[47:04] [Captioner Present]

[47:52] >> I want to thank you for your comments and everything that

[47:57] the Citizens Budget Commission does.

[47:59] It's more important to us now that we

[48:03] have citizens looking at every nickel that comes into the city

[48:06] and going out of the city and.

[48:08] More important that we have that in place now than ever before.

[48:12] You are very talented group of people in terms

[48:15] of financial capabilities.

[48:17] We want you to continue being watchful for any opportunity

[48:24] that we can.

[48:27] To do a better job in the city.

[48:28] Not just internally but also for the taxpayer.

[48:31] Thank you very much.

[48:33] Anyone else wish to be heard.

[48:40] your name and address for the record please.

[48:46] >> Hello everybody.

[48:47] My name is Laurie Henriquez.

[48:49] My address is 600 Northwest 86 Avenue, Pembroke Pines Florida.

[48:56] I am also on the board for the diversity.

[48:59] I had a question for City Manager's.

[49:04] Just need clarification comment regarding if we are city

[49:10] of approximately 180,000 people, more or less.

[49:15] The Powerpoint indicated that the assessed value of 56,000

[49:22] residents.

[49:23] Was that correct?

[49:25] >> That was households.

[49:28] >> Is there any indication about the revenue that is being

[49:34] generated or the value that is being generated for commercial

[49:37] property?

[49:40] >> Yes.

[49:41] >> Was it shown I might have missed it.

[49:43] >> It wasn't in the presentation,

[49:45] but we certainly can break that down.

[49:47] The percentage of revenue that comes

[49:49] from ad valorem for residential for commercial

[49:52] as well as for industrial permit the total

[49:55] of all those properties, as far as the taxable value

[50:00] of the city.

[50:02] It is 112 million.

[50:05] >> Including the commercial?

[50:07] >> Includes commercial and industrial, yes, it does.

[50:11] >> Thanks for the clarification.

[50:12] He mentioned being on the board for the budget.

[50:15] I'd be willing to submit my resume

[50:18] and I'd like to be involved in that level as well.

[50:20] I have a bachelor's degree in finance.

[50:23] The one thing is I don't know if anybody

[50:25] is aware that the economy, we're in a bubble.

[50:31] I feel that we are in a bubble.

[50:33] I have a bachelor's degree in finance.

[50:35] I have not been able to find work in finance.

[50:39] Commercial finance, for over a year.

[50:42] I came across Commissioner good.

[50:46] Today I went to a job interview and I was hired on the spot.

[50:51] It is a good thing.

[50:53] I monitor, we love Pembroke Pines closely.

[50:58] I see a lot of residents asking for work.

[51:00] I don't know if AI is taking away the jobs

[51:04] or making it impossible for people like Me to find work?

[51:10] Because AI is screening the year that you graduate from college.

[51:15] There is ageism.

[51:16] I can show you my resume.

[51:19] When you show up and we are talking

[51:24] about the tax exemptions.

[51:26] You are taking a money from me.

[51:29] From my table.

[51:30] From my two kids.

[51:32] >> We can't take into that subject here.

[51:36] >> I'll leave it at that.

[51:40] [Cross-talk]

[51:42] >> There are about what the state's placed restriction

[51:44] of what can be discussed in this chamber.

[51:47] >> Sorry this is my first time.

[51:49] I apologize.

[51:51] >> It is hardly your fault. It is least of all your fault.

[51:54] >> Thank you.

[51:56] >> Should be able to say whatever the heck they want.

[51:59] However, that is not the law in Florida.

[52:02] Not at least in city halls.

[52:04] We have to sit to the budget.

[52:07] You're doing so well.

[52:09] >> Can I start again?

[52:11] I wanted to put out there, Commissioner Castillo,

[52:14] I mean Mayor Castillo.

[52:17] That I cannot find work in my industry in this city.

[52:21] Almost every job that I've ever had

[52:24] has been outside of this city.

[52:27] Just keep that in mind when you guys are thinking.

[52:30] I'm pretty sure most of you also work outside of the city.

[52:35] >> Thank you for your testimony.

[52:36] I'm glad you said you got hired today.

[52:39] Congratulations!

[52:40] I'm very happy for you.

[52:43] Anybody else wish to be heard on the budget?

[52:45] Anybody else wish to be heard on the budget

[52:48] permit commissioners comment any Comments?

[52:56] >> Anyone else?

[52:57] Without further ado, this hearing is adjourned.

[53:01] We will take a short recess.

[53:06] Then we'll begin our city commission meeting.

[53:11] >> If you will come we have ordinances to read.

[53:14] First reading.

[53:16] >> Let's get back in business.

[53:18] Go ahead.

[53:19] >> Thank you Mayor and Commissioners.

[53:21] The BB a public hearing number one

[53:24] are two ordinances before you.

[53:25] One of which relates to the mileage for the city's

[53:29] upcoming fiscal year.

[53:30] Which are both for allowed for public hearing.

[53:33] They're provided for both state statute 265 Florida statutes.

[53:38] The city charter is the millage and with your permission

[53:42] I'll read into the record.

[53:43] BPH number two is ordinance 2026-09 motion to adopt Proposed

[53:52] Ordinance 2026-09 on First Reading.

[53:55] Proposed ordinance operating the millage rate of 5.6690 or $5.69

[54:01] per thousand of taxable assessed property value.

[54:05] Which is 4.5% above the rollback rate of 54226,

[54:10] for the city of Pembroke Pines, for, pursuant to the 2026-2027

[54:15] city budget, accordance with chapter 200, Florida Statutes:

[54:20] Establishing the debt service millage rate of 02507 for debt

[54:25] service on the general obligation bonds approved

[54:27] by the electorate: Providing for conflicts:

[54:31] Providing for severability providing for an effective date.

[54:35] This is the first reading of the establish of the millage.

[54:38] In accordance with state law and the City Charter.

[54:42] >> City Attorney, can I have a motion.

[54:43] And move by the Vice Mayor.

[54:45] Is there a second?

[54:46] The second by Commissioner Rodriguez.

[54:48] Any discussion?

[54:50] Anything from the public?

[54:52] We heard a yes.

[54:55] Did you have anything?

[55:02] >> Sorry.

[55:04] I wanted to follow up on special events

[55:10] during in the Recreation and Culture Arts total.

[55:14] I had highlighted this when looking at what

[55:18] the impacts of the DIY restrictions

[55:21] that we'll be having in the next year.

[55:23] Although I understand that legally moving forward,

[55:27] we cannot name these festivals or celebrate them in specific

[55:31] ways.

[55:32] My assumption is that the Caribbean Heritage Festival

[55:39] was brought down.

[55:41] I am wondering if we can put in place a similar budget

[55:46] for the upcoming year for a Caribbean music festival

[55:50] or something of that sort.

[55:51] I'm willing to move forward on this item this evening.

[55:55] Come back on second reading just see a little bit more

[55:58] of a wiggle room and that for additional budgets

[56:01] that may or may not be able to name currently.

[56:04] I think it's really important to celebrate music heritage

[56:09] or anything.

[56:11] Anything else for special events.

[56:13] On that same line, although the advertising budget in the past

[56:19] for these kind of events was quite low at $5,000 per I do

[56:23] want to put something in this space for the advertising of all

[56:29] of our events, because some of them do completely fill out

[56:32] and they've been staples in our community.

[56:35] Like Pine State, we don't technically

[56:37] have to advertise because people already come up

[56:39] and show up for that.

[56:40] For newer events, I do want to build out some kind of budget

[56:44] in that.

[56:45] In May in my fault not seeing it.

[56:48] Maybe it's in the communications budget.

[56:50] That is something.

[56:52] Is very small, but I think it's something

[56:54] that we should look forward and not simply put a zero.

[56:57] As always, we do have wiggle room in our budget.

[57:01] Maybe to come up with something a similar to the Caribbean

[57:06] Heritage Festival announced.

[57:08] If we can put a line item of new events or something like that.

[57:15] >> I can tell you, Commissioner, I'm looking at Mr. Dodge.

[57:20] He and I had a conversation about events.

[57:24] And the activities of the Diversity and Heritage Board

[57:31] as part of our ongoing one on one.

[57:33] It was his impression, Charlie, correct me if I'm wrong.

[57:38] It was your impression that somewhere in December staff

[57:41] will be ready to discuss their review

[57:43] of possible recommendations on moving forward,

[57:47] in line with the state's new rules were.

[57:50] I thought that we had talked about maybe

[57:52] what we would do when staff is ready is reviewing it to.

[57:58] Is that we would probably workshop it and see if we

[58:01] can't come up with a schedule.

[58:03] It could very well be that some of the events

[58:09] are repackaged into legally acceptable format.

[58:13] It could be that some of them will require some sponsorship.

[58:17] Some of them are pay events.

[58:19] Some are them remain free.

[58:22] Certainly the national holidays are available.

[58:25] However, while they can be acknowledged,

[58:29] they don't fall into our core service.

[58:31] We don't know -- and this is part of why I think it makes

[58:37] some sense.

[58:38] Events have always been an important part

[58:41] of the city of Pembroke Pines.

[58:43] My conversation with the manager,

[58:45] he feels that sometime in December staff will be ready.

[58:48] We can probably call together a workshop to further

[58:51] explore and understand this.

[58:52] I think it should be done together with the heritage

[58:56] Diversity Board.

[59:00] Whose name will likely need to be changed as well.

[59:03] I think all of that is probably coming in December.

[59:07] Is what I meant to say.

[59:10] >> I feel comfortable with that.

[59:11] I just want to make sure we are dedicating

[59:13] a budget at some point for the possibility

[59:17] that these events need to be changed in name or time frame.

[59:21] Things like that.

[59:23] >> Yes, man.

[59:25] >> At least a small amount of money towards digital

[59:29] advertising of these events as well.

[59:30] And if that was part of the communications plan.

[59:33] I apologize if I didn't catch that.

[59:36] >> Thank you.

[59:37] Commissioner good.

[59:45] >> I reserve that for the next item.

[59:47] However, on this item it was a concern for me as well

[59:51] to the special events.

[59:53] For me I think we all agree that these type events.

[59:57] It's the best connection that we can make with our residents.

[1:00:01] I do not know why we even contemplate

[1:00:04] any removal of any event under any circumstances.

[1:00:10] The special events was reduced by about $100,000 from last year

[1:00:16] to this year.

[1:00:17] In my opinion, I think that we should actually doubling that

[1:00:22] special event from 500,000 to 1 million.

[1:00:27] And then create new programing, we have the same programing year

[1:00:31] after year after year.

[1:00:33] And I've heard constantly that there's an interest

[1:00:35] to have additional type of programing

[1:00:38] for other groups of people.

[1:00:40] To participate within the city.

[1:00:43] I know that we're going to have this workshop, hearing workshop.

[1:00:47] But this is the budget.

[1:00:49] If we don't establish the budget,

[1:00:52] there's no guarantee that the money will be assigned

[1:00:55] in a workshop in December.

[1:00:57] I think we should making some capacity for an increase

[1:01:02] in special events.

[1:01:04] Because there's a line item that is called special events.

[1:01:08] It doesn't have any particular and it could be loaded up.

[1:01:16] That money would be reservation of either enhancement

[1:01:19] to existing programing or a creation of new programing.

[1:01:25] I am in full support of that.

[1:01:27] That's one of the big concerns that I had in this.

[1:01:30] This is a half $1 million and a $600 million total budget.

[1:01:35] I think it's really something that

[1:01:38] has great impact, with regards to how we connect

[1:01:42] with our residents and I don't think

[1:01:43] there is anything wrong with increasing it.

[1:01:45] Making it double.

[1:01:47] From 500,000 to 1 million.

[1:01:52] >> Yes, sir.

[1:01:57] >> So there's no confusion.

[1:01:59] Adjustment to the fiscal year 26-27 budget,

[1:02:01] I believe Commissioner, what you're addressing.

[1:02:04] The December workshop is beginning structuring what

[1:02:08] we're going to do for the fiscal year 27-28.

[1:02:12] How it affects everything.

[1:02:17] If this is a motion of yours, we would

[1:02:21] have to go back and look at the budget

[1:02:24] and figure out how we can increase that and decide what

[1:02:28] we might be able to reduce.

[1:02:30] In order to make that happen.

[1:02:33] >> Can that be done between the first and second reading?

[1:02:36] >> Yes, it can.

[1:02:37] If that's the desire of the commission.

[1:02:40] >> Just a stipulation, can it come from the police or fire.

[1:02:45] If it does, it loses my vote.

[1:02:48] >> Does anyone object to consensus moving forward with

[1:02:51] that?

[1:02:52] Anyone else wish to speak on the item?

[1:02:56] >> I'll be brief.

[1:02:57] I would like to thank Finance Director Chung, for once again,

[1:03:04] presenting to the public very easy to understand process.

[1:03:08] I want to acknowledge that the budget is online with links.

[1:03:14] I have had it online agenda book now for 13 plus years.

[1:03:22] But when it comes to the budget, I actually

[1:03:25] need to have a working document.

[1:03:26] I want to thank you for going above and beyond

[1:03:29] to produce a 450 page PDF.

[1:03:32] Now residents can actually share and go through those as well.

[1:03:36] It's one of those things where you ask

[1:03:38] for technology to be helpful.

[1:03:40] Some cases it doesn't work as well as it could be.

[1:03:44] A couple things: One, I submitted a very detailed load

[1:03:51] of questions to the administration.

[1:03:56] Imagined that it was going to be challenging to be

[1:03:59] able to get all those answered by first reading.

[1:04:01] I respect that.

[1:04:03] So I narrowed down my focus and I just

[1:04:07] want to focus on the most material issues

[1:04:11] within the budget.

[1:04:12] One of the things is we have a $3.85 million reserve draw.

[1:04:18] We are using approximately 3.885 million of general fund reserves

[1:04:23] to balance this year's budget.

[1:04:25] How much of the 3.885 million is paying

[1:04:28] for reoccurring expenditures?

[1:04:36] >> Mr. Manager.

[1:04:36] >> Mr. Mayor, I believe finance director Chung responded to this

[1:04:40] question.

[1:04:41] However, every year, as far as I know,

[1:04:45] we have might say plug the number into the budget saying

[1:04:50] that we're using reserves.

[1:04:51] We've never had to do that.

[1:04:54] If I do not have that number in there,

[1:04:58] then you'd have to raise your millage rate to 3.8 million,

[1:05:04] which we might not need.

[1:05:06] What that is going to do is pass on an increase to the residents.

[1:05:11] >> Yes, of course.

[1:05:13] >> I never believed in that.

[1:05:14] That's why we used it.

[1:05:16] We're very vigilant during the year.

[1:05:18] We don't always spend all that money.

[1:05:20] There are reasons for it.

[1:05:22] If there's any leftover money, that goes back into reserves.

[1:05:26] Those reserves are always dedicated for one time

[1:05:31] expenditures of capital items.

[1:05:34] You do not use your reserves for expendable items operating

[1:05:39] budget.

[1:05:40] Because once you do, they are gone forever.

[1:05:43] If you committed to that, then what do you do the second year?

[1:05:47] Do you take another 3.8 million out of the reserves?

[1:05:50] So you have nothing left.

[1:05:52] That becomes a problem.

[1:05:56] >> In summary, is a one time or recurring, Mr. Dodge?

[1:06:01] >> In this budget, I don't anticipate using it.

[1:06:04] Reserves would be for one time expenditure.

[1:06:07] >> So your plan is one time.

[1:06:09] If you had to use it come it'd be one time.

[1:06:12] >> One time expenditures.

[1:06:14] >> Perfect.

[1:06:15] We've got increases in the general fund.

[1:06:20] That makes mostly up of personnel expense.

[1:06:24] Is that going to be the new bar in next year's budget?

[1:06:30] Is this a one time increase?

[1:06:33] >> It's one time this year.

[1:06:35] We can't project what it will be for future years,

[1:06:39] because union contracts come up on a regular basis.

[1:06:43] I can't tell you what that might be.

[1:06:48] Once we receive those documents, we

[1:06:51] share them with the commission.

[1:06:54] Then it's decided how much money we can afford to do that.

[1:06:58] That's what we discuss with our bargaining units.

[1:07:03] >> On the finance department, is $425,000 for other services.

[1:07:08] How much of that is new and reoccurring spending?

[1:07:17] >>, would you address that.

[1:07:18] >> Lisa Chung, associate city manager and finance director.

[1:07:21] Therefore in 25,000 that we have and other services is

[1:07:26] for facility contract services permits so those are recurring.

[1:07:30] >> Okay.

[1:07:32] >> Good news.

[1:07:34] We found $252,000 of an increase since August 1st budget was

[1:07:40] published.

[1:07:41] Supervisor of elections has reduced costs from 370,000 to 90

[1:07:47] something thousand dollars per minute as a result of that, Mr.

[1:07:50] Dodge, are you comfortable lowering this year's budget

[1:07:55] tonight by $252,000?

[1:07:59] >> I'd have to look at it, Commissioner,

[1:08:01] this has not been discussed with me prior.

[1:08:03] The best thing to do, instead of lowering it,

[1:08:08] is lowering the amount of money that we put in reserves.

[1:08:12] >> That was my follow up.

[1:08:14] >> That wouldn't change anything,

[1:08:15] as far as what we're proposing.

[1:08:17] It would not change

[1:08:22] [Cross-talk]

[1:08:23] >> Nor would it change the ability to reduce millage

[1:08:25] because of that.

[1:08:27] We're already 3.8 million in the hole.

[1:08:30] Whenever we find, we will continue

[1:08:33] to deduct from what we have budgeted from reserves.

[1:08:38] >> Last question : It's always challenging ever ear.

[1:08:44] I did ask the administration.

