeowners responsible for
maintaining it and then the we
also have certain issues in our
code. Our code says you can
only have turf for certain
portions of adjacent to asphalt,
but in fact, it's not practical
to only have turf in certain
neighborhoods where you have
repeated flooding, regular
flooding through the entire
rainy season. So those areas
get completely rutted and you
can't you end up with a churned
up mud. So and in fact, we've
allowed people to have certain
types of gravel to replace turf
because it is completely
impractical to have turf. But
to to the specific point,
Jeremy, the the buttons that
you see, the, the, the stakes
in the ground that are they put
concrete underneath all those
things. Are they against our
code within a certain distance
from the edge of asphalt? Yes.
Okay. And and are people
driving around? Do they not see
that or are they told not to
enforce that? No. We we have
been we've been enforcing
things that are a danger. Yeah.
Right. When when somebody
creates a tripping hazard, when
somebody creates something that
is a clear violation. Yes.
We've been we we enforce that
simple question, Jeremy. When
they block the access to the
swale by this concrete thing,
poles by reflectors by anything,
it's not legal. Is that against
our code? It is within a
certain distance from the edge
of of pavement. There's the
pavement. Here's the property
line in that area is the swale.
Is it a against our code in
that area to block it? Yes or
no? I know you're allowed to
have certain landscape elements.
I'd have to check the code to
be clear. There's, there's it's
not as straightforward as
property line. So you can you
can block it. Then you can have
for instance, you're allowed to
have shrubs over a certain
height that are effectively
blocking it. We're talking
about people putting posts in
the ground and putting chains
across the across the post and
ropes or whatever. And blocking
say, is that against the code?
That's what. But that's what
John's talking about. I mean,
we're talking about these sort
of blatant divisions, basically
saying, don't park here. This
is my this is my grass. I don't
want you running over it. And
that's kind of what this the
purpose of those, those things
are I mean, they're to block
people from parking on the
swale. And, and I think what
we're asking is, is this
against the code or not against
the code? I think John's very
clearly says this is against
the code, and he wants this
kind of addressed. If you're
suggesting that it's not 100%
clear what Mike is suggesting,
do you have a resolution? Do
you have a solution for this
other than consistently
policing it? Yeah, I mean, I do
I do think consistency in
policing is part of the issue.
It's look, it's part of the
reason we've brought a third
person on so that we can do
something other than just
monitor construction sites with
the rest of our staff. And I
think we could do more thorough
policing of these. There is
certain vague vagueness in the
code that wouldn't we could we
could stand to improve the
partly it's it's the fact that
it's sort of scattered around
in different portions of the
code that we have. Some of it's
in landscape, some of it's in
the Public works ordinance. And
we're also dealing with county
and county requirements for
roadway sections that even if
it's not a county road, they do.
We have a way forward to yeah,
I think we have a way forward
to improve, improve, improve
enforcement under existing
rules. Okay. We can step up
enforcement under existing
rules. Is it a matter of better
educating the code enforcement
people so they know also? Yeah
I mean I think it's it's it's
not a complicated educational
process. Like they they know
it's been resource strapped so
we can improve enforcement on
this. Can I suggest that we
prepare a plan that talks about
clarifying the code, policing
the code. This is my suggestion.
First, let me pull all these
things. And Chris would have to
be involved just in the right
away. I think I have him on my
whiteboard right now, by the
way. We'll pull it out and
we'll tell you everything that
is in the code right now so
that we clearly understand
what's what's assessed the code.
Before we talk about changing
it. It MAY be what we want.
We'll come back to you on
DECEMBER. Let's, let's let
let's start the education
process okay. But we have to
educate. We have to pull it out
and we have to. It sounds like
there's unclarity even amongst
the leadership on what that
code looks like. So I don't I
don't know if it's necessarily
clarity. I think it's just the
lack of enforcement over the
last 20 or 30 years is kind of
put people in a difficult
situation. We also got a
responsibility to yeah, there
is and I and I think that it's
more the point of it's, it's in
a couple of different sections
of the code. It's about
consolidating it. So we
understand what we're dealing
with. It's not I don't know
that we'll need to redraw or
rewrite anything. But we also
guys we got to be we got to be
conscientious. We just can't go
and start finding citizens
because they've got they've
done this because their
neighbor did it and the guy
down the street did it. So we
got to there needs to be
there's got to be some some hey.