[1:08:46] I knew we were going through a budget

[1:08:50] exercise for something pending.

[1:08:52] Something in a couple of months.

[1:08:55] We sat at the workshop the other day

[1:08:59] and went through an exercise.

[1:09:02] The manager identified a certain amount of funding.

[1:09:06] My questions a couple weeks ago was,

[1:09:08] is there any dollars that could be reduced in this year's budget

[1:09:16] or deferred without cutting front line services?

[1:09:20] Is there anything between first and second reading ,

[1:09:29] that you could propose for whether it be deferred

[1:09:37] or reduced?

[1:09:39] >> If I understand your question, Commissioner,

[1:09:41] you're talking about the current budget?

[1:09:44] >> This year's budget.

[1:09:48] [Cross-talk]

[1:09:50] >> I can't tell you at this point.

[1:09:51] We're in September.

[1:09:53] Usually you finalize your budget maybe a couple of months after.

[1:09:59] We have commitments for open purchase orders.

[1:10:03] Those are carried over.

[1:10:04] If I were to reduce something, if we

[1:10:09] hadn't committed to that comment we

[1:10:11] wouldn't be able to reduce it because we had to carry it over.

[1:10:15] >> But you're open to -- >> We're certainly look at it.

[1:10:19] We're open to it.

[1:10:20] Certainly.

[1:10:21] >> The budget board was mentioned before .

[1:10:27] This my last comment.

[1:10:28] I do anticipate a potential change,

[1:10:30] as far as my appointments.

[1:10:32] So please put the application in through the clerk's office.

[1:10:37] So I don't have -- so I have the ability at the next meeting

[1:10:43] to make a substitution change.

[1:10:47] >> To follow up with ordinance says.

[1:10:51] >> I'm asking the clerk to post that I'm receiving applications.

[1:10:56] >> How many positions?

[1:10:58] >> One right now.

[1:10:59] I have all my positions are filled

[1:11:00] at the moment within the district.

[1:11:02] This would be potentially what I have on the budget side.

[1:11:08] >> Clerk do you have that?

[1:11:11] >> Also I'm working on an economic development program,

[1:11:16] in my individual capacity.

[1:11:18] To look at ways that we can stimulate our immediate Pembroke

[1:11:23] Pines economy.

[1:11:25] Identify the industries that are being impacted by technology

[1:11:28] and where things are moving.

[1:11:30] I'm sitting down with a core group of chamber members

[1:11:34] right now.

[1:11:35] And we are formulating how we can do a an outreach.

[1:11:41] I asked the manager for this year's budget.

[1:11:45] To allow budget for district town halls.

[1:11:50] And I would utilize those funds in order

[1:11:52] to be able to push out information come

[1:11:55] at least within my district, but certainly Citywide people

[1:11:59] are hurting.

[1:12:01] We have always been a city of forward looking.

[1:12:08] So I think the city of Pembroke Pines

[1:12:12] is in a very very good position.

[1:12:14] We rebounded from COVID.

[1:12:17] We rebounded from short sales back in 2008.

[1:12:21] And interest rates just went up.

[1:12:23] The mortgage rates just got established at 7% today.

[1:12:26] We know the housing market is a little turbulent

[1:12:29] in the near future.

[1:12:31] I am doing my part in this budget process, is good.

[1:12:38] The manager is open to make adjustments when necessary.

[1:12:40] I know as a collegial body, we're

[1:12:43] going to invest dollars that are going

[1:12:45] to have the greatest return on investment

[1:12:47] back to the community.

[1:12:49] That's what I'm looking forward to.

[1:12:51] Thank you for your time.

[1:12:53] >> Thank you.

[1:12:54] We appreciate your efforts on economic development and we know

[1:12:57] that you will discuss those fully with the City manager,

[1:13:00] city attorney, and also with Mr.!.

[1:13:04] Before you bring your item here.

[1:13:06] Then from there, the commission will

[1:13:08] decide how to proceed with city wide town hall

[1:13:12] meetings and the like.

[1:13:14] Thank you very much.

[1:13:15] Any further discussion?

[1:13:17] >> I have a follow up.

[1:13:19] What was alluded to was some of the lists provided

[1:13:22] during amendment three conversation

[1:13:24] that we had on Monday.

[1:13:26] Personally looking at the list, while that was an exercise

[1:13:31] conducted by administration to show us

[1:13:35] possible effects, possible items that could be cut in the future.

[1:13:38] I look at this and I don't feel comfortable for at least

[1:13:41] this year, if we do not have to absolutely cut down on these.

[1:13:46] Because to me, these are also essential services.

[1:13:51] I just want to put that on the record.

[1:13:54] >> I appreciate that.

[1:13:55] This commission come Mr. Dodge, Mr. Gordon,

[1:13:58] retains the ability to amend the budget at any time.

[1:14:02] >> Legally, correct.

[1:14:04] >> Anything from the commission?

[1:14:05] None.

[1:14:06] Hearing from the public?

[1:14:09] Seeing none all those in favor.

[1:14:12] Passes unanimously.

[1:14:15] >> For the record, we tell the public after the approval

[1:14:19] and first reading, the second and final budget is scheduled

[1:14:23] for 6 p.m.

[1:14:25] On Wednesday, September 16th, 2026 in these chambers.

[1:14:29] The notification is a reference to the millage as proposed

[1:14:34] in the first adopted millage.

[1:14:36] Page number three.

[1:14:38] May I read.

[1:14:40] PB eight number three is a motion

[1:14:42] to adopt ordinance number 2026 dash ten on first reading.

[1:14:45] The record proposed ordinance number 2026 ten

[1:14:48] is an ordinance of the city Pembroke Pines Florida.

[1:14:51] Adopting the budget for fiscal year 2026 2027

[1:14:54] and adopting the five year Capital Improvement Program

[1:14:57] for the City of Pembroke Pines, Florida,

[1:14:59] in accordance with section 5.08 of the City Charter,

[1:15:03] providing conflicts, providing for severability

[1:15:07] and providing for an effective date.

[1:15:08] Second and final reading is scheduled for Wednesday, 726,

[1:15:13] 2026 --

[1:15:22] September 16th, 2026.

[1:15:27] >> Is there a motion?

[1:15:29] Is there second?

[1:15:31] Thank you.

[1:15:34] >> Please understand that my questions are somewhere

[1:15:37] submitted to the staff and they respond and still

[1:15:39] there's a number of other questions that I had in regards

[1:15:42] to the budget.

[1:15:43] It's all been reminded that we see the detailed budget Monday.

[1:15:48] Today is Thursday.

[1:16:37] >>-- one was for a general fund and one was for utilities.

[1:16:41] I think another one for road and bridge.

[1:16:45] >> One more page here.

[1:16:46] Flip one more.

[1:16:48] >> Capital budget 10.4.

[1:16:51] Following pages capital items.

[1:16:53] This is what's in the current budget.

[1:16:56] >> Go to page 14 on the slides.

[1:16:58] The next slide please.

[1:17:00] I just want to clarify on this simple thing.

[1:17:04] I didn't pick this up until looking at the Powerpoint.

[1:17:08] The fire rescue it shows 1.2 million for fire engine.

[1:17:15] >> Yes.

[1:17:16] >> Is that correct?

[1:17:18] >> Yes.

[1:17:19] >> On page 336 of the budget .

[1:17:27] It would be object number six 64450,

[1:17:30] which is in the fire budget.

[1:17:39] Page 336.

[1:17:42] 664450, which is -- >> What was it again, Commissioner?

[1:17:59] >> 664450, titled Fire engine.

[1:18:01] And the number here is $2.27 million.

[1:18:07] The power is 1.2 million.

[1:18:12] Clarity, which is at?

[1:18:14] Is supposed to be 1.2 million and it's

[1:18:16] incorrect in the budget?

[1:18:18] >> I believe at one time we had two.

[1:18:20] I don't know if it's corrected.

[1:18:23] >> It's in the budget right now.

[1:18:25] Is 2.2.

[1:18:26] Is that $1 million that we all of a sudden

[1:18:29] found to be able to put in our events?

[1:18:34] >> We can reduce our >> That will help reserves,

[1:18:41] that's correct.

[1:18:41] >> Not necessarily.

[1:18:43] >> I don't need the explanation, other than the fact

[1:18:46] of what's right.

[1:18:48] >> For asking the question, let the chief answer.

[1:18:51] >> I didn't ask the question.

[1:18:53] >> Marcel Rodriguez, fire chief.

[1:18:56] Commissioner, the line item you're looking at

[1:18:58] is a combination of both the fire engine

[1:19:01] and the tactical support unit.

[1:19:03] The tactical support unit is not a truck

[1:19:06] that replace on a regular basis permit it is not

[1:19:10] used as often as the engine.

[1:19:16] No Capitoline for the tactical support unit.

[1:19:19] So it's combined with the fire engine.

[1:19:28] >> With that, I apologize, mayor,

[1:19:30] there's a $2.5 million contingency in the budget.

[1:19:35] In the budget, right?

[1:19:39] That's was my think that we could pull for some

[1:19:43] of the recreation events.

[1:19:48] Right?

[1:19:48] I would like to have now between second reading,

[1:19:53] I guess a historical perspective of the contingency fund

[1:19:58] permit how much we've budgeted, how much we've worked

[1:20:02] and how much has been a part of the carryover.

[1:20:05] I know the contingency is when a storm hits we

[1:20:10] have to clean up the streets.

[1:20:11] That's the money been sitting.

[1:20:13] Until we get reimbursed.

[1:20:14] I kind of want to know where we've been with the contingency.

[1:20:18] We need to have some options to be

[1:20:21] able to move some money around to support

[1:20:25] programing that we rightfully need to have in the city.

[1:20:32] >> Commissioner, we can give you detail from prior years on how

[1:20:36] the contingency is used.

[1:20:38] And therefore items that are unexpected.

[1:20:43] >> Don't go back like to 1992 or something.

[1:20:47] I just want something realistic that we

[1:20:51] can say that we have the ability to move monies around.

[1:20:54] I know sometimes when there's nonprofits or political action

[1:21:01] committees, sponsorship monies come out of that.

[1:21:05] >> I'm not aware of any political action committees that

[1:21:08] have ever been funded by the city.

[1:21:13] >> Committees maybe.

[1:21:16] >> Can I have my floor back, please.

[1:21:21] Thank you very much.

[1:21:23] On page 340 of the budget .

[1:21:29] It is a line item 546155 comets R and m land and building school

[1:21:36] major project.

[1:21:39] There are several billion dollars

[1:21:43] of school building projects that are being

[1:21:47] done under a general fund teir.

[1:21:52] And I was under the understanding

[1:21:55] that maybe schools were going to be done under school budgets.

[1:22:00] Not necessarily under general fund.

[1:22:02] I'd like to get an explanation of why

[1:22:05] we are spending money for schools under general funds.

[1:22:10] >> Mr. Dodge, certainly, this question has come up

[1:22:13] in the past.

[1:22:14] These are city owned buildings.

[1:22:17] The schools actually pay the debt on it.

[1:22:21] The building themselves belong to the schools.

[1:22:24] If, for example, there are repairs

[1:22:28] needed for the facilities, such as reroofing or doors.

[1:22:33] We've always paid for it out of that fund.

[1:22:36] Out of the city fund, because they are

[1:22:40] in fact property of the city.

[1:22:43] If we were to use school funds, at some time in the future,

[1:22:49] if we didn't continue with charter schools.

[1:22:52] There may be a claim on those funds back.

[1:22:57] That's why we always use the general fund.

[1:23:00] That we've done historically for the last 25 years.

[1:23:06] >> Will have more conversation on that.

[1:23:08] You're saying, it is an authorized expense

[1:23:15] under a general fund.

[1:23:17] Using tax dollars for schools.

[1:23:20] The second thing, the next thing is

[1:23:24] I'm looking at vehicle replacements.

[1:23:26] It looks like it's about 4 or $5 million cost.

[1:23:30] Probably just like to have a general conversation

[1:23:33] on what is that replacement cycle for some

[1:23:36] of these vehicles.

[1:23:38] >> I don't know what line item you're looking at.

[1:23:41] >> It's throughout.

[1:23:43] Like replacement of vehicles and it totals about $5 million.

[1:23:49] It's through a lot.

[1:23:50] I'd like to understand whether replacement schedule is.

[1:23:52] I'll replace them after four years?

[1:23:55] After six?

[1:23:57] After ten years?

[1:24:00] >> Commissioner, it depends on the vehicle.

[1:24:03] It has to deal with the condition of the vehicle.

[1:24:07] Most of our vehicles last a lot longer than that.

[1:24:11] We have equipment in some areas that is ten, 15 years old.

[1:24:16] There are others that the lifespan of it

[1:24:19] come if example, in police cars is less because

[1:24:22] of the miles on the road.

[1:24:26] There are replacements.

[1:24:28] Occasionally, there may be a new vehicle

[1:24:31] that's needed for some purpose.

[1:24:33] This also includes trailers, dump trucks,

[1:24:37] or whatever it might be for that particular department.

[1:24:41] >> I'll take a look and see how it compares to interest norm.

[1:24:45] Just to make sure.

[1:24:47] I know newer vehicles are obviously better.

[1:24:50] Nowadays, the way maintenance vehicles,

[1:24:55] they last a lot longer sometimes.

[1:24:56] Somebody charge can be pushed farther out.

[1:24:59] Lasts a little bit longer.

[1:25:01] So we'll have that conversation again.

[1:25:04] Another item here is not in the budget.

[1:25:07] We had talked about having a professional solid waste

[1:25:12] manager.

[1:25:13] I see it was not included in the additional staffing.

[1:25:17] I think we're in a position right now where we really

[1:25:20] need to have a professional solid waste

[1:25:23] person, who understands this industry throughout.

[1:25:27] Who has spent their career in solid waste.

[1:25:32] Very simple things.

[1:25:34] I was taking a look at our code of ordinances

[1:25:38] and our solid waste codes.

[1:25:40] It is so out of date.

[1:25:42] I do not understand why it's not being brought up

[1:25:45] to current code.

[1:25:46] We are still making reference to flow control.

[1:25:50] Do not flow control means?

[1:25:52] You have to bring your solid waste to where we tell you.

[1:25:55] And the reference in the code is to a disposal agreement

[1:25:59] with router, that no longer exists.

[1:26:01] When you look at other aspects of the code,

[1:26:05] they are just very simply outdated.

[1:26:07] What was even more surprising, one of the issues

[1:26:11] we're trying to deal with right now, is recycling.

[1:26:14] Our code does not even speak to recycling.

[1:26:18] So that is something that a professional

[1:26:23] would be able to grab a hold of and at least bring

[1:26:29] our code to current compliance with the way we operate,

[1:26:32] actually.

[1:26:33] We need somebody to actually really pay attention and monitor

[1:26:36] what's going on.

[1:26:38] Waste Authority now and everything's

[1:26:39] starting to go in gear.

[1:26:41] The last meeting we talked about that we're

[1:26:43] going to do some composting and some vegetative material.

[1:26:46] Mr. Mayor, a wonderful letter you sent out there.

[1:26:50] I really appreciate that.

[1:26:51] You made it very clear.

[1:26:53] I didn't want it to stink and we don't want traffic.

[1:26:57] And that's a real statement.

[1:26:59] People think that green waste doesn't smell.

[1:27:01] The reason why Fort Lauderdale disbanded their green composting

[1:27:06] is because it smelled.

[1:27:08] Mayor did a great job of pushing it out.

[1:27:10] We need someone paying attention to those kind

[1:27:12] of things that are happening.

[1:27:14] Again, I've got to reiterate and because I've really angers me

[1:27:18] that we miss the opportunity to go to Broward County

[1:27:22] and protest their zoning change.

[1:27:25] Their zoning amendment that allowed the landfill that is

[1:27:30] West Pines to go from 100ft to 300ft.

[1:27:34] If they want to do a 300 foot landfill,

[1:27:37] there is no stopping it now.

[1:27:40] We had a chance to speak it and we missed the opportunity.

[1:27:45] Again I think having a professional that

[1:27:47] knows those kind of things, pays attention, brings it

[1:27:50] to awareness to city manager and to others

[1:27:53] who may be participating in this solid waste arena.

[1:27:57] I'm telling, again, to my colleagues,

[1:28:00] this is something I think we really

[1:28:02] should be giving direction to the city manager

[1:28:04] to include solid waste manager.

[1:28:06] A professional in the industry.

[1:28:09] A position with the city of Pembroke Pines.

[1:28:12] >> I agree that you should take a look at it.

[1:28:16] It should be funded out of the trash fees.

[1:28:18] If we need a position there, because the environment

[1:28:23] is changing.

[1:28:24] That's the way it should go.

[1:28:26] I know you have an assistant city manager who is operating

[1:28:30] as the environmental overseer.

[1:28:35] I know these individuals probably answer there.

[1:28:44] If there's a feeling that we need

[1:28:46] to have one more person to get these things done,

[1:28:48] I think it should absolutely be evaluated.

[1:28:52] >> You said director or manager?

[1:28:54] There's a >> Right now, we do have

[1:28:59] sustainable and one of these assistant city manager.

[1:29:02] He's doing a great job.

[1:29:04] There's nothing.

[1:29:05] I'm really impressed with the growth that

[1:29:07] has occurred since taking that.

[1:29:11] I've been in this business 2530 years,

[1:29:13] I'm telling you I still don't know anything.

[1:29:16] It's the more you know, the less you know type thing.

[1:29:21] It shifts all the time.

[1:29:23] It would be a great asset to the assistant city manager

[1:29:26] to oversee that part of the operation.

[1:29:29] >> Do you need a motion for this?

[1:29:32] >> I think taking note of what we're saying.

[1:29:34] I do not hear any objection to it.

[1:29:37] That's pretty clear that something you'd like to look at.

[1:29:41] >> I'd like to ask the city attorney for a legal question.

[1:29:45] It is my understanding that voters of Broward County

[1:29:50] gave the county authority to do whatever they wanted

[1:29:52] on the property that they own.

[1:29:55] Right through the referendum.

[1:29:57] Was it two cycles ago or something like that?

[1:30:01] >> City attorney?

[1:30:04] >> My recollection is that there were referendums in recent years

[1:30:08] on the ballot referencing protecting certain lands.

[1:30:10] That was a specific issue on the ballot regarding the county's

[1:30:14] inability to modify the use or land use of certain regionally

[1:30:18] significant properties.

[1:30:20] Not specifically, environmentally sensitive,

[1:30:22] but restricted properties.

[1:30:24] But the county is always, under the county charter,

[1:30:28] maintain its integrity and legal control over its own land.

[1:30:32] That's been Revalidated.

[1:30:33] The site that we don't want stinking traffic,

[1:30:38] they control that.

[1:30:39] They own that property, correct?

[1:30:43] >> That's what it's called.

[1:30:45] That is correct.

[1:30:48] Incorporated Broward county, which they do own.

[1:30:51] >> Outside of Florida DEP, telling them they can't go up.

[1:30:56] They have full control over that asset, correct?

[1:31:01] >> If I may comment Mr. Mayor, I wouldn't use that particular

[1:31:04] phrase.

[1:31:04] There may be limitations and restrictions

[1:31:07] that are not yet in being.

[1:31:09] I would not choose to compromise the city right to an objection

[1:31:12] to an issue, which may occur.

[1:31:15] >> You asked to the attorney.

[1:31:19] [Cross-talk]

[1:31:19] >> I don't want to stray too far.

[1:31:22] >> Good question.

[1:31:24] >> I'm in agreement that we need to have an industry professional

[1:31:32] , who is a day to day knowing of what's happening.

[1:31:36] It's no shot at anyone who is currently

[1:31:39] overseeing the process.

[1:31:40] Commissioner goods involvement for 25 years,

[1:31:44] he was a day to day guy for a very long time.

[1:31:47] We need somebody on the bench who can look out

[1:31:49] for our best interests.

[1:31:50] To advise us when necessary.

[1:31:52] I think there's an opportunity through the professional

[1:31:55] services procurement.

[1:31:57] Where the manager can bring somebody in.

[1:32:02] On an as needed basis to watch these things.

[1:32:05] Because it could ramp up kind of quick.

[1:32:09] I would want to have someone brought on to look out

[1:32:13] for the interest of all of us.

[1:32:16] >> Thank you very much.

[1:32:17] Commissioner good.

[1:32:18] Reclaiming your time.

[1:32:20] >> Thank you Mr. Mayor.

[1:32:24] The next thing that I don't quite understand.

[1:32:26] I think I need an explanation or maybe something is not right.

[1:32:36] Looking at employee salaries throughout this document,

[1:32:42] every employee --

[1:32:45] I appreciate the detail.

[1:32:47] I've got to say it's spot on.

[1:32:50] It really gives a good picture of what's

[1:32:53] going on with the budget.

[1:32:56] I did notice, though, that every position is getting an increase.

[1:33:02] Anywhere from 10 to 20%.

[1:33:06] And what is happening is as you're

[1:33:10] going higher up in management, it gets closer to the 20%.

[1:33:16] I do recognize that there is a general employee --

[1:33:24] let me preface this, this does not include public safety.

[1:33:27] Public safety we manage that through a contract.

[1:33:30] They seem to be consistent with the contracts that we agreed to.

[1:33:35] We did agree to a general employee

[1:33:38] contract for compensation.

[1:33:41] But that contract only allows maximum of 5%.

[1:33:45] And then there are many other employees,

[1:33:50] particularly as you go into management

[1:33:51] and above, that are not in the general employee contract.

[1:33:55] So I don't even know how and what determines their increases.

[1:33:59] I'm hoping that this is a mistake.

[1:34:03] Maybe there was just some double counting error or whatever.

[1:34:07] When you have somebody that's making high six figures --

[1:34:15] [Cross-talk]

[1:34:17] >> Mr. Dodge, what say you to this?

[1:34:19] >> We have specifics and we'll look at them.

[1:34:24] >> That's it.

[1:34:26] That's substantial and thank you.

[1:34:29] Another thing I was having difficulty with is the city

[1:34:36] is using Florida contract staffing.

[1:34:40] Which is FCS.

[1:34:43] FCS is a workforce management that

[1:34:47] does supply personnel to support our city operations.

[1:34:54] There are no details in the budget

[1:34:56] that define what positions are being sourced out in the city.

[1:35:02] It could be window clerk.

[1:35:05] It could be somebody at Parks and Recreation.

[1:35:10] It could be somebody in finance.

[1:35:15] The only way that these numbers are provided to us,

[1:35:20] is under what are called, other services, FCS.

[1:35:23] So it just comes up with a general number of the cost.

[1:35:28] And when you look at the number, the amount

[1:35:33] that it costs us for FCS employees,

[1:35:37] versus our own city of Pembroke Pines employees.

[1:35:42] And in some cases, they are three times the amount

[1:35:46] of what we pay our own employees.

[1:35:48] So what that tells me is, we have

[1:35:51] a large number of FCS personnel working

[1:35:54] for the city of Pembroke Pines.

[1:35:57] I do not know anything about what positions they're filling.

[1:36:02] I don't know whether they're being compensated at.

[1:36:06] Are we overpaying or underpaying them.

[1:36:09] Anything.

[1:36:10] I think we should be getting a more detailed assessment of what

[1:36:17] our contract employees are doing with the city.

[1:36:21] When it's clear to me that more than 50%

[1:36:23] of the employees here at the city of Pembroke Pines

[1:36:26] are contract employees.

[1:36:28] I am going to need that kind of understanding.

[1:36:33] >> Commissioner, we certainly can provide that to you.

[1:36:37] That is not accurate that we have employees making

[1:36:40] three times the amount of what you consider to be

[1:36:44] the traditional employees.

[1:36:45] If you remember this slide -- >> Mr.

[1:36:53] Manager I better my statement to you.

[1:36:58] When you total up personnel service cost in a department

[1:37:03] for city employees.

[1:37:06] Then you match that to what the total amount for FCS costs are,

[1:37:12] the FCS costs double N triple what

[1:37:16] the personnel costs total total personnel

[1:37:19] costs for city employees.

[1:37:21] It just tells me that you might have one, two, FCS employees

[1:37:27] for every one city employee.

[1:37:31] >> That is accurate.

[1:37:33] >> I'm not saying that you're making more than our people.

[1:37:36] But I don't know what they're making.

[1:37:37] I don't know what position titles they are.

[1:37:40] I just know that they're working for the city.

[1:37:42] Somewhere in the city.

[1:37:44] It's hard for me to assess.

[1:37:49] >> That we can provide.

[1:37:51] >> Mr. Manager, number of these questions didn't come up before.

[1:37:56] I'm at a loss because I'm hearing this the first time

[1:37:59] as well.

[1:37:59] What the commissioner is asking for is an order, obviously.

[1:38:03] For next year, if we could, let's

[1:38:06] distribute these books in advance of when

[1:38:11] we distribute them this year.

[1:38:14] So that the commissioner has the opportunity

[1:38:16] to review the books earlier.

[1:38:19] And these questions can be there.

[1:38:21] So we can hopefully resolve these questions

[1:38:23] and not have to bring them up on a day.

[1:38:28] >> Just for clarification, the online budget was provided

[1:38:32] on August 1st.

[1:38:33] The printed one we all requested a little bit later.

[1:38:37] It's easier to see.

[1:38:41] >> Thank you comment you clarified what I meant.

[1:38:45] Printed budgets earlier.

[1:38:47] Because Commissioner Schwartz is right.

[1:38:49] A document like this is easier looked at in hard copies.

[1:38:53] Just make sure that we get that out several weeks beforehand.

[1:38:58] So that we don't have to go through this process now.

[1:39:03] Where questions are being raised,

[1:39:05] very legitimately many of us have heard before.

[1:39:12] >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor, other things that came to my attention

[1:39:16] as I was reviewing the details as well.

[1:39:19] Again, public safety has its own it at media personnel.

[1:39:27] So police have their own ID, fire have their own I t.

[1:39:32] They have their own media people.

[1:39:33] And the city has it and media people.

[1:39:36] I don't understand why we can't consolidate all of them

[1:39:39] under one roof and maybe get a little bit of a synergy out

[1:39:42] of that action.

[1:39:44] That is my opinion.

[1:39:46] I want to bring it to the attention of my colleagues,

[1:39:50] where they find it to be of any value or not.

[1:39:54] >> I can tell you uniformed services,

[1:39:56] they will be hard pressed to give up their PIOs.

[1:40:02] Both fire chief and police chief have PIOs

[1:40:06] that answer directly to them.

[1:40:08] So that the information that they provide under their state

[1:40:12] authority meets their particular expectations.

[1:40:16] It has always been that way in every city in every jurisdiction

[1:40:21] that I've worked in.

[1:40:22] I certainly believe that we could look at it.

[1:40:25] It differs from general communication.

[1:40:30] >> PIO is one thing, media is another.

[1:40:34] >> They have those responsibilities.

[1:40:37] >> There are certain cities that do have communication department

[1:40:41] that includes all art major organizations.

[1:40:47] However comment they do have dedicated personnel.

[1:40:50] The only thing I'd ask for that is maybe

[1:40:52] someone within the communication department

[1:40:55] can have branding across the board.

[1:40:57] But I think our media personnel in each

[1:41:00] do pretty much as good a job as they

[1:41:03] can with the branding of the place and fire being separate.

[1:41:09] The structure could be different.

[1:41:11] There are plenty of cities that combine all of it

[1:41:15] but they are individually.

[1:41:17] They're under the same umbrella.

[1:41:19] But they are associated with each department.

[1:41:21] >> Mr. Mayor I appreciate Commissioner Goode's focus.

[1:41:25] I mentioned earlier that there were some questions that

[1:41:29] asked the administration that they had not written back

[1:41:33] to me on.

[1:41:34] I also acknowledge Commissioner Goode,

[1:41:37] that there are technologies within about five categories

[1:41:42] within PD now.

[1:41:44] That deserve a review of overlap,

[1:41:51] if certain softwares are doing the same thing.

[1:41:55] Why would we be spending the money

[1:41:58] for the duplication of tech?

[1:42:02] Some of it is like a half $1 million worth of programing.

[1:42:08] This is something that I anticipate

[1:42:11] getting between now and second reading period

[1:42:14] I am with you on that one.

[1:42:17] I want to keep my items kind of brief tonight.

[1:42:21] The administrator is probably going

[1:42:23] to get me something in the ballot,

[1:42:25] hopefully within a week so we can

[1:42:28] have that second reading with a little more clarification.

[1:42:31] Why we're speaking about our first responders,

[1:42:35] who I absolutely support.

[1:42:42] >> I apologize I took the floor from you.

[1:42:43] >> Another thing I'd also like to take and reconsider the 410

[1:42:50] workdays versus a five eight workweek.

[1:42:53] I'd like to share with you with some of my beliefs.

[1:42:57] Where I think operations are efficient,

[1:43:01] are inefficient both on service level and as a financial impact.

[1:43:05] I'd like at some point to have that conversation where we talk

[1:43:09] about four dash ten versus 5-8 workweek.

[1:43:13] >> Would you like to bring that back as a commission item with

[1:43:16] whatever background you wish to include or how would you like

[1:43:20] to proceed with that discussion?

[1:43:23] >> I can do that.

[1:43:25] It could be a lengthy discussion it could be a quick.

[1:43:29] I do not know how my colleagues would feel.

[1:43:32] >> I don't know if we can do it tonight.

[1:43:34] >> Not tonight.

[1:43:36] >> I am glad to hear the preview.

[1:43:40] >> Thank you for that.

[1:43:41] >> I thank you for bringing it up go ahead.

[1:43:45] >> The other thing I'm having some difficulty with is

[1:43:48] understanding our attorney costs.

[1:43:50] There is a small section here for the attorney speaks to what

[1:43:56] they have as a retainer.

[1:43:58] That's most of what the cost is per I

[1:44:03] know that there is more costs than just

[1:44:08] what's under the attorney.

[1:44:10] That the attorneys get paid or outside attorneys.

[1:44:14] For instance, I cannot figure out what is currently hourly

[1:44:19] rate?

[1:44:20] I know we approved an hourly rate at some point

[1:44:23] in time, which is about 225 an hour.

[1:44:27] >> May I respond quickly?

[1:44:29] It went from 225 to 250.

[1:44:34] >> What was it in this >> Two hourly billed work.

[1:44:40] That's correct.

[1:44:41] Not for the >> I think you should

[1:44:45] meet with the city attorney come and go through your questions.

[1:44:47] >> The other thing is somebody can help me find where the cost

[1:44:52] for external legal fees are captured in the budget.

[1:44:56] I couldn't really lock that down.

[1:45:02] The only other thing is I am still not

[1:45:09] clear about what our anticipated budget

[1:45:13] amount, that has not been expended

[1:45:17] will be that we carry forward.

[1:45:20] Again, we have a very large amount

[1:45:24] of encumbrances or designated dollars for projects.

[1:45:29] Things of that nature.

[1:45:31] I do understand encumbrances, when

[1:45:34] you talk about them being in APO or some kind of purchase order

[1:45:38] or some kind of commitment for that payment.

[1:45:40] You have to wait 30 days past your budget cycle,

[1:45:45] before you can make all payments clear.

[1:45:47] In order to make your financial documents correct.

[1:45:50] As they need to be.

[1:45:53] There are a number of other items that are not covered,

[1:45:57] that have not been committed funds for payment.

[1:46:00] But are still sitting there.

[1:46:02] We just did one a couple of weeks ago.

[1:46:05] It was $100 million.

[1:46:07] What are we anticipating for this next year?

[1:46:10] I know the question was answered by Chief Financial Officer.

[1:46:16] Said, well, the budget amendment might be coming to us sometime

[1:46:21] in December.

[1:46:22] Which is good.

[1:46:24] It's better than waiting and hoping

[1:46:26] that it's a budget amendment for this year.

[1:46:30] Not as we traditionally done a year from the budget approval.

[1:46:36] I was don't like to have an understanding, generally, of how

[1:46:42] much money is we're anticipating is going to be rolled over,

[1:46:46] it's going to be added to this budget because it's 600 million,

[1:46:49] it's going to be 100 million I'd just like to understand that.

[1:46:54] That's what we just did.

[1:46:55] We just approved $100 million budget and added it to last

[1:46:58] year's -- >> 100 million rollover.

[1:47:02] >> We should sit down with the manager and ask these questions

[1:47:06] directly.

[1:47:06] I don't have that information.

[1:47:09] >> That's my question.

[1:47:11] >> Did you answer that, Mr. Dodge?

[1:47:14] >> The current when we have, as you know,

[1:47:17] didn't have the strategic plan in the budget that was quite

[1:47:21] a bit of money.

[1:47:22] That was part of the rollover.

[1:47:26] Then were the encumbrances, which

[1:47:28] were purchase orders that were encumbered

[1:47:31] before the end of the fiscal year.

[1:47:36] We did not be able to finish the project.

[1:47:38] So we carried it over and it goes in front reserves,

[1:47:42] but then we have to pay it, we take it from there.

[1:47:45] Yes, there sometimes excess funds

[1:47:47] that are left over each fiscal year that go into fund balance.

[1:47:52] That's how we're able to accumulate

[1:47:55] all the funds that we're using for the strategic plan.

[1:47:58] We use those for capital.

[1:47:59] If you use them up for operating,

[1:48:02] then you're never able to secure sufficient funds

[1:48:05] to do projects that are needed for the community.

[1:48:10] But there's no way you could generate the money.

[1:48:12] Other than put it in a future fiscal year and raise the taxes.

[1:48:18] So we've always tried to avoid that.

[1:48:21] Pay for capital out of whatever funds

[1:48:23] we had left over in reserves.

[1:48:26] >> I would offer , manager, more to my colleagues as well.

[1:48:34] Maybe should think about having a capital budget

[1:48:37] as well as operating budget.

[1:48:39] Because we don't have a capital budget.

[1:48:42] Where we have as money set aside for capital budgets.

[1:48:45] Capital budgets typically would get

[1:48:47] approved at the same time the operating budget.

[1:48:50] Which means that any money that you still have sitting there.

[1:48:52] Might have a five year project, it got it

[1:48:55] and the money needs to be there for.

[1:48:57] But if you have capital budget that

[1:48:58] gets submitted at the same time as your operating budget, what

[1:49:01] happens is you just automatically

[1:49:03] carry those dollars over with having to go through

[1:49:05] and amended budget process.

[1:49:07] That we're doing now.

[1:49:09] We can talk more about that later.

[1:49:11] There's a more formal way of doing that?

[1:49:14] Because I don't like making approval of a budget months

[1:49:18] later.

[1:49:18] That are in the numbers --

[1:49:21] I understand why it's being done.

[1:49:24] >> Commissioner good for clarification purposes.

[1:49:26] I'd like to have a definition of an adopted budget, operating

[1:49:31] budget, and a working budget.

[1:49:32] That's what I'd like to have in an ordinance clearly defined

[1:49:36] by legal of what is what.

[1:49:38] We need clarification.

[1:49:41] >> Okay.

[1:49:43] >> Mr. Dodge, if you could provide that clarification

[1:49:46] permit go ahead.