Yeah. It's got to be. Hey, guys,
by the way, you understand this
is not appropriate. Here's a
warning. Please take it out by
x period of time. I have a
legal question. Are we going to.
Get responses like, I've had
those coral rocks for 40 years
in my swale, and now you're
citing me because. Or that I'm
sure there will be some people
saying there definitely will be.
I think there's a I think
there's a significant case
study that I would recommend
you talk with Miami Beach on
their encroachment removal
policies and what they
encountered. They had to it's,
you know, normal shrubs and
saplings, whatever. Not that
hard to remove. But when you're
talking about an oak tree or
you're talking about an
instances driveways built over
easements where pipes should be
out for outfalls, those are a
little hard to remove, but
still legally we can remove
them. So just, you know, I
think that it for council
purposes, I mean, it really
should give you a sense of what
the breadth and scope is of
this. This is not just removing
stuff off the swale. These are
people that have planted a tree
for their dead dog. Say, you
know, and it. I'm serious. I've
had or those are just walls. So
I give you a courtesy. Two
seconds here. Come on. Forward.
Are you done, John? Three. Two
seconds are up. John Fester,
695 Harbor Lane. I came here
eight months ago. Then six
months ago, and nothing has
been done. As a matter of fact,
six months ago you said you
were going to schedule a
workshop. I know you're going
to do it now. The building and
zoning director. I asked him
specifically about the absolute
violations of our code. Our
code is not complicated. It's
very simple. Absolutely. Very
simple. And what I was focusing
on was exactly what Joe
mentioned. The pipes, the rocks,
the ropes, the ropes, the wood.
Ugly. And also present a hazard
for pedestrians, bicycles and
cars should they need to swerve
into the swale. Right. When I
talked to Jeremy eight months
ago at his office, I was told
it's a major problem for him.
And you can you can debate what
I'm going to say. But what I
thought I heard was that
previous councils have said
it's difficult. Lay off it for
now. So and he actually
encouraged me to come and talk
about it, because he wanted
this council to provide
guidance. So we did the study
in terms of mentioning to
everybody what was the problem.
You schedule a workshop.
Nothing's happened. I asked
them that evening back in MAY
if he would at least remove the
posts, and he said, I will not
do selective enforcement. Those
were his words. It got a little
heated exchange, but he did say
that if I went and told him the
addresses, he would said code
compliance over there. That's
not the way to run a village.
You had low lying fruit from a
tree that could easily have
been taken care of years ago.
Those low lying fruit have now
fallen on the ground. They're
rotting. More and more people
are putting things up. There's
one house that has three
different types of posts, not
even uniformity. So all I'm
asking you to do now is two
things. Acknowledge that your
code is clear on this specific
item. Number one. Number two,
instruct the building zoning
department to develop a plan to
have those removed as soon as
possible. I would recommend you
write a letter to all the
village residents that owned
home and tell them about the
problem, and that we are going
to start enforcing this, and
they have x weeks to remove
these education campaign. Write
x weeks to remove it. If after
those things are not removed,
then you will refer to the
special magistrate for finding.
That's the way it's done. Get
that done with. That's the easy
thing to do. Now, the workshop
where the administration could
say, we need clarity on what to
put in the swales versus
drainage, rock or other things,
trees. It's very clear about
the 3 foot or 6 foot clear zone.
What you could put in there,
develop that in the workshop.
Also in the workshop. I'll
bring it up. Now. You should
discuss whether you could, how
you're going to allow people to
put artificial turf in the
front, because you should be
aware that the state of Florida
prohibits municipalities from
not allowing artificial turf.