[1:49:48] >> I just want to say where the comments I'm making today,

[1:49:53] I am not asking for the reduction in the budget.

[1:49:57] That's why I went ahead and said, I don't think,

[1:50:00] why I agreed to the millage.

[1:50:03] I think it's very important.

[1:50:05] That's a very important decision we made.

[1:50:07] What I'm speaking about is just Reallocations.

[1:50:11] Move money.

[1:50:12] I would rather see projects comment like we're

[1:50:15] talking about the events.

[1:50:17] I'd like to see events elevated.

[1:50:19] It's direct contact with the community.

[1:50:20] That's what we need to be doing.

[1:50:22] I'd like to see it going in some of our capital projects,

[1:50:25] whether they be in our facilities

[1:50:26] or in some of our transportation infrastructures.

[1:50:28] I'd like to see the moneys go there

[1:50:31] because those are things people are constantly

[1:50:33] talking to me about.

[1:50:34] About why aren't we getting some of those things?

[1:50:38] Not about anything else other than that.

[1:50:44] >> And we have that ability.

[1:50:47] >> Mr. Mayor, that concludes my comments.

[1:50:49] I think everybody did a great job.

[1:50:52] I appreciate the detail.

[1:50:53] That was good stuff.

[1:50:54] Great set of >> Thank you.

[1:50:59] >> Following up to what commissioner good mentioned.

[1:51:02] You did mention employee salary bump.

[1:51:04] I want to hear if Miss Cheung has anything regarding that.

[1:51:08] I think was mentioned at 10 to 20%.

[1:51:13] That was not my interpretation, if you can clarify?

[1:51:17] >> Good evening.

[1:51:18] That increases that are reflected

[1:51:21] has been a result of the 26 budget.

[1:51:24] Being a little bit lower.

[1:51:26] The collective bargaining agreement, I don't think

[1:51:30] was approved until later on in the year

[1:51:33] period so those numbers were not reflected in the 26 budget.

[1:51:37] It looks as if the 27 change between 26 and 27,

[1:51:41] looks a lot bigger than it should.

[1:51:45] >> If later on we saw with an actual budget was from 25-26,

[1:51:51] versus what we have in the proposal,

[1:51:53] it would be more of a tighter space between those two?

[1:51:57] >> Yes.

[1:51:59] >> Commissioner, may I point you to an example.

[1:52:02] I wouldn't say it unless I could prove it.

[1:52:08] >> I just interpreted something different I just wanted clarity.

[1:52:11] >> I want to make sure we have the opportunity to meet with

[1:52:14] the manager and go through the questions completely.

[1:52:17] >> I heard the answer, the response and I think

[1:52:19] it's important for the commissioner to recognize where

[1:52:21] I'm speaking, in particular to the budget.

[1:52:24] 330 and go to item number 512451 paragraph

[1:52:36] >> 512451.

[1:52:51] >> can look across This was 24, 25, 26, 27.

[1:52:57] There's just several >> Commissioner good --

[1:53:07] >> We can look together.

[1:53:08] >> Commissioner good --

[1:53:17] >> That presentation.

[1:53:18] >> That's what we're looking at at the series.

[1:53:21] That's why we need clarification.

[1:53:24] When we look at how the books are presented,

[1:53:27] we are not looking at our current working budget,

[1:53:32] comparing next year's budget.

[1:53:34] We're still working off the adopted budget.

[1:53:36] In the book presentation period I

[1:53:38] know there's national guidelines on how it's presented.

[1:53:43] Now more than ever, residents taxpayers

[1:53:47] need to know how the money is allocated.

[1:53:51] If we have a labor agreement that

[1:53:54] was ratified late September.

[1:53:59] And there's a lookback period, that's going to be reflected

[1:54:04] in the following year's .

[1:54:08] In the working budget, not the adopted one.

[1:54:11] I look forward to some clarification.

[1:54:14] But really all the questions today, I'm

[1:54:16] very happy with all of my colleagues

[1:54:19] and how prepared we were tonight.

[1:54:22] >> Thank you very much.

[1:54:24] Anything further?

[1:54:26] >> Mr. Mayor, really quickly.

[1:54:28] The commissioner good has --

[1:54:32] I appreciate the opportunity very much.

[1:54:35] >> Anything else on this?

[1:54:36] Anything from the public?

[1:54:38] Seeing none.

[1:54:39] Yes, Ma'am.

[1:54:40] Please.

[1:54:46] Your name and address for the record.

[1:54:50] You have three minutes.

[1:54:52] >> Hello come again, Laura Enriquez,

[1:54:54] 600 North West 86th Avenue, Pembroke Pines, Florida.

[1:54:59] I just want to point out regarding the Subcontractor's.

[1:55:03] I do know an example that you were looking for.

[1:55:07] Sometime last year, the police department

[1:55:10] had an open position for accounts payable.

[1:55:12] The pay was $18.

[1:55:14] I am pretty sure that there would have

[1:55:17] been a markup for management.

[1:55:20] So that we're discussing the budget,

[1:55:22] I'd like to know how much the city would be

[1:55:24] paying for something like that?

[1:55:26] You were discussing that and it just popped in my mind.

[1:55:30] >> Thank you very much.

[1:55:31] Anything further?

[1:55:33] Anything from the public?

[1:55:35] Hearing none all in favor say aye.

[1:55:40] I'll opposed?

[1:55:41] It passes unanimously.

[1:55:46] >> I am a no on the budget.

[1:55:51] >> If you will comment Mr. Mayor,

[1:55:54] the second final public hearing on the budget ordinance will

[1:55:57] also be scheduled at the same time for consideration

[1:55:59] on Wednesday September 16th, in these chambers as well as 6 p.m.

[1:56:04] As well the millage ordinance described previously.

[1:56:07] Which will be considered under both state law and state law

[1:56:10] the charter at the time.

[1:56:12] >> Anything else on this item?

[1:56:14] This budget hearing is closed.

[1:56:18] We will now open our regular City Commission meeting

[1:56:24] of September 3rd, 2026.

[1:56:28] Mr. Clark, if you call roll.

[1:56:40] >>

[1:56:40] [Roll Call] We have a quorum.

[1:56:58] >> Thank you very much.

[1:56:59] Would you please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance

[1:57:01] and remain standing for the National Anthem.

[1:57:12] >> I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States

[1:57:14] of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation

[1:57:19] under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all.

[1:57:33] [National Anthem Playing]

[1:58:46] >> Thank you very much.

[1:58:47] Please be seated.

[1:58:49] Clerk com announcements of items to be pulled from the agenda.

[1:58:58] >> Item number 15 has been pulled.

[1:58:59] >> Thank you very much.

[1:59:01] Any others?

[1:59:02] >> No comment mayor.

[1:59:04] >> Under presentations today will be the fire Rescue

[1:59:07] Department will formally introduce to the Commission

[1:59:09] and to the public a new sponsorship program.

[1:59:12] It allows for the hiring of Non-certified individuals

[1:59:15] and city employees while they complete their required training

[1:59:20] and certifications to become sworn firefighters.

[1:59:26] Chief Rodriguez come at you are recognized.

[1:59:29] >> Good evening again.

[1:59:30] Marcelina Rodriguez fire chief.

[1:59:32] Thank you very much to allow me to present to you

[1:59:37] the new sponsorship program.

[1:59:39] Two first introduce it to the public, as well as

[1:59:42] the Commission.

[1:59:43] Before I get on -- one second.

[1:59:51] I have a Powerpoint presentation.

[1:59:55] I have to load it.

[1:59:57] Would I have access here?

[2:00:07] >> Do you see it on your screens, commissioners?

[2:00:09] Before I begin with the Powerpoint presentation,

[2:00:14] I think it's important to understand our current hiring

[2:00:16] process.

[2:00:17] Today, and for as long as I've been here,

[2:00:21] we've only hired certified firefighters.

[2:00:23] What does that mean?

[2:00:25] You have to have your fire certificate come as well

[2:00:28] as your EMT certificate, emergency medical technician.

[2:00:32] As well as some other certificates.

[2:00:34] The sponsorship program that I'm going to go over

[2:00:37] provides us with the opportunity to hire

[2:00:41] Non-certified firefighters.

[2:00:43] That means individuals without any certifications.

[2:00:47] But I hope they have a strong desire to serve this community.

[2:00:52] So one of the primary goals or objectives or benefits

[2:00:58] of this program is going to provide us

[2:01:01] a larger pool of candidates.

[2:01:04] We are looking for military veterans, recent high school

[2:01:10] graduates, college graduates, lifeguards.

[2:01:13] Perhaps someone that is seeking a career change.

[2:01:17] Maybe a communication expert or a police officer.

[2:01:22] Anyone seeking a career change that

[2:01:24] may not be happy or satisfied in their current career,

[2:01:26] but have always wanted to and they fire service

[2:01:31] has intrigued them.

[2:01:32] Those are the individuals that we're going to look for.

[2:01:35] We will search for high quality candidates

[2:01:38] whose character and values align with our standards

[2:01:41] here in Pembroke Pines.

[2:01:48] This will be a huge recruitment tool.

[2:01:53] Supplementing our existing ten week program period

[2:01:56] we're not getting rid of our current program.

[2:01:58] It's only going to supplement.

[2:02:00] We'll deploy and utilize it as we feel fit

[2:02:04] or as that need arises.

[2:02:07] What I'm referring to is one of the changes

[2:02:11] is going to be 21 week program which

[2:02:14] will incorporate both fire minimum standards,

[2:02:17] as well as emergency medical technician.

[2:02:19] To be 21 weeks compared to ten weeks.

[2:02:22] It's going to be a longer program.

[2:02:24] It's going to be a cost effective training.

[2:02:27] But what's not going to change is

[2:02:30] we're going to maintain our class one professional standards

[2:02:33] throughout the entire program.

[2:02:35] In my humble opinion, I expect after 21 weeks of being exposed

[2:02:39] to our training staff, they are going

[2:02:42] to be more prepared on day one than utilizing

[2:02:46] our current ten week process.

[2:02:51] Let me go over briefly how the program is going to work.

[2:02:56] It's going to first begin with a strong proportional outreach.

[2:03:00] We're going to have job fairs with the help of our HR

[2:03:04] department, as well as Mr. Rothstein.

[2:03:06] We're going to have school outreach, social media,

[2:03:10] internet based advertisement.

[2:03:13] We've discussed even meta ads.

[2:03:15] We're going to try to reach as many of these candidates

[2:03:18] as possible.

[2:03:18] Up to and including, and employee incentive of $1,000 per

[2:03:23] month to an employee of Pembroke Pines recommend a candidate

[2:03:27] and that candidate is hired as a city employee,

[2:03:32] for the training program.

[2:03:35] And then they become a sworn firefighter, EMT,

[2:03:39] that employee will receive a $1,000 incentive per second,

[2:03:44] is the screening and selection process.

[2:03:47] We have standardized and validated exams,

[2:03:50] which will include Cpap.

[2:03:53] Written aptitude exams, structured interviews.

[2:03:55] As well as assessment centers peer

[2:03:58] to ensure that we get the most qualified candidates

[2:04:02] for those positions period then the condition

[2:04:10] conditional employment.

[2:04:11] The conditional job offer is going

[2:04:13] to be consistent with our current standards.

[2:04:15] It's going to include backgrounds, polygraph,

[2:04:17] polygraph test, drug screening, etc..

[2:04:20] It's not going to change.

[2:04:21] When the firefighter completes that successfully it

[2:04:26] completing the 21 week program, they'll

[2:04:29] obtain their certification, and they'll

[2:04:31] be able for a full time firefighter EMT as a sworn

[2:04:33] firefighter and join the ranks of our current firefighters.

[2:04:36] However, they're going to have to commit

[2:04:38] to four years of employment as a firefighter if not,

[2:04:42] if they leave, they will have to reimburse the city

[2:04:47] for the education and their training.

[2:04:56] So a little bit of the framework on how that's going to work.

[2:05:01] We're going to onboard them as city employees.

[2:05:04] Full time making $20 an hour.

[2:05:07] It will be at will employees.

[2:05:12] Trainee must earn certifications in firefighter one firefighter

[2:05:17] two, EMT, Evoc and CPR training, which we will provide.

[2:05:22] They'll have to maintain certain standards

[2:05:24] throughout their program.

[2:05:25] Consistent with our current standards.

[2:05:27] At that point, as mentioned earlier, they'll transition

[2:05:31] and they'll have the opportunity to transition

[2:05:33] into a sworn firefighter.

[2:05:35] There are some advantages to the empty program in-house.

[2:05:40] Not so long ago, you approved a contract

[2:05:45] allowing us to an agreement with Memorial Hospital.

[2:05:50] Allowing our firefighters, our EMTs,

[2:05:54] that are taking courses within our program

[2:05:58] to complete their clinicals at Memorial Hospital.

[2:06:00] That was a key agreement to help us to get to where we are today.

[2:06:05] The EMTs will complete all of their field training

[2:06:08] in-house at our fire stations on our trucks.

[2:06:11] Come day one, they'll already be familiar with our system.

[2:06:18] They will have an advantage, compared to the current program,

[2:06:22] where they're not exposed to our firefighters or our system.

[2:06:28] Our fire stations, until they become a sworn firefighter

[2:06:34] on day one.

[2:06:35] Once they complete the program, and they're

[2:06:38] onboarded as a firefighter EMT, they'll have the opportunity

[2:06:42] and be required to become a paramedic within three years.

[2:06:46] They will have the opportunity to participate

[2:06:48] in our in-house paramedic class.

[2:06:51] Now we get into the financials.

[2:06:55] As you can see, there is a savings of the 21 week training

[2:07:04] course, compared to the ten weeks

[2:07:06] period the cost of the 21 sponsorship program

[2:07:12] is obviously less than a ten week training.

[2:07:15] That does not tell the whole story.

[2:07:18] The additional savings will come,

[2:07:23] because we expect there to be an increase in retention, which

[2:07:28] has been a challenge for our fire department

[2:07:30] as it has been for all municipal fire departments in the county

[2:07:34] and throughout other cities and counties as well.

[2:07:38] Our training facility was recently

[2:07:41] accredited by the Florida Department of Health.

[2:07:43] And authorized to begin offering EMP classes

[2:07:46] as I mentioned earlier.

[2:07:48] Soon we expect to expand on these programs

[2:07:51] to include both EMT and firefighter minimum

[2:07:55] standard training for individuals pursuing

[2:07:57] a career in the fire service.

[2:07:59] This is going to be and is going to become a financial benefit

[2:08:06] to the city and the fire department as well.

[2:08:08] The revenue generated from these programs come along

[2:08:11] with our other courses currently offered at the facility,

[2:08:13] will be used to offset operating costs and fund

[2:08:18] future facility improvements at the training facility.

[2:08:23] I didn't get here by myself, I had the help of a lot of people.

[2:08:27] Beginning with my staff that are highly trained and capable.

[2:08:32] The city manager for his support and him

[2:08:35] greenlighting this program.

[2:08:37] The finance department, of course.

[2:08:39] Elected officials for reviewing and approving and authorizing

[2:08:42] many of these agreements.

[2:08:44] The Human Resource department for reviewing and vetting

[2:08:48] this program and ensuring that it remains

[2:08:51] within certain guidelines.

[2:08:52] The legal team, of course.

[2:08:55] And again I just mentioned that I'm

[2:08:58] blessed to have the training staff that I

[2:09:00] do that put in the hard work to get us to where we are today.

[2:09:03] Thank you.

[2:09:04] With that, I open it up for any questions.

[2:09:08] >> Chief, I want to thank you for your presentation and I want

[2:09:10] to thank your staff for their creativity and finding ways

[2:09:14] to produce an even better fire department than we have now.

[2:09:20] I really appreciate that.

[2:09:22] My understanding is that labor has reviewed this

[2:09:25] and they're on board with it as well.

[2:09:28] We do have a full labor management partnership.

[2:09:32] >> I've met with them and discussed in details with what I

[2:09:36] went over with right now.

[2:09:37] There was no issues that I wasn't able to address.

[2:09:40] At the very end, they seem supportive.

[2:09:43] >> That's important because labor management partnerships

[2:09:47] are the stuff which great success is made.

[2:09:50] I very much appreciate the presentation.

[2:09:54] Mr. Dodge, has been incorporated into the budget.

[2:09:58] We just read it first >> Funds will

[2:10:03] be available for this program.

[2:10:04] >> Thank you very much.

[2:10:06] Any questions commissioners.

[2:10:09] >> I hate that you spoke before me.

[2:10:10] I was going to mention labor.

[2:10:12] I appreciate obviously chief, but I can't see him.

[2:10:16] Dan Rothstein.

[2:10:17] When I reached out, I think it's very incredibly important,

[2:10:21] especially with our public safety departments

[2:10:23] to work with, proactively work with our labor leaders.

[2:10:27] They represent the body that serves this community.

[2:10:30] I appreciate very much that you met with them.

[2:10:32] This is only via, I'd like to see the same over

[2:10:38] with our police department.

[2:10:39] Thank you Chief, for what you've done.

[2:10:42] >> Thank you very much.

[2:10:44] >> I want to say that everyone I talk to and the kids that are

[2:10:47] coming up with choice between police and fire.

[2:10:50] Because police eat donuts and fire eat gourmet.

[2:10:56] >> I'll let you in on a secret.

[2:10:58] I've eaten lunch with the police chief the other day.

[2:11:01] It's been a life long dream for him to become a firefighter.

[2:11:04] I gave him the opportunity to take advantage of that.

[2:11:08] Thank you.

[2:11:10] I'm

[2:11:18] >> Thank you very much.

[2:11:19] This is a proclamation of the city of Pembroke Pines, Florida,

[2:11:22] declaring National Childhood Cancer Awareness Month.

[2:11:24] Is there a group here coming forward?

[2:11:26] Come on up here

[2:11:32] >> Stand here.

[2:11:33] How are you?

[2:11:34] Good to see you again.

[2:11:35] How are you?

[2:11:46] >> Good to see you.

[2:11:47] >> How are you?

[2:11:47] Good to see you.

[2:11:48] How are you?

[2:11:53] September has been designated National childhood Cancer

[2:11:57] Awareness Month, to honor the children whose lives have been

[2:12:01] lost and those whose lives have been irrevocably impacted

[2:12:05] by this devastating illness.

[2:12:07] While strengthening our nation's resolve to find cures.

[2:12:12] Whereas cancer remains the leading cause of death

[2:12:14] by disease among children in the United States with approximately

[2:12:18] 15,000 children, adolescents diagnosed with cancer each year

[2:12:22] before the age of 20.

[2:12:24] Whereas childhood cancers across all racial

[2:12:27] ethnic, and geographic social economic backgrounds.

[2:12:30] Children and their families face the challenges

[2:12:32] of this disease with incredible bravery, strength and hope.

[2:12:37] Whereas childhood cancer affects not only child diagnosed

[2:12:39] but also the parents and grandparents siblings,

[2:12:42] loved ones and the entire support network while

[2:12:45] dedicated health care professionals

[2:12:46] organizations and advocacy groups provide critical support

[2:12:50] and encouragement.

[2:12:51] Whereas the City of Pembroke Pines

[2:12:52] recognizes the devastating impact of childhood cancer

[2:12:56] on children and families in the community

[2:12:58] and the importance of advancing research and improving treatment

[2:13:03] options and increasing awareness and supporting the effective

[2:13:07] those affected by this disease.

[2:13:09] And if I could add, whereas medical science

[2:13:12] is making it possible for many of these children

[2:13:16] to live long lives.

[2:13:19] Thank to the research and the hard work that they put into it.

[2:13:24] There has never been a time where more cancers are

[2:13:28] cured than right now.

[2:13:30] We owe it to our doctors and our nurses

[2:13:32] and other health care professionals

[2:13:33] for work and our scientists and researchers

[2:13:37] for working so hard on the science of this.

[2:13:39] At a time when people are amazingly

[2:13:42] dismissive of medical science.

[2:13:45] This is what is saving lives.

[2:13:48] This is what is giving hope to adults and children alike.

[2:13:52] With this horrible disease.

[2:13:54] Therefore, Angelo Castillo, mayor

[2:13:56] of the city of Pembroke Pines, Florida, and the City

[2:14:01] Commission, do hereby proclaim September 2026 National

[2:14:07] Childhood Cancer Awareness Month in the City of Pembroke Pines.

[2:14:10] And encourage all residents to join us

[2:14:11] in raising awareness, supporting effective families,

[2:14:14] honoring the courage of children cancer patients survivors

[2:14:17] and remembering those whose lives have been lost

[2:14:19] and whose lives have been saved.

[2:14:21] Congratulations and thank you for everything that you do.

[2:14:29] [Applause]

[2:14:30] >> I'm Christina and I'm part of Mystic Force Foundation,

[2:14:33] Sylvia Vanni wishes she could be here tonight.

[2:14:35] She had other things she had to take care of.

[2:14:37] She started this foundation 17 years ago,

[2:14:40] when her son Sal passed away tragically

[2:14:42] from childhood cancer.

[2:14:43] She dedicates her entire life to making sure

[2:14:47] that children that are affected by cancer just can be kids.

[2:14:53] Because as a family when you go through childhood cancer,

[2:14:57] everything stops.

[2:14:58] These children are in hospitals and in clinics.

[2:15:03] The families are just torn apart.

[2:15:05] She works treacherously to just ensure that the kids --

[2:15:12] tirelessly to ensure that kids have a place to go.

[2:15:16] And be kids and forget about being in the hospital.

[2:15:18] We're grateful for the city and the commission

[2:15:20] for allowing us to be here and raise awareness.

[2:15:23] Without that, the funding and the ability

[2:15:26] to know that childhood cancer is not rare

[2:15:29] when it affects your kids.

[2:15:30] When it affects your family's.

[2:15:32] We are grateful for that.

[2:15:33] I just want to introduce Jay Kaplan here.

[2:15:37] He is a two time cancer survivor.a

[2:15:42] [Applause] We have Jake Duenas, this is my son.

[2:15:46] He is a one time cancer survivor.

[2:15:49] Still very impressive.

[2:15:50] [Applause] And I'm Jake's mom.

[2:15:54] And these are Jake's siblings.

[2:15:56] That is Luke, Cristian, and Danica

[2:15:58] Patrick childhood cancer affects the entire family.

[2:16:01] Would you like to say a couple things?

[2:16:04] >> First of all, I want to thank Mayor Castillo and the city

[2:16:08] Commission for their time.

[2:16:11] Of course, she introduced me, I'm

[2:16:15] Jake, two time cancer survivor.

[2:16:17] I want to say how important it is for childhood cancer

[2:16:22] awareness to be in effect.

[2:16:24] I cannot stress enough how unnoticed it is among many

[2:16:29] people.

[2:16:29] Most of the population come if you ask them,

[2:16:32] how many kids a year do childhood cancer?

[2:16:34] They probably won't tell you.

[2:16:37] We as a group are looking to change that.

[2:16:41] As cancer survivors and cancer parents from around the world

[2:16:44] are also looking to change that too, how we can start personally

[2:16:49] is via schools.

[2:16:50] We can implement that into our Septembers into our school.

[2:16:56] Kind of create a Spirit week like wearing gold and stuff

[2:17:01] like that.

[2:17:01] I remember we did it at our old school.

[2:17:04] My mom can confirm.

[2:17:06] Yeah, still do.

[2:17:09] I felt like we fought really hard.

[2:17:13] We come along with the people who didn't survive,

[2:17:18] and everybody else.

[2:17:20] The parents deserve to be recognized.

[2:17:22] This could really help us raise awareness for cancer.

[2:17:28] If we keep doing stuff like this,

[2:17:31] maybe we can raise enough funds to create better treatments

[2:17:36] for children.

[2:17:37] We are stuck with medicines from the 80s and the 60s.

[2:17:42] It does more harm than good.

[2:17:44] Actually my second cancer was from the treatment

[2:17:47] from my first cancer, which is pretty ironic.

[2:17:50] My first cancer was a tumor.

[2:17:52] My second cancer was a blood cancer from it.

[2:17:55] I really want to thank you for what you do

[2:17:59] and for keeping the city great.

[2:18:00] All of our elected officials here

[2:18:03] for also doing the same thing.

[2:18:06] Keeping our city safe, clean, and strong.

[2:18:11] Strong.

[2:18:11] That's the word of the day.

[2:18:13] Strong!

[2:18:14] Thank you.

[2:18:18] [Applause]

[2:18:18] >> Thank you so very much.

[2:18:20] Let's take a photo.

[2:18:22] >> We have fantastic little gold ribbons that we can pass out all

[2:18:26] to the commissioners.

[2:18:27] >> Let's take a photo and then you can pass those out.

[2:18:30] Wonderful.

[2:18:58] >> Thank you very much.

[2:19:08] Thank you so very very much.

[2:19:15] [Applause] It was good to see you.

[2:20:01] >> Thank you.

[2:20:02] I am going to put this on right now.

[2:20:13] >> It was nice to see you.

[2:20:14] It was a pleasure.

[2:20:16] >> Thank you.

[2:20:28] >> I think it's on.

[2:20:29] Great.

[2:20:30] Thank you very very much.

[2:20:34] now we have our commission auditor,

[2:20:36] who is here to present the completed order plan for 2026.

[2:20:42] If you would draw near please.

[2:20:47] Your name and affiliation for the record.

[2:20:55] >> Hello, Kristi Clemens, Commissioner auditor.

[2:20:59] >> Pull it down a little bit.

[2:21:01] >> I'm joined by doctor Jamie Amos,

[2:21:03] who is the day to day engagement lead on your commission audits.

[2:21:10] I don't see the presentation up here

[2:21:13] we are here to present on three of the audits that

[2:21:16] have been completed on the audit plan and issued.

[2:21:19] The first one is --

[2:21:22] I'm sorry, the presentation is not up here

[2:21:25] remediation and validation.

[2:21:27] We re reviewed reports.

[2:21:30] Thank you.

[2:21:32] From 20 to 2024, that had observations and findings

[2:21:38] associated with them.

[2:21:39] We're able to validate that all items but one

[2:21:42] had been remediated.

[2:21:43] That is good news.

[2:21:46] We will be following up on that one remaining item.

[2:21:51] Before the end of the year.

[2:21:53] There wasn't enough evidence to validate it.

[2:21:56] Because they had just recently started

[2:21:59] performing that remediation.

[2:22:02] >> Okay.

[2:22:03] >> The permitting process efficiency audit.

[2:22:07] With that, we looked at the efficiency of the processes

[2:22:12] around the permitting process.

[2:22:15] With that, there were three recommendations

[2:22:19] that we identified out of that.

[2:22:23] For the most part, the processes were efficient.

[2:22:28] The three items that were noted were very low risk items.

[2:22:33] One related to the permit technicians

[2:22:38] closing the completed permits within the system.

[2:22:42] They were still showing open a couple with those.

[2:22:46] The other one has to do with monitoring for permits that

[2:22:50] remain open that are requiring some type of action

[2:22:54] from the applicant.

[2:22:57] At 180 days, they expire and they should

[2:23:01] be closed due to inactivity.

[2:23:02] We noted one of those.

[2:23:05] During our audit, they started automating the notification

[2:23:09] to applicants.

[2:23:11] We see that as a process improvement.

[2:23:14] We just recommend that they continue utilizing the system

[2:23:19] to its highest capabilities.

[2:23:22] With that, the next one is the utility billing accuracy audit

[2:23:28] that we did.

[2:23:29] With that, there was no findings noted.

[2:23:32] We looked how they were reading meters.

[2:23:35] How they're looking for potential errors.

[2:23:38] Looking at the billing process.

[2:23:41] There were no exceptions noted.

[2:23:44] With that, we would like to thank the staff who

[2:23:48] worked closely with us.

[2:23:50] They were very responsive.

[2:23:52] We appreciate that.

[2:23:56] >> Anything else?

[2:23:57] >> Any questions?

[2:23:59] >> Anything, commissioners?

[2:24:01] Thank you very very much for your presentation

[2:24:03] and for the work that you do.

[2:24:05] You are the internal audit arm of the city.

[2:24:08] Separate and apart from you we also have the year end audit.

[2:24:12] And I know that you are being in contact with them as well.

[2:24:19] We also mentioned before we have citizens Budget Council here

[2:24:23] in Pembroke Pines.

[2:24:24] That's not something every city has.

[2:24:27] The money in this city is looked at,

[2:24:31] as you can tell from our budget discussion comment

[2:24:35] with a great deal of scrutiny.

[2:24:37] A great deal of interest.

[2:24:39] It is for that reason, that the city

[2:24:43] has kept not only its finance, but its operating practices.

[2:24:49] Working well and our internal control structure,

[2:24:53] is a strong and vibrant one.

[2:24:56] A robust one.

[2:24:58] We thank you for everything you do to help us stay that way.

[2:25:03] Thank you very much.

[2:25:07] Okay.

[2:25:11] Of peals of board of adjustment decisions.

[2:25:15] None.

[2:25:17] >> Hearing none.

[2:25:19] >> Any announcements of board and committee appointments.

[2:25:21] >> None, mayor.

[2:25:23] >> Thank you very much.

[2:25:24] Today's consent agenda items is one through 13.

[2:25:28] Commissioners, what is your pleasure?

[2:25:30] Any polls?

[2:25:31] Seeing none.

[2:25:32] Any from the public?

[2:25:34] Seeing none.

[2:25:34] Can I have a motion.

[2:25:37] >> Motion to approve.

[2:25:39] >> Moved by the Vice Mayor, seconded by Commissioner good.

[2:25:43] Any discussion?

[2:25:45] >> I want again thank the city administration for the MoU that

[2:25:49] is being approved for the Broward Teachers Union.

[2:25:52] >> Yes.

[2:25:53] I know that they will be very very pleased.

[2:25:58] Anything else?

[2:25:59] All those in favor say aye any opposed?

[2:26:03] That passes unanimously.

[2:26:05] City Attorney, we are on regular agenda.

[2:26:11] >> Thank you, mayor, may I continue for the record.

[2:26:14] If you will come at the regular agenda

[2:26:16] actual begins with item number 14.

[2:26:18] Number 14 reads as follow and the public consumption

[2:26:21] and for the mayor Commission discussion and possible action

[2:26:24] to discuss August 5th, 26 draft for solicitation for building

[2:26:29] Department services, direction on potential revisions

[2:26:32] and approvals to advertise RFP number AD 2601 operation

[2:26:37] and management of the Building Department.

[2:26:40] It's in public record item.

[2:26:42] It's a item for mayor and commission

[2:26:44] and requires your attendance and guidance this evening

[2:26:47] through the administration to the mayor Commission.

[2:26:49] Thank you.

[2:26:51] >> Okay.

[2:26:52] I know there was a survey that was passed around.

[2:26:57] Some sort of consensus could be gotten on what

[2:27:02] is a very long list of items.

[2:27:55] Okay.

[2:27:56] Mr. Gomes come if you'd walk us through this.

[2:28:03] >> Good evening, everyone, Mark Gomes,

[2:28:06] assistant city manager slash director of procurement

[2:28:08] and sustainability.

[2:28:09] As mayor said, we did send out a survey.

[2:28:13] Obviously, as you know, we've met many times in regards

[2:28:16] to this item.

[2:28:17] A couple workshops and agenda items

[2:28:19] discussing the draft solicitation

[2:28:21] for the building department.

[2:28:23] So we did recently is we sent out

[2:28:25] a survey to get this various items from the last workshop

[2:28:29] that we did.

[2:28:30] That are still pending and we need direction

[2:28:32] from the City Commission.

[2:28:33] We outlined that in the agenda item

[2:28:35] and we also set a survey recently

[2:28:37] to get understanding of where the City Commission lied

[2:28:41] on some of these items.

[2:28:44] See if there's any consensus.

[2:28:46] As you can see on the page I just handed out,

[2:28:50] there are certain items that are highlighted in green here

[2:28:53] for the three commissioners that responded to that survey.

[2:28:55] There's a consensus on.

[2:28:57] Then the items highlighted in yellow.

[2:28:59] Two of the three commissioners were on the same page.

[2:29:02] Besides that, I also handed out a copy of the survey

[2:29:07] that we sent out.

[2:29:08] Which is pretty much outlining the items

[2:29:10] in the agenda from the last meeting.

[2:29:12] On which we need direction on.

[2:29:18] >> Mr. Mayor, for full disclosure,

[2:29:20] the survey came in last night in the email.

[2:29:24] I was celebrating my 44th birthday with my family.

[2:29:28] So I didn't complete that survey.

[2:29:31] >> Happy birthday to you Commissioner Good.

[2:29:35] In fact, happy birthday to all of us.

[2:29:41] Go ahead.

[2:29:41] Don't worry about it.

[2:29:42] We do not fill out every survey.

[2:29:45] It happens.

[2:29:46] We're all very very busy people.

[2:29:48] We all do the best that we can.

[2:29:50] I know that all of us do.

[2:29:52] How do you want to proceed?

[2:29:54] >> We'd like commission's direction on each one

[2:29:56] of the items.

[2:29:58] >> Do you want to go one at a time?

[2:30:01] >> I think that would be >> The first item is:

[2:30:05] How much time should firms be provided to submit proposals

[2:30:08] following the advertisement of the RFP.

[2:30:11] Two people said eight weeks.

[2:30:12] I said four.

[2:30:14] Eight sounds fine to me.

[2:30:16] Anybody object to eight?

[2:30:18] >> I would agree to eight.

[2:30:20] >> I'm the cause right and we had --

[2:30:24] I thought we were going to be done by now.

[2:30:28] I thought we were actually going to be able to sitting here

[2:30:31] tonight selecting somebody.

[2:30:33] >> No, we're going to go through this list.

[2:30:35] We've had two workshops.

[2:30:38] >> We had three.

[2:30:39] >> And didn't respond to the survey.

[2:30:41] We're going to go one at a time.

[2:30:44] >> I was also celebrating.

[2:30:45] I was also celebrating vice mayor's birthday.

[2:30:49] >> Well come a happy birthday.

[2:30:51] The question before us

[2:30:54] [Cross-talk]

[2:30:55] >> I did communicate with Mr. Gomez verbally.

[2:30:57] I provided verbally all of the questions.

[2:31:02] We actually spoke to our times.

[2:31:05] >> The question now is: Eight weeks.

[2:31:07] I have people who are happy with eight weeks.

[2:31:09] Are you good?

[2:31:11] >> I was going with six.

[2:31:13] I'll go with eight.

[2:31:15] Here's my concern, my only concern is --

[2:31:19] we have a long list here.

[2:31:21] Go ahead.

[2:31:22] We have a long >> We go eight weeks.

[2:31:28] That puts us at the beginning of November.

[2:31:30] Mr. Gomez anticipating potentially for dates.

[2:31:35] Give us the forecast of when this comes back

[2:31:39] to the commission after you go through all your reviews and all

[2:31:42] the stuff you do on procurement.

[2:31:44] You're able to do that.

[2:31:47] I prepped you in advance.

[2:31:50] For that >> Attach to the backup for the agenda item

[2:31:55] is an estimated timeline.

[2:31:56] Based on this eight week solicitation process,

[2:32:00] we anticipate coming back to the City Commission on March 3rd

[2:32:03] with the item to approve the negotiated contract to begin

[2:32:08] the transition process.