So you need to rewrite your
zoning code on that as well. So
that could be part of the
workshop. All right, John,
thank you. But I but I do want
you to ask building and Zoning
to start enforcing it now and
not waiting. I think we have
consensus of council on that.
So yeah. Yeah definitely. Yeah.
Yes. Okay. One more thing for
Jeremy. Jeremy. I don't know.
We in our code, do we have any
sight lines at corner lots
going on to intersections? Yeah
we have requirements for clear
sight lines. Well I gotta tell
you, there's a number of places
in this game when you pull to a
corner and you cannot see
around. And I guess it's really
code enforcement type thing
again. So I would like to again,
if people have a whatever
they're putting out there to
have them, the code enforcement
go ahead and say, listen, you
have to remove that. Maybe
they're putting it out and they
have no idea. When we see the
when we notice those issues, we
act on it. Well, I'll send you
a few pictures tomorrow. Are we
supposed to go out and tell you?
Well, look, when my when my
team sees it or notices it, but
I'll tell them about it. They
might do it because. Yeah. Yeah
I would love to. When they
notice them, they act on it.
When they, when they've done it
driven by it 50 times and they
stop noticing it. Sometimes you
stop seeing these things. So we
always, always welcome
information or problems so that
we can act on it. I would just
suggest you might want to
mention it to him. Yeah. I just
want to be clear. So are you
directing the administration to
enforce our codes in our line
of sight codes? Just want to be
clear. That's the case. Jeremy
and I will. And I will come up
with a plan. If we want to wait
until after the workshop. But
but the the the main message
was start, you know, giving the
education. And in those cases
that are, you know, really bad
then you got you got to cite
them. Yeah. No, I think we'll
come up with we'll start
educating the residents and
that'll get them maybe excited
about coming to a workshop and
talking about their ideas or
whatever, getting a bunch of
citations out there will drive
attendance to a workshop. Part
of our code is such that you're
not. You have all these houses
that do not have grass out
there because it's mud and
water, etc. You want to start,
you don't want to enforce that.
We're now talking about
enforcing blockage of the
obstructions. Yeah, I think
there's a because I also have
the villages. I think that
there's a low hanging fruit. I
mean, I'll be in noncompliance.
I have the villages. Everybody
has the and by the way, I have
approval in writing to, to be
able to put the rocks in the
front yard. So look, this is
where it gets confusing because
they're picking and choosing up
here before you were here. Why
don't we do this? Because
that's not very far away. It's
DECEMBER 9th. Let's pull the
stuff. Everything that we have
on the swales out of the code,
we'll bring it to you, show it
to you on DECEMBER 9th, and
then we can take a look at it
and then talk about. But start
the education process. Yeah. No,
no we will I mean we can't wait.
Education is educating
ourselves as well as as well.
Right. All right. We're already
talking about selective
enforcement up here. So we're
either going to do it or we're
not going to do it okay Nancy
you want to take 12 b and 12 c
okay. We'll see how long it's
going to take. On 12 b. I think
our Board of Special
magistrates having a board is
not really serving the, the the
village very well. Everyone on
the board is doing a great job
and it has nothing to do with
who's on the board. It has to
do with our structure and other
municipalities. Rather, some
have a board, but many
municipalities have a special
magistrate or a special master
because this is a quasi
judicial hearing. And the
purpose of the hearing really
is fact finding is making a
record. Because when people
disagree with the facts that
are found by the magistrate,
they can appeal to the court.
And I circulated today
something to show you what
happens when when we don't have
people in that position who
understand what the function
and are not qualified to
perform the function of that
body. So my suggestion is that
we do away with the the board
and that we appoint two lawyers
who have litigation experience.
For pay to serve as the special
master. And if anyone read the
opinion that I sent around
today, you will understand why
that is so important. I read
the opinion. I don't know if
certainly there seemingly was
maybe a failure to hear certain
evidence or certain
conversation or discussion. I
don't know what the outcome, if
the outcome would have been
different had that been allowed.