[2:32:10] >> Honestly, put down four weeks,

[2:32:12] because I feel if they can't do it four weeks,

[2:32:14] then they don't know what they're doing.

[2:32:15] If we're going to eight weeks, I won't object.

[2:32:19] >> Mr. Gomez mentioned March 3rd.

[2:32:21] That's also a deadline that this commission

[2:32:23] imposed on our current vendor.

[2:32:27] Mr. Gomez, anticipating the possibility of an eight week.

[2:32:32] What would be the implication of a transition period

[2:32:35] if we wait that long?

[2:32:38] >> As you mentioned, the current contract we have ends around

[2:32:42] March of 2026. --

[2:32:45] 27.

[2:32:46] >> 27.

[2:32:47] We may have to extend that agreement

[2:32:50] to have the transition process take

[2:32:55] >> There's no guarantee that that would

[2:32:56] be agreeable by both parties.

[2:32:58] It's an assumption.

[2:33:01] >> Which both parties?

[2:33:02] >> The city and the current vendor.

[2:33:04] >> They don't get a say in this.

[2:33:06] This is our RFP.

[2:33:07] Let's focus.

[2:33:09] >> I want you to focus, it's a transition period on March 3rd

[2:33:12] of 2027 period

[2:33:15] >> If we say it's eight weeks, they'll figure a way to do it.

[2:33:18] We've already asked these questions.

[2:33:20] The question before us is eight weeks.

[2:33:24] Are we good?

[2:33:25] All right let's move on to the next item the next item is --

[2:33:31] >> Mr. Mayor -- >> Forgive me I'm having difficulty reading

[2:33:36] this.

[2:33:37] Is there a way you can bring it up on the screen?

[2:33:39] >> Mr. Mayor, just a comment for the record,

[2:33:42] as you go through this list, you're accepting consensus with

[2:33:46] your colleagues as opposed to motioning it.

[2:33:48] The record reflects your consensus on the item.

[2:33:51] The staff can be guided accordingly.

[2:33:53] Thank you, >> Should the RFP remain

[2:33:58] a non-mandatory Pre-bid meeting.

[2:34:00] Everyone said yes.

[2:34:01] Any objection?

[2:34:02] It will be included.

[2:34:05] The next one is should city staff

[2:34:08] document all verbal questions?

[2:34:10] Everybody said yes.

[2:34:13] Any objections?

[2:34:14] So noted.

[2:34:15] The next question was: Should the city clerk

[2:34:20] be required to attend the meeting.

[2:34:25] Everyone said yes.

[2:34:27] Any objection?

[2:34:28] We are good there.

[2:34:30] The next one was : Should the RFP remain the proposed minimum

[2:34:45] required roles and staffing levels?

[2:34:49] I'm reading this to say that everyone said yes.

[2:34:54] Any objections to that?

[2:34:56] That is good.

[2:34:59] >> One second.

[2:34:59] That one I did find a little bit confusing.

[2:35:02] Should the RFP retain the proposed minimum.

[2:35:05] Right above it it provides option A and option

[2:35:08] B. I thought that was supposed to say,

[2:35:10] option A or option B, which one was the preference?

[2:35:15] >> Just to clarify, if I may, there's option A and option B.

[2:35:21] Those both have minimum requirements.

[2:35:23] So there's minimum role assignments

[2:35:25] for option A, 18 role assignments.

[2:35:28] Filled at least by 17 individuals.

[2:35:30] Because assistant building official

[2:35:32] can serve as one of the trade chiefs.

[2:35:35] Similarly, option B would be the city providing those two staff

[2:35:39] members.

[2:35:40] Which will be the chief building official and the building

[2:35:44] department manager.

[2:35:45] This is just C1, is asking is the City Commission

[2:35:50] fine with retaining those minimum requirements

[2:35:52] for both options.

[2:35:54] >> For both options.

[2:35:55] Then I change mine to yes.

[2:35:58] >> Those two are done.

[2:36:00] We are on C3 now.

[2:36:03] >> C2.

[2:36:04] >> I thought we just did that one.

[2:36:06] >> We did c1.

[2:36:08] >> Should RFP retain the ability for assistant building official

[2:36:11] to also serve as one of the four required trade chiefs?

[2:36:15] I am reading this to be yes.

[2:36:19] Anyone object?

[2:36:22] >> I'm not going to on this one -- >> Anyone else?

[2:36:26] So, that one's good.

[2:36:27] The next one is C3 now.

[2:36:29] Should the RFP remain maintain the restrictions

[2:36:33] of the minimum required dedicated personnel shall

[2:36:36] be prohibited from simultaneously providing

[2:36:39] building department services to other jurisdictions.

[2:36:43] I am seeing yes.

[2:36:46] Adapted as necessary.

[2:36:47] That sounds like three yeses to me.

[2:36:50] Anyone object?

[2:36:53] >> I'm not saying yes to retain the restriction but only while

[2:36:56] they're --

[2:37:07] >> Mic, please.

[2:37:10] >> My answer was yes, but only during their work hours.

[2:37:13] Not during their off time.

[2:37:16] >> Anyone object to that >> Is a break,

[2:37:21] because one of the mentions was a break clocked hours?

[2:37:26] >> A break is not clocked our.

[2:37:28] Lunch hour is not a clocked hour.

[2:37:29] Otherwise, you run into mischief.

[2:37:32] If they're on their own time period out of the office.

[2:37:37] >> If they're on their own time, they should be subject to this

[2:37:40] period my thought is during a lunch break.

[2:37:46] >> They're on salary during lunch period they get paid

[2:37:48] lunch.

[2:37:53] >> Is the breaks mentioned in the questionnaire.

[2:37:55] Would that be on the clock or off the clock?

[2:38:00] >> And the solicitation, we stated that the current language

[2:38:03] states that they can't provide services while they're doing

[2:38:06] their scheduled working hour.

[2:38:08] Including breaks.

[2:38:08] If they start at say a m and go to 6 p.m..

[2:38:12] The lunch break would also be included that they cannot

[2:38:15] provide those private -- >> IG report on this thing.

[2:38:22] >> If they call it sick that day,

[2:38:24] they're still scheduled but they show up,

[2:38:26] they wouldn't be able to do it.

[2:38:29] >> If they're collecting --

[2:38:32] I read this to mean, if they're collecting,

[2:38:35] which is a paid six day PT p o, they

[2:38:39] can't use that day permit after hours they can go.

[2:38:42] Like a Saturday or Sunday.

[2:38:44] If they're off on a day, they can do it whatever they want.

[2:38:49] >> Thank you.

[2:38:50] >> I think that's just too restrictive.

[2:38:56] >> Let's put it to a vote.

[2:38:57] >> I understand the concept of a lunch.

[2:38:59] If they choose to take a half day, full day, whatever it

[2:39:03] may be.

[2:39:05] >> If it's on their time or our time period

[2:39:07] >> If they take the time off, that's their time period

[2:39:11] >> If we're paying them.

[2:39:12] >> If we're paying them, it's not their time.

[2:39:16] If they take time without pay.

[2:39:21] If they take PTO, they're on their time.

[2:39:24] There was just an IG report on this.

[2:39:28] >> It doesn't make sense.

[2:39:29] The IG report they were doing it while they were still

[2:39:31] on the clock.

[2:39:32] This is not on the clock.

[2:39:34] >> That's correct.

[2:39:36] >> The city attorney.

[2:39:38] >> If you put in for time off, your time off.

[2:39:42] >> If it's vacation time or if it's sick time and it's part

[2:39:47] of your own time, that is one thing.

[2:39:51] If it's city time you're collecting a benefit.

[2:39:56] You are working on city time.

[2:40:01] >> I think I'm coming to understand where Commissioner

[2:40:03] good is coming from.

[2:40:05] When I worked at the county.

[2:40:07] I took time off to go do things that I couldn't do on county

[2:40:11] time.

[2:40:12] You would take the time off to be able to do those things,

[2:40:17] even though in theory, you're taking time off.

[2:40:19] The agency is paying you.

[2:40:22] >> That's the mayor's point.

[2:40:24] If you're getting paid for it, it

[2:40:25] means that you've accrued a benefit.

[2:40:27] >> That's right.

[2:40:29] >> But you're taking time >> But you're being paid for that time

[2:40:32] off.

[2:40:33] The city is paying you that time.

[2:40:34] That's part of your compensation.

[2:40:35] You get to get some time off.

[2:40:38] >> Not to pick on -- >> They can go on vacation.

[2:40:43] >> Not to pick on police or anything,

[2:40:44] but let's say our police officer takes time off.

[2:40:47] I don't know if that's true.

[2:40:49] Does private security.

[2:40:51] They're not allowed to do private security

[2:40:53] during their time off?

[2:40:56] >> Not unless it's an approved detail.

[2:40:59] >> Okay.

[2:41:01] >> PD obviously has specific rules and regulations.

[2:41:07] >> The whole point of this, Commissioner, and let's back up.

[2:41:10] The whole point is not to have Pembroke Pines implicated

[2:41:15] by an association with the part time work.

[2:41:20] If you're going to work part time, it should be on your time.

[2:41:23] Should have nothing to do with city compensated time.

[2:41:26] Whether on the clock or off the clock on PTO.

[2:41:31] If you being compensated, you shouldn't use

[2:41:35] that time for part time work.

[2:41:38] >> Could they ask for paid time off?

[2:41:42] >> They can.

[2:41:44] >> Again we're not paying employee for the service

[2:41:46] provider to provide a staff person there to do a job.

[2:41:53] If it's person A B or C it doesn't matter.

[2:41:56] As long as they have it filled.

[2:41:58] That's the whole point behind it.

[2:42:00] The roles and all this other good stuff.

[2:42:21] >> Were paying the company.

[2:42:22] Someone want to make a motion on this?

[2:42:26] >> Mayor, I'm going to let you make the motion.

[2:42:29] >> I don't make motions.

[2:42:32] >> Give me the language you would support.

[2:42:34] >> I make a motion that we only have the restriction when they

[2:42:41] are clocked in.

[2:42:43] And that does not include the break or lunch hour.

[2:42:47] >> I will second for discussion.

[2:42:49] I'd really like to hear from the manager on this.

[2:42:52] I don't know how I'm going to vote on it.

[2:42:54] For the assistant manager.

[2:42:57] >> There's a second.

[2:42:58] You can ask your question.

[2:43:02] >> Define it.

[2:43:03] >> My stance as City manager is the context that comes along

[2:43:06] with this and when this was first discussed,

[2:43:10] is that staff was concerned that a person would serve as one

[2:43:16] of our trade chiefs, but could also be a building official

[2:43:20] and another city.

[2:43:21] Therefore the staff here at the city of Pembroke Pines,

[2:43:24] would not have the dedicated time we need to serve.

[2:43:28] There's a second question I'll come up in your survey

[2:43:30] that I really believe the lunch break type issue can happen.

[2:43:33] We have asked the commission.

[2:43:38] >> I just exempted that.

[2:43:39] So it's not a lunch break issue here.

[2:43:42] >> He took it out.

[2:43:44] >> They can't do it on a lunch break.

[2:43:46] >> What was I going to suggest you is the dual role issue.

[2:43:50] We've given you another question where

[2:43:52] it's Monday through Friday, during regular business hours.

[2:43:56] Again, I do not want to put yourself in a situation

[2:43:59] where you say yes here but you contradict yourself

[2:44:01] on the second vote.

[2:44:03] If that makes sense, mayor.

[2:44:06] >> Two Commissioner Rodriguez's point,

[2:44:08] which you need to restate it, Commissioner,

[2:44:10] but who are you paying?

[2:44:13] Are you paying an individual are you paying a company?

[2:44:17] If Mike Hernandez, is the building department and Angela

[2:44:22] Castillo is one of my employees.

[2:44:24] Wouldn't that be amazing.

[2:44:27] >> I would work for you.

[2:44:30] >> Let's just say he's one of my employees.

[2:44:32] He is not reporting to work that day.

[2:44:35] Tom good fills the slot.

[2:44:38] They meet the minimum requirements.

[2:44:40] Angela is not being paid or is being paid at that moment

[2:44:44] by the city of Pembroke Pines.

[2:44:46] My question is, are you paying the entity,

[2:44:48] the company that's doing the work or the individual.

[2:44:51] Are we actually paying individuals?

[2:44:54] >> We're paying the entity.

[2:44:56] It's very important, vice mayor, the context of this question

[2:45:00] was about serving in required positions in two

[2:45:05] locations at the same time.

[2:45:07] Staff's concern, I know this migrated into a different place.

[2:45:12] Staff's concern is that our chief structural,

[2:45:17] whoever that person may be in the future,

[2:45:19] cannot be in the ability permit could not serve as a building

[2:45:23] official or chief structural and another location.

[2:45:26] What staff needed as part of the situation

[2:45:29] with dedicated position is people

[2:45:31] who are here to serve the city of Pembroke Pines.

[2:45:35] >> From a staff's perspective, security we're looking for.

[2:45:39] That's what the second question comes up.

[2:45:45] >> There any objection to what the assistant city manager just

[2:45:48] said, that the officials will only serve the city of Pembroke

[2:45:51] Pines?

[2:45:51] Is anyone object to that?

[2:45:53] I'm not hearing an objection.

[2:45:56] >> I'm still missing that point.

[2:45:58] Just serving the city.

[2:46:01] All these providers have a requirement

[2:46:08] to fill the position with a qualified staff person.

[2:46:14] Whether that qualified staff person is person A B or C,

[2:46:18] as long as they're there on the day,

[2:46:20] I don't think we should be meddling

[2:46:23] with those kind of details within that organization.

[2:46:26] >> I've got to tell you Commissioner good,

[2:46:28] this rarely happens.

[2:46:30] I 150% disagree.

[2:46:32] I want to know who they are proposing.

[2:46:35] I do not want bait and switch down the road

[2:46:38] that we should hire our own staff.

[2:46:41] >> No we don't have to hire our own staff.

[2:46:43] That's not what we're talking about.

[2:46:47] We are getting our money's worth out of a contract.

[2:46:50] We have that now.

[2:46:52] There are other companies that may want

[2:46:54] to engage in other practices.

[2:46:56] In my opinion, that does not work for us.

[2:46:59] If you want to work for Pembroke Pines,

[2:47:01] you have to propose dedicated people in your proposal who

[2:47:06] we know are going to be there.

[2:47:09] Not a bunch of an apparent all start list.

[2:47:13] Then when the first day of the contract shows up,

[2:47:15] is the B squad.

[2:47:17] I'm not interested in that.

[2:47:19] I'm interested in them delivering

[2:47:21] people they said they want.

[2:47:24] They're quality people who we rank them on.

[2:47:27] And nobody else.

[2:47:28] And they should hold on to them, of course people

[2:47:31] die, they move away, they take other jobs,

[2:47:33] all that's understandable.

[2:47:35] Just moving a company moving from here

[2:47:38] to there without the approval of the contract manager.

[2:47:42] I am not involved in that.

[2:47:44] That's not what I am looking for.

[2:47:47] That's not what the company is rated on.

[2:47:50] That is not something I'm interested in.

[2:47:52] I just have to tell you come on that one,

[2:47:55] it's a bridge too far for me.

[2:47:57] It's up to you guys.

[2:47:59] >> I could probably agree for sure if we were still operating

[2:48:02] off a traditional model.

[2:48:04] The model has been substantially changed this past legislation

[2:48:08] session.

[2:48:09] They gave the private providers the right

[2:48:11] to do that our staff or our contractor would otherwise do.

[2:48:16] It's going to create an incredible shift

[2:48:20] in this industry.

[2:48:21] This is something -- >> I don't care.

[2:48:29] it's to me -- >> It sounds like I could be the deciding vote.

[2:48:37] I've listened to both sides and I've spoken to administration

[2:48:40] exclusively on this.

[2:48:41] I am going to be with Commissioner good.

[2:48:45] I think there are changing dynamics in the industry.

[2:48:50] >> If I may, I don't know if I focused how I'm voting.

[2:48:55] I just asked what the mayor wanted to do.

[2:48:58] What concerns me about a private provider,

[2:49:03] it said a 101 and I said back in June is that if we're going

[2:49:09] to go down this path, we cannot have a chief building official

[2:49:14] in-house.

[2:49:15] Because then we're going to have an ethics conflict.

[2:49:21] >> There's no ethics conflicts.

[2:49:23] Just stay on this matter.

[2:49:28] >> Let's please stay on the motion we have.

[2:49:30] It can be managed in any way that we say.

[2:49:34] >> I guess if this were the past, the way this is,

[2:49:38] it's going to fundamentally change the way that Pembroke

[2:49:42] Pines has been doing.

[2:49:45] Building services.

[2:49:47] >> Is changing already.

[2:49:49] >> For no good reason in my opinion.

[2:49:51] >> Yes, there are dynamics that are changing.

[2:49:56] Vice mayor, and colleagues, this is not the direction.

[2:50:06] If we go down this path, you're not going to get it back.

[2:50:12] It is -- it is -- mayor and I have.

[2:50:18] I mean the mayor was part of the original --

[2:50:23] >> Mayor can we call the question.

[2:50:27] >> Please please this is a big deal.

[2:50:29] Anything on the list, this is the one item

[2:50:32] that there really is a game changer.

[2:50:36] >> Can I get some clarification.

[2:50:38] There's something being misunderstood.

[2:50:41] What staff is suggesting on this item

[2:50:43] is that it's for another jurisdiction.

[2:50:45] I'm not suggesting for any moment

[2:50:48] that on Saturday and Sunday that if our building official works

[2:50:53] as a private provider for another company or for a company

[2:50:56] that he can't go to that work.