But my I guess what I'm curious
is you mentioned that it's not
functioning. And so I'm curious,
is there data to suggest that
it hasn't functioned over the
last 30 years? No, no, as a
matter of fact, in my
discussions with Chad, it's not
frequent that we lose appeals.
But but what happened in this
case indicates that they don't
understand because they don't
understand evidence and and
fact finding and creating a
record. They're not doing what
that job, what that body is
supposed to do, which is
different than an advisory
board. Okay. Isolated. So let
me explain to you what could
have happened, what should have
happened. In that case, I think
if there had been, if they had
made a finding of fact that the
the grandfathered use was
abandoned. But they didn't say
that, right. They didn't let
anyone talk about it and say,
oh, that you that you don't
have that right anymore.
Because when you go to the
appellate court, it's not a new
trial. They can only make their
decisions on the basis of of
the record that's been given to
them. So if the if the
magistrate hasn't made a record,
they don't have anything to go
on. And that's exactly what
happened here. They had nothing
to go on. And and honestly. All
these violations that go before
the magistrates really are it's
a fact determination. Did you
violate is there a violation.
Did you get notice. Do you have
due process yes or no. It's
it's really a legal analysis.
And knowing how to make a
record. Most times people don't
appeal, but when they do, bad
things happen. It really was.
That wasn't good. Nancy, are
there particular types of
lawyers that do this litigation?
Anyone who does litigation, and
I'm certain that we have many,
many lawyers in this. They
don't even have to be bar
members of the Florida Bar. But
any person who who was a lawyer,
who did litigation, we have so
many retired people who would
be more than happy to fill that
function. And we only need one
magistrate to serve at a time.
So if we have two, we could get
through a once a month. Right?
Okay. We're we're running out
of time. What is is there is
there a lot of consensus to
have something brought back, or
do you want to think about it
some more or what? I'm support
of it. I'd want to think about
it some more. I just haven't
seen enough data to suggest
that the system is broken. But
but this could just be an
isolated incident, a mistake,
or a matter of training because
Nancy's dead right about the
function. Yeah. No, I agree
with our attorney PRESIDENT.
Our attorney was present, and
he was his his guidance was
disregarded. So he advised them.
Yes. He advised them to allow
the testimony to make the
record. And and it wasn't
followed, and it wasn't because
anyone was intentionally doing
it. They really didn't
understand what their function
was. Do you do you think that
could be. Resolved through
training? How are you going to
I mean, how often are you? It's
not a training thing. You have
to be you have to have
understand the record, how to
make a record. You have to
really be a lawyer. So I think
and that's why other
municipalities have lawyers.
The ramification of the result
would have what was the ramp
that the ramification was that
they, they could continue to
use the dock attempt
incorrectly. Yeah. Okay. We
lost the village, lost the case
because it wasn't handled well.
We can't really tell for
certain is that if that
testimony was allowed and heard
that it would have changed the
outcome. It doesn't matter. I'm
just in other words, the
financial aspect of it. There
was a financial loss that we
that we incurred because of
something that was done. No, I
don't I don't think we suffered.
No, there wasn't any there
wasn't there wasn't any
monetary damages. They I mean
the in this case, the owner did
send a threat of a bird harass
claim against the village while
the appeal was pending, which
is would could result in
monetary damages. But we
haven't seen anything since we
had additional legal fees. We
did. Yes, there was legal fees
in the defense. I mean, we over
the years have had very few
appeals of the Code Enforcement
board, and we have one, you
know, the ones that I recall,
we've won several. This one was,
as council member stoner said,
was a little bit odd in that
the court latched on to what
happened and was not thrilled
with the fact that the the
board did not allow the
property owner to provide put
their case on. So. So, yes. So,
so, Chad, in other in other
municipalities like Pinecrest
or or Surfside or
municipalities of similar size,
what do they do? So I'll tell
you that like the newer cities
have a magistrate. As council
member, stoner is saying the
some of the older cities still
have boards. Some of the larger
cities have boards, but most
have a magistrate who is a
lawyer who the government pays.
So you would have to pay this
person. Currently you don't pay.
You know, the magistrate boards
and it's you know, it's like
clockwork and they act like a
judge. Now, the difference
being also is in those
circumstances, typically it
depends. But usually my office
would. So currently my office
sits as the advisor to the
board, just like I'm sitting
with you. In the case when
there's a magistrate, we would
sit as a prosecutor, we would
prosecute. So we would be
putting on the evidence, like
Councilmember Stoner saying,
whereas here the staff puts it
on. So there might be a
structural change also, but we
can provide you with a survey
of what all the cities do. We
can, you know, show you what
would change. I mean, we would
have to change our code,
obviously. But it's it's really
a policy decision. Which way
you want to go are the fees for
people like this $20,000 or. No.
It's usually like probably it I
mean, you probably have $1,000
a month. Like it's usually not
that high and sometimes it's
per case. I mean, we would have
to decide on how we do it, but
they're typically not very high.
I also just in closing, because
I know we're going to wrap it
up, I think it's important for
the village to look like we
know what we're doing and, and,
and, and to have the. The board
of magistrates without people
with litigation experience
really it just doesn't fulfill
the job of, of the, of the task.
So I think it would be similar.
Also like I think we have a red
light camera magistrate, I
believe it would be similar to
that. Okay. We should the board.
So I'm sorry. What was that? Is
it so is this something that we
want to pursue? Yes. I'm
hearing definitely look at it
more for sure. Okay. Look at it
more. So do you want me to
bring back some additional
information on a survey of what
the other cities do, maybe
figure out what they're
charging? Are magistrates are
charging as well as. And then
you can start working with
Nancy about how it would look.
Okay. Yeah. And and maybe some
type of metric that would talk
to us about the performance of
the current structure over time.
Just, just because let me, let
me check with is it really
broken or is was this a one off
I don't know okay. I'll check
with Steve on that and we'll
put something together. I'm
going to defer my 12. See what
is what's expired. I'm going to
defer to what's 1312 means not
in public. We're going to defer
that one okay. Yeah. And I'm
going to defer 12 h also that I
have on there. We need to get
the 13 a 13 a. Yes, indeed.
Election of vice mayor pursuant
to section 2.02 b of the
village charter looking for
nominations? Yes. Nominate
Oscar. Seconded. I'm sorry, is
the second second. Yeah.
Discussion. Doing a great job,
Fernando. Okay. Sitting back
there, I'll nominate Fernando.
You said nominate Fernando.
I'll nominate Fernando. I asked
him if he would be Vice Mayor.
Oscar all the way. Okay. Just
checking. Fernando. Oh, this is
to renew. First word for you.
Okay? Okay. Is it Olivia? Still.
Do I still love him? So
consensus. Oscar. Yes.
Consensus. Consensus of council.
All right. Congratulations.
Congratulations. He's going to
get the drainage done, though.
He's going to get the drainage
done, I gotta go get the
undergrounding. He's training
for mayor. All right. Since
we've had so much fun, anything
else, MR. Manager? You need
anything else? I think we're I
think we're good. MR. Mayor. I
do want to just state one thing.
If you look at 11 a two, you
saw it when I emailed it to you.
But again, that outlines not
just for you, but for the
public as well, the status of
all the major projects that
we're doing in initiative. So
just want to make sure you take
a look at that as well. Chad,
you got anything for us? What
was that? Good. 11 I'm good.
Have a happy Thanksgiving
everyone. Yes yes indeed yes
indeed. We we won't be back
together again here. But all
right. With that, I need a
motion to adjourn the second.
All those in favor? Aye. Post
adjournment, we've got the
Thanksgiving and recognition
ceremony tomorrow. Tomorrow? At
what time? 11. I think
formalities will start at 12.
12. Okay. Formalities will