[2:50:57] What we're saying and what we're asking for,

[2:50:59] is our building officials are building officials.

[2:51:02] That are structural chief is our structural >> That's right.

[2:51:07] That's the way we've always operated here.

[2:51:09] I see absolutely no good publicly policy changes.

[2:51:13] >> I want to make that clarification.

[2:51:14] I know private provider was coming up.

[2:51:17] If one of the people that worked for the companies

[2:51:20] they're coming forward, on the side

[2:51:22] does private provider work for that company,

[2:51:25] because both the companies we've been discussing so far

[2:51:28] have private provider entities.

[2:51:29] They want to do that work on Saturday Sunday, that's

[2:51:32] not for me to say.

[2:51:33] During their time off.

[2:51:35] It's not the same.

[2:51:36] What we're saying here is we have

[2:51:37] dedicated staff in this city.

[2:51:39] If our structural chief needs to do Central Village to do

[2:51:42] reviews, we need that.

[2:51:46] >> Imagine managing your staff and you don't know --

[2:51:51] >> Now this is the one that confuses me.

[2:51:55] >> I'm going to clarify.

[2:51:57] I think we all agree on that.

[2:51:59] I think there is or I think there's consensus.

[2:52:02] I agree on that point as well.

[2:52:05] My question was simply on off time.

[2:52:08] There is a difference.

[2:52:12] Because my train of thought is, and Monday

[2:52:14] on Friday to whatever.

[2:52:15] It's not like these companies have unlimited PTO.

[2:52:19] I assume so.

[2:52:21] Most companies have limited PTO.

[2:52:24] If you ask for vacation time.

[2:52:26] If you ask for off time, it's not

[2:52:29] like we're going to have this bait

[2:52:31] and switch 100% of the time.

[2:52:34] There is a limit to the amount of time off that you take.

[2:52:39] >> I'm telling you that the IG has investigation where

[2:52:42] they've held cities and gross mismanagement for allowing

[2:52:47] employees to do unauthorized work during paid time off.

[2:52:52] Which they are compensated for.

[2:52:54] You open the door and you're inviting an IG complaint.

[2:53:00] In this industry, there has been a history,

[2:53:04] without pointing fingers.

[2:53:07] There has been a history of all kinds of shenanigans.

[2:53:11] Unless the rain is very tightly pulled.

[2:53:14] I cannot go down that path.

[2:53:18] I just can't.

[2:53:21] >> If I -- >> They were doing this simultaneously.

[2:53:28] >> I see no simultaneously.

[2:53:30] >> We were actually a part of the assistance in double

[2:53:35] payment.

[2:53:36] Remember.

[2:53:37] We were part of that process.

[2:53:40] It has happened to us already.

[2:53:43] >> My question to you, Assistant city manager Sam,

[2:53:46] if I were to support -- here's what I want, bottom line.

[2:53:51] The chief building official.

[2:53:53] Like Mr. Pezzullo who's in the back

[2:53:54] is specific to Pembroke Pines.

[2:53:58] I do not want to change that.

[2:54:00] Now tell me what I'm voting on?

[2:54:05] >> C3, was about them serving -- >> I'm not on c3.

[2:54:12] >> We are on c3, right?

[2:54:15] >> Just to clarify, right now we are on c3.

[2:54:18] A lot of the conversation I think is more focused on E.

[2:54:24] >> C3 is yes on everything.

[2:54:27] >> C3 is specifically that are required positions cannot serve

[2:54:33] in that same role in another jurisdiction.

[2:54:37] Everyone said yes, so what is the issue?

[2:54:41] >> The other topic of E was brought up.

[2:54:45] >> Let's just focus on c3.

[2:54:47] All of our officials can only serve

[2:54:49] in that capacity in this city.

[2:54:51] >> The answer is yes by everybody.

[2:54:54] >> Does anyone eject?

[2:54:55] That was a yes.

[2:55:00] >> The motion is made.

[2:55:01] >> The motion is gone.

[2:55:03] >> The next one is c4.

[2:55:07] >> Did we vote on that?

[2:55:10] >> I seconded it.

[2:55:14] >> It is removed.

[2:55:15] It is gone.

[2:55:18] >> It can't be removed.

[2:55:19] >> You can pull it off.

[2:55:22] What would you like to do?

[2:55:25] >> Would you like to vote?

[2:55:30] >> There is a motion and a second on c3.

[2:55:31] Yes we will allow them to work in other jurisdictions and --

[2:55:36] >> It's the other way.

[2:55:40] >> Time off not on the clock.

[2:55:42] Not being paid time off.

[2:55:45] >> Mayor.

[2:55:51] >> On whatever it may be. (Indistinct)

[2:55:54] >> Commissioner, if I may.

[2:55:58] >> Hold on a second.

[2:56:00] All those in favor of the motion indicate

[2:56:03] by saying I. All those opposed to the motion

[2:56:06] indicate by saying no.

[2:56:08] The ayes have it.

[2:56:10] By that motion, we will allow employees of the vendor

[2:56:17] to work in other jurisdictions.

[2:56:19] Do you understand what vote was just taken?

[2:56:25] >> Only on time off?

[2:56:27] >> Did you understand your vote?

[2:56:30] >> One second.

[2:56:31] Hold on.

[2:56:32] As long as my motion, I seconded the motion.

[2:56:37] >> You don't have to vote -- >> Nobody talks me out of my vote

[2:56:43] anyways.

[2:56:44] The point here is, and I understand we went to C3

[2:56:47] and what we were discussing.

[2:56:49] Why I have confusion, C3 says, yes, yes, yes.

[2:56:56] All of them.

[2:56:59] Okay.

[2:57:00] I have indicated, I don't want a chief building

[2:57:04] official that does not work exclusively for the city.

[2:57:07] What I understood from my conversations,

[2:57:10] and that's why I also vote in the majority,

[2:57:12] because I can bring it back up for reconsideration,

[2:57:14] Robert's Rules of order.

[2:57:17] Therefore, was I not just voting on anyone but the chief building

[2:57:23] official?

[2:57:25] >> Mr.!

[2:57:26] With great reduction in the number of words,

[2:57:30] please answer Vice mayor's question as directly as you can.

[2:57:34] What does this item mean?

[2:57:37] >>, to provide the utmost clarity,

[2:57:40] the commissioner's motion brought in item from eight one

[2:57:45] into C. What I described to the commission was that we would

[2:57:50] have dedicated staff and our city.

[2:57:53] Our trade chiefs, building officials, the 18 positions

[2:57:56] and or 15 positions that are outlined here

[2:57:58] would be dedicated to our city.

[2:58:00] That's what this question asks.

[2:58:02] When you reference a three yes votes,

[2:58:04] it was having dedicated positions.

[2:58:06] What happened in the motion, was items from lunch breaks

[2:58:12] and everything else, discussed later, and question E,

[2:58:16] was brought in and blended.

[2:58:18] That's my confusion.

[2:58:20] >> We're not referring to e.

[2:58:22] >> I wanted to vote on c.

[2:58:24] And C said yes.

[2:58:26] >> But the thing is we weren't technically voting on C,

[2:58:28] we're voting on the motion.

[2:58:31] >> Correct.

[2:58:32] The motion was blended.

[2:58:34] >> You'll have to explain it to me.

[2:58:36] I'm getting dizzy.

[2:58:37] I want the chief building officials on the individuals

[2:58:40] to be specific to the city of Pembroke Pines.

[2:58:42] I'm also sympathetic to what Commissioner Goods said.

[2:58:45] There are changes coming whether we like it or not.

[2:58:48] Providing private provider and how we provide this service.

[2:58:51] With all due respect to everyone who's been here,

[2:58:54] Brooke Pines cannot continue to operate the way it has

[2:58:56] for the last several decades.

[2:58:58] Because outside of our control lies are changing and society is

[2:59:01] changing. -- laws are changing in society is changing.

[2:59:07] Mr. Not him specifically, but his position

[2:59:10] be for the city of Pembroke Pines.

[2:59:11] I don't want a chief building official

[2:59:13] saying I'm going to work in Weston today.

[2:59:16] I don't want that.

[2:59:17] However, I'm a semi-intelligent individual.

[2:59:19] The way that this was explained and how

[2:59:22] it got to where it got to come I voted yes

[2:59:25] to bring it up for reconsideration.

[2:59:26] If what I want is not actually what I vote on.

[2:59:29] Does that make sense now?

[2:59:33] >> Let's vote explicitly on what's written on C3.

[2:59:36] Let's tackle each one afterwards.

[2:59:39] >> Is that a motion for consideration,

[2:59:41] Commissioner Rodriguez paramedic

[2:59:43] >> I will second that motion.

[2:59:46] >> Any discussion on reconsideration.

[2:59:48] All those in favor say aye.

[2:59:50] Any opposed?

[2:59:51] That passes unanimously.

[2:59:54] Commissioner Rodriguez is recognized for motion C3.

[2:59:59] >> So I motion that RFP maintain the restrictions of the minimum

[3:00:03] required dedicated slash dedicated personnel shall be

[3:00:06] provided from providing building department services to other

[3:00:09] jurisdictions.

[3:00:11] >> Second to that motion?

[3:00:12] >> Seconding the motion.

[3:00:15] >> Any discussion?

[3:00:16] All those in favor say aye any opposed?

[3:00:18] Okay.

[3:00:19] That passes.

[3:00:21] C4.

[3:00:22] What was c4.

[3:00:27] >> Should the RFP maintain the required H minimum position with

[3:00:31] the exception of official shall be filled by separate dedicated

[3:00:34] individuals otherwise expressly approved in writing

[3:00:37] to the city's contract manager.

[3:00:40] >> One said yes, one said adept is necessary.

[3:00:44] >> This falls along the same line.

[3:00:46] The only line with the assistant city manager position is

[3:00:49] depending -- >> Official.

[3:00:52] >> Excuse me, official.

[3:00:55] >> We're not talking about Mr. Gomez are you.

[3:00:58] >> Depending on the option that's selected,

[3:00:59] option A or option B. Are assistant building official

[3:01:04] could also serve as a trade chief .

[3:01:08] That's a flexible position.

[3:01:11] >> Another jurisdiction or jurisdiction?

[3:01:14] >> Then this is just dedicated to the city.

[3:01:17] It matters on what option gets picked in the future, a or b.

[3:01:22] >> What is your recommendation?

[3:01:24] >> This is something we put in there and the commission asked

[3:01:27] for options.

[3:01:28] >> What is your recommendation?

[3:01:31] >> Yes.

[3:01:35] >> (Indistinct)

[3:01:36] >> Any.

[3:01:36] They do a great job.

[3:01:38] The auditors just told us.

[3:01:40] >> And one of the things were -- >>Mic, please.

[3:01:50] >> The reason I believe that I put adapt is necessary

[3:01:53] because you're going to wind up having to change.

[3:01:56] That you continue to put on here.

[3:01:58] That we're going to hold staff that's not necessary.

[3:02:01] And those staff hours are going to be built into the permit fees

[3:02:06] and white residents are going to have to pay those permit fees.

[3:02:11] >> Unless otherwise expressly approved in writing

[3:02:14] by the city's contract managers.

[3:02:20] If it's necessary for the contract manager

[3:02:23] should be able to deal with that.

[3:02:26] >> I'm just making it very clear that my opposition to this is I

[3:02:29] believe that some of these issues are going to a cost

[3:02:34] driver that's not necessary for my residents to have to pay

[3:02:37] for permit.

[3:02:39] >> I totally agree.

[3:02:42] >> Once the private providers come in we take a substantial

[3:02:46] amount of work off of the buildings.

[3:02:49] >> You'd be contract manager?

[3:02:52] >> As of today, I would be.

[3:02:55] >> I would encourage you to heed Commissioner good is saying

[3:03:00] because nobody wants to imagine that you would incur any more

[3:03:03] expense on anything than we absolutely have to.

[3:03:07] >> I think it's extremely important to understand.

[3:03:10] We currently have approximately 50 personnel

[3:03:13] in the building department.

[3:03:17] The flexibility that a private company serving as our building

[3:03:21] department provides comment that a person, that company,

[3:03:24] can make adjustments to those personnel.

[3:03:27] What we've identified in this proposal

[3:03:29] is that a certain amount of staff, minimum staff,

[3:03:32] is required.

[3:03:33] These are the professional staff that

[3:03:35] can shift clerks in and out.

[3:03:38] They can shift additional inspectors in and out.

[3:03:40] This is the minimum amount of staff,

[3:03:43] with certain credentials, that we need to operate the building

[3:03:48] department.

[3:03:49] Considering changes in private provider, Et-cetera.

[3:03:54] We have not put in here that I need

[3:03:57] to have the same 40 staff paramedic I

[3:03:59] know that gets missed.

[3:04:01] I completely understand what the commission is going

[3:04:04] and there's a change.

[3:04:06] I know it's difficult to grasp, because you don't touch it

[3:04:09] every day.

[3:04:09] And I apologize for my passion when it comes to this.

[3:04:12] We see the ebbs and flows of plus or -4000 permits.

[3:04:16] If the permits go down, there's still

[3:04:18] work to be done on private provider.

[3:04:21] This is the minimum.

[3:04:22] I hope that is clear.

[3:04:24] I apologize.

[3:04:26] >> I have to tell you that even in baseball,

[3:04:29] tight goes to the runner.

[3:04:32] C-4, can somebody make motion with the language

[3:04:35] consistent with C four.

[3:04:37] >> I make the motion.

[3:04:39] >> That's moved by Commissioner Rodriguez.

[3:04:41] Is there a second?

[3:04:43] Seconded by the vice mayor.

[3:04:46] Any further discussion on C4?

[3:04:48] All those in favor say aye.

[3:04:50] Any opposed?

[3:04:51] That passes unanimously.

[3:04:54] C five, let's walk through C five.

[3:04:57] Should the RFP maintain the requirements that staff

[3:05:02] fulfilling minimum positions shall remain assigned

[3:05:06] to designated disciplines, while allowing an appropriately

[3:05:11] qualified and certified employee to provide limited

[3:05:14] and temporaries -- who keeps moving this.

[3:05:18] I can't read it if you move it.

[3:05:22] Temporary assistance and another discipline

[3:05:24] with the written approval of the city's contract manager.

[3:05:28] Explain what that means.

[3:05:30] >> This came up during their workshop.

[3:05:32] Again, it was to allow flexibility.

[3:05:36] Commissioner good come I believe you kind of allude to this.

[3:05:39] That if somebody had different credentials,

[3:05:42] could they fill that role on a temporary basis and fill in?

[3:05:45] Again, the reason we're here is because we

[3:05:50] heard a bunch of things.

[3:05:51] We're trying to hone in, we're in agreement on this end.

[3:05:55] >> Anyone wants to make a motion as written?

[3:05:58] >> I don't think we need to make motions.

[3:06:00] I think there would be consensus for some of these.

[3:06:03] >> I want to make sure that we're not jumping over at.

[3:06:06] Does anyone object?

[3:06:08] >> I have a question.

[3:06:10] If the same, yes, keep this.

[3:06:13] I'm trying to land these planes here.

[3:06:15] I'm sympathetic to what Commissioner Good is saying.

[3:06:19] I also understand what you're trying to get at.

[3:06:23] However, there may need to be adaptation.

[3:06:25] That's what we're trying to do.

[3:06:28] >> That's why it says -- >> -- it will explicitly say that.

[3:06:34] >> It literally says, while allowing provide --

[3:06:39] with their written approval of the city's contract manager.

[3:06:44] Their flexibility is in the link.

[3:06:47] >> As long as it's also in the RFP and also followed and not

[3:06:50] just here for us.

[3:06:55] >> Does anyone object to c5?

[3:06:56] That gets done.

[3:06:58] Now we are on c6.

[3:07:02] Mr. City attorney.

[3:07:05] Is that Mr. City manager.

[3:07:09] >> RFP the requirement that cross-disciplinary assistance

[3:07:13] may not be used to count what individual is filling two

[3:07:15] or more minimum required positions.

[3:07:17] Eliminate a required position or otherwise reduce

[3:07:20] applicable staffing levels.

[3:07:23] >> And why does this make sense?

[3:07:25] >> Mayor, I'm going to use as my reference.

[3:07:27] If you have the credentials to be the chief building officials

[3:07:32] -- excuse me, check that.

[3:07:34] Credentials to be chief structural and a chief plumbing.

[3:07:38] You cannot serve into those two roles at the same time,

[3:07:41] except a temporary situation where we're transitioning

[3:07:44] or something like that.

[3:07:45] Although it's very rare that someone

[3:07:47] has all these credentials.

[3:07:48] Again, staff's preference is this

[3:07:51] is only on a temporary basis, not

[3:07:53] on a permanent basis, so that our minimum capacity,

[3:07:56] minimum roles.

[3:07:58] >> Anybody have objection to that?

[3:08:00] >> My question would be if private providers come

[3:08:02] in and our work gets slashed in half.

[3:08:05] That would be an exaggeration or something like that.

[3:08:09] Our work gets slashed in half.

[3:08:11] Would we still all agree that only one person per role?

[3:08:16] >> Commissioner, if I could clarify.

[3:08:17] I don't know how these companies are

[3:08:20] going to bid on this are going to run their businesses.

[3:08:22] If a private provider comes in they're

[3:08:24] no longer going to provide the extra inspectors,

[3:08:27] extra plant reviewers.

[3:08:28] Chiefs and dedicated roles that were requesting,

[3:08:32] again, are the minimum.

[3:08:34] They will make cuts as necessary.

[3:08:36] That's what they do.

[3:08:38] >> The extras.

[3:08:39] They're saying it wouldn't be of the minimum staffing.

[3:08:41] Correct?

[3:08:43] >> Correct.

[3:08:44] That makes sense.

[3:08:47] >> We have disciplines of structural electrical mechanical

[3:08:49] and plumbing.

[3:08:50] Of the four, mechanical and plumbing

[3:08:52] would generally be the closest that would bind together.

[3:08:55] To have a structural and plumbing,

[3:08:58] those are two different trade schools.

[3:09:00] That doesn't generally happen in the industry.

[3:09:03] You can see a mechanical and plumbing go together.

[3:09:07] But that's about the extent of it.

[3:09:12] >> Can I ask a question.

[3:09:13] >> Yes, sir.

[3:09:15] >> In the private provider somebody qualified for all

[3:09:18] the disciplines, can they sign all?

[3:09:21] >> That would be an engineer.

[3:09:24] >> If a private provider is qualified in all

[3:09:27] the disciplines, would they be able to sign for each one

[3:09:30] of those disciplines?

[3:09:32] >> That is my understanding.

[3:09:34] >> Why would we be different than the real world business out

[3:09:37] there?

[3:09:40] >> Commissioner, in all fairness,

[3:09:42] use the word private provider, individual typically

[3:09:46] doesn't work in that role.

[3:09:48] >> Is the company.

[3:09:50] >> They may have all those disciplines within their.

[3:09:54] [Cross-talk]

[3:09:55] >> Ask you a question.

[3:09:56] Can the private provider be the same person signing

[3:09:58] for all disciplines.

[3:10:00] >> You're implying that the private provider is one person.

[3:10:03] Not a private provider company.

[3:10:06] >> Let's take it to the individual.

[3:10:07] Can the individual come if they're

[3:10:10] qualified in each discipline, can they

[3:10:12] sign for each and every >> That is my understanding.

[3:10:17] >> If they have all four, they're probably not doing

[3:10:19] the kind of work.

[3:10:20] They're probably working for NASA.

[3:10:24] >> You're going to have to pay quite the salary for such

[3:10:27] a capable person, I imagine.

[3:10:31] >> Whoa whoa whoa.

[3:10:33] So 25 years and the utility service,

[3:10:36] 25 years and the inspection service.

[3:10:38] I helped write the law in the state of Florida.

[3:10:41] I know exactly what it takes for all four disciplines.

[3:10:44] And the amount of degrees and trade school and all this stuff.

[3:10:50] It is not common.

[3:10:51] It is not common to have an individual holding

[3:10:57] four certificates.

[3:10:58] The likelihood that the city of Pembroke Pines

[3:11:02] would even have one.

[3:11:03] We don't have one person in this current setup

[3:11:06] that we have they're holding all four.

[3:11:08] Not one.

[3:11:11] >> Okay.

[3:11:12] >> I purposely covered the names.

[3:11:14] So I don't see who wrote what.

[3:11:16] I'm with whoever is in the third book providing the option

[3:11:20] that the workload efficiency and the managing the workload

[3:11:23] gets changed.

[3:11:23] The vendor would have the option to prevent a failed plan

[3:11:26] to reduce staffing.

[3:11:28] >> Commissioners Rodriguez.

[3:11:30] >> I don't want to know.

[3:11:31] I'm covering the names on purpose.

[3:11:33] Whoever that is.

[3:11:35] >> It's public record.

[3:11:37] >> Built into most of this is obviously the ability for all

[3:11:41] of us.

[3:11:42] Whether the vendor comes forward,

[3:11:44] to speak to the contract manager.

[3:11:47] Eventually, somebody whether on our end or the contractor

[3:11:51] or the vendor, could come in and say actually we

[3:11:54] have this one overachiever.

[3:11:56] They can do all these things.

[3:11:57] Can we switch that?

[3:11:59] At some point that could come up.

[3:12:01] I just want to state that flexibility.

[3:12:04] >> I think we can work that into the motion.

[3:12:08] >> Mayor, this is just the RFP.

[3:12:12] >> We're trying to approve language for you.

[3:12:15] >> We can add or approve as approved by the contract

[3:12:20] manager.

[3:12:21] >> I'm trying get that approved.

[3:12:23] >> No, that is fine.

[3:12:25] Allowing whatever's on their is fine as a consensus.

[3:12:30] >> C6 is written with Commissioner Rodriguez comment.

[3:12:34] Any objection to that?

[3:12:35] That one is cleared.

[3:12:38] D1 .

[3:12:45] >> Mayor, this item -- read it -- >> Read it first.

[3:12:54] >> The proposal initially talked about during the first year

[3:12:58] paramedic no changes within the first year.

[3:13:01] This is specific to the required positions.

[3:13:06] Not the whole staff.

[3:13:09] They control the rest of the staff.

[3:13:11] The required 18 or 15 positions.

[3:13:14] The staff's recommendation was not in the first year,

[3:13:17] they have to have year in the system understanding

[3:13:19] how it works and operates before they just immediately get rid

[3:13:22] of, let's call it not the chiefs, but some lower

[3:13:24] positions.

[3:13:26] >> That's why I wrote what I wrote.

[3:13:27] It should be up to the contract.

[3:13:30] >> I still don't want to know who wrote what.

[3:13:32] I still think setting a year with a dynamics of the industry

[3:13:36] and how everything changes.

[3:13:38] I wouldn't stick our feet in concrete.

[3:13:41] There's 365 days.

[3:13:43] >> Is there consensus for that to be negotiated with

[3:13:46] the contract manager, instead of a timeline?

[3:13:50] >> I agree to it.

[3:13:52] >> Sounds good.

[3:13:53] >> Anybody disagree?

[3:13:55] D is agreed to.

[3:13:56] E1.

[3:13:58] >> What restrictions should apply to private provider work

[3:14:00] performed by the contractor personnel assigned to the city?

[3:14:05] >> No.

[3:14:06] I believe this is where Commissioner Goode was coming in

[3:14:10] with time off.

[3:14:11] We provide a couple options here.

[3:14:15] >> I don't want people who we pay for doing that work.

[3:14:18] I want them working for us and that is it.

[3:14:20] That's the cleanest way for the city of Pembroke Pines.

[3:14:23] This has been troublesome.

[3:14:28] And embarrassing and ECG context.

[3:14:32] I don't want that drifting away.

[3:14:34] I want them to work for us.

[3:14:36] For as long as they can.

[3:14:37] If the world changes, we can work it out again.

[3:14:39] As long as we have a hand in it, I want them working for us.

[3:14:44] >> One of the options here, is to expand -- >> --

[3:14:52] >> Work performed by the contractor personnel assigned

[3:14:55] to the city Monday through Friday.

[3:14:56] Our current vendor does inspections on Fridays.

[3:15:00] If they're scheduled.

[3:15:02] This would come theoretically, if one of those personnel

[3:15:06] does private provider work on a weekend, that's

[3:15:08] one of the options that's provided here.

[3:15:11] The big issue is it's not happening Monday through Friday,

[3:15:14] during business hours.

[3:15:16] Staff initially brought this item forward.

[3:15:18] There was concern in a city vehicle,

[3:15:21] someone could fly down in another city adjacent to us

[3:15:24] and provide services.

[3:15:25] It was brought up to the commission,

[3:15:27] I think it was a one mile radius.

[3:15:28] There was a little conversation around that.

[3:15:31] We feel that we brought something back in these options.

[3:15:35] Monday through Friday during those working hours,

[3:15:38] that could be accomplished and still

[3:15:40] allow those people to do things on their own

[3:15:41] to make additional money.

[3:15:43] To do whatever they need to do.

[3:15:45] >> I'm going to go further with that, Mr. Stamm,

[3:15:48] our building stop at 6 p.m..

[3:15:51] There's nothing proving after six.

[3:15:52] There's nothing prohibiting Saturdays and Sundays.

[3:15:55] I think this is the best option to be

[3:15:58] able to adapt to the changing world of the private provider.

[3:16:03] >> Would that be a B or C?

[3:16:05] >> I believe it would be b.

[3:16:08] >> B says Monday through Friday.

[3:16:11] >> During city business >> You would add during city business

[3:16:15] hours.

[3:16:16] >> I can live with city business hours.

[3:16:20] >> What city business hours is not Friday.

[3:16:23] >> 7 to 6.

[3:16:26] >> I think we saying, Commissioner Rodriguez,

[3:16:29] is city business hours including Friday.

[3:16:32] >> Is that the difference between A and B?

[3:16:36] That's city working hours, technically

[3:16:40] city is not open on Friday.

[3:16:42] >> But department operates on Friday.

[3:16:44] Matter of fact, Mr. Stamm works there every Friday.

[3:16:48] >> It would be more the consensus of Monday to >> 7 to 6

[3:16:54] p.m..

[3:16:55] >> Adding the time frame.

[3:16:56] >>, staff has no issue with that.

[3:17:03] >> Consensus is 7 to 6, Monday through Friday.

[3:17:05] 7 to 6 Monday through Friday.

[3:17:09] Monday through Friday, 7 to 6.

[3:17:11] Anybody object?

[3:17:13] >> I still get the time off.

[3:17:15] There would be consensus otherwise.

[3:17:16] You guys can go ahead.

[3:17:19] >> We are good.

[3:17:20] The next one is what?

[3:17:22] F one.

[3:17:26] >> For reference, the current draft has two alternative

[3:17:28] leadership models: Option a, under chief building official

[3:17:33] and Building Department Operations Manager.

[3:17:36] Option B, under which positions are employed directly

[3:17:39] by the >> Private provider.

[3:17:44] I do want to get too deep into it.

[3:17:46] With the changing world, the private provider and avoiding

[3:17:49] conflict.

[3:17:50] Mr. Stem, what would be the best way forward?

[3:17:56] >> I think it can go either way.

[3:17:57] I think it's going to be a preference on the commissioner's

[3:18:00] end.

[3:18:01] Whether they want it together or to positions.

[3:18:04] We've heard different ideas come from the commission on how

[3:18:08] this can >> To clarify, we wouldn't be deciding this now.

[3:18:13] If we decide to go only with option B --

[3:18:17] we would modify the RFP.

[3:18:20] >> Modify the RFP and go with that.

[3:18:22] The reason I kept A and B, is to gather that information

[3:18:26] from the possible bidders and make a decision later.

[3:18:30] That was my preference.

[3:18:32] At least on this paper, I don't see that as a consensus.

[3:18:37] I wanted to hear from the rest of you who weren't

[3:18:39] able to complete the survey.

[3:18:43] >> Commissioner Rodriguez, I think if I may come at you are

[3:18:48] saying put it out to bid with both options.

[3:18:54] The winning bidder would be more of a contractual commitment

[3:18:57] to which way they would go?

[3:19:00] >> They would go.

[3:19:01] What we both decide would be best for the city.

[3:19:05] >> I think we should decide it upfront.

[3:19:07] >> I think that's the whole point behind it.

[3:19:09] Not putting in both.

[3:19:13] Both one or the other.

[3:19:18] We should have building official employed

[3:19:22] by the city of Pembroke Pines dedicated to the city.

[3:19:26] Don't even put it in the bid.

[3:19:29] That way it keeps it nice and clean for the review process.

[3:19:32] Just like the mayor said, like you said Commissioner Rodriguez,

[3:19:38] let's just make that decision.

[3:19:40] >> I can live with it.

[3:19:43] >> I'm not ready to make the decision right now.

[3:19:45] The two people who did not participate in the survey

[3:19:48] can give more context where their consensus is there.

[3:19:52] >> I was on the phone last time.

[3:19:53] This is my concern about the in-house.

[3:19:58] The city administration can change.

[3:20:02] If that changes, so does the entire staff.

[3:20:07] By having the vendor provide the CBO,

[3:20:11] it gives us stability regardless of what happens

[3:20:16] at the administration level.

[3:20:20] >> What if the person who the vendor chooses also happens

[3:20:23] to retire?

[3:20:24] So you come across the same issue.

[3:20:28] >> It's a matter of having in-house management that can be

[3:20:32] changed by circumstances.

[3:20:35] Whether it be through policy change of the commission.

[3:20:39] A retirement.

[3:20:41] We know.

[3:20:42] We have a general idea that there's probably

[3:20:47] going to be some evolution of what the city administration is

[3:20:52] going to look like before a contract

[3:20:54] like this comes up for renewal.

[3:20:56] Because of the length of the contract.

[3:21:01] I believe it would serve the public well.

[3:21:08] Having a chief building official not worrying

[3:21:10] if they're going to be able to keep their job if there's

[3:21:12] a change in management within the city of Pembroke Pines.

[3:21:32] >>

[3:21:51] >>

[3:21:52] >> It's not that it hasn't worked the way we've had it.

[3:21:55] But the option of having a CBO that answers

[3:22:00] directly to the city and is our employee.

[3:22:03] Offers the stronger internal control.

[3:22:08] >> The building department operations manager I feel

[3:22:12] strongly.

[3:22:12] I said this with no disrespect to Mr. Stamm.

[3:22:17] I think there needs to be a building official

[3:22:22] industry individual in between the city administration.

[3:22:28] So we can still have our in-house go to.

[3:22:32] Overseeing the operations.

[3:22:35] That's the building operations manager.

[3:22:37] Not the CBO.

[3:22:39] Mayor, I know it's a little quirky.

[3:22:42] We can have the stability of a CBO.

[3:22:46] >> It's too many people.

[3:22:49] It doesn't achieve anything.

[3:22:52] If you're an employee and you've got a chief CBO who

[3:22:56] is a city employee and then you've

[3:22:58] got an assistant city manager that's the contract manager.

[3:23:02] Assistant city manager knows enough,

[3:23:05] but doesn't have to be the one who approves the permits.

[3:23:08] He only needs to do is manage the contract.

[3:23:11] That is a different discipline.

[3:23:14] That's a different skill.

[3:23:16] I'm okay.

[3:23:18] Commissioner good has been saying for years

[3:23:21] that he's been uncomfortable with this setup.

[3:23:24] And in fairness, it's the only department head

[3:23:27] that we have that doesn't answer directly to us.

[3:23:30] I can't think of another one.

[3:23:34] If we want to move in the direction of having

[3:23:39] a CBO who's a city employee.

[3:23:43] That's fine by me.

[3:23:45] >> Would that be defined by city employee or FCS?

[3:23:49] >> I don't know.

[3:23:51] >> It's important.

[3:23:53] Because FCS, c employee.

[3:23:56] Employee contract at will.

[3:24:04] >> (Indistinct)

[3:24:04] >> All department directors are at will.

[3:24:10] >> I just need clarification.

[3:24:12] I was in house last year.

[3:24:14] I was saying this was a position that I had last October.

[3:24:19] To bring it in house.

[3:24:21] Is it a consensus of the commission

[3:24:23] that we want in-house?

[3:24:25] >> I don't have a problem with it.

[3:24:28] >> I don't have an issue with it.

[3:24:30] I'd like at a later date be briefed

[3:24:32] on liability issues regarding having

[3:24:34] that individual as an employee.

[3:24:37] I do not have a problem.

[3:24:38] It sounds like there's >> Probably less liability

[3:24:43] than an employee.

[3:24:44] >> Hence why I want to understand later.

[3:24:47] >> Mayor, this is for option B is two positions.

[3:24:52] It's the building official.

[3:24:58] >> Option A is do both.

[3:24:59] Option B was just to do -- >> Option A is contractor provides

[3:25:05] all positions.

[3:25:06] Option B is there's a chief building official.

[3:25:10] Also common operation manager.

[3:25:14] I want to make sure it's clear.

[3:25:16] I know we only talked about one position.

[3:25:19] There's two positions.

[3:25:22] >> If you do not want additional staff,

[3:25:24] the operational manager has to get pulled out of this thing.

[3:25:29] >> We're talking about somebody between the CBO

[3:25:32] and the assistant city manager.

[3:25:35] This is someone below the >> That's

[3:25:40] where the difference between F1 and F2 is.

[3:25:42] >> F is the second part of the.

[3:25:46] >> F2, I think -- >> I'm blending.

[3:25:51] >> F1 is simply the internal, external for the RFP or we

[3:25:56] provide both options.

[3:25:58] It looks like we are going with simply option B. In the RFP

[3:26:04] and consequently as the vendor only having the possibility.

[3:26:10] >> Is Commissioner good on the building department operations

[3:26:12] manager.

[3:26:14] >> I think that's perfectly fine.

[3:26:15] Does that role right now.

[3:26:19] >> Currently, miss Cheryl, is in a role as we laid this out.

[3:26:23] A lot of what she does is in terms of public records.

[3:26:30] >> The city as well as the operations.

[3:26:34] >> I'm putting a name with a face.

[3:26:41] >> If we bring it in-house, we need the operations person.

[3:26:44] >> Again, the design of this when we heard from

[3:26:47] the commission there may be an interest in having a bidding

[3:26:49] official work for the city.

[3:26:52] The building official typically works

[3:26:53] with our trade chiefs and our inspectors

[3:26:56] and that type of staff.

[3:26:58] The operations manager deals with public records.

[3:27:00] Deals with housing stuff.

[3:27:03] And technicians.

[3:27:05] >> That was my understanding on my purpose.

[3:27:07] I thought it would be duplicative.

[3:27:09] For clarity, you don't believe it would be duplicative even

[3:27:12] if we bring someone in-house to have the operations person's.

[3:27:16] >> Correct.

[3:27:17] >> This would be the third option.

[3:27:20] The third selection.

[3:27:24] >> I'm hearing a consensus for chief building official

[3:27:28] and the buildings department operation manager to be Pines

[3:27:32] employees.

[3:27:32] And not FCS.

[3:27:34] It's actually Pines employee.

[3:27:36] That's correct.

[3:27:37] Is there an objection?

[3:27:39] F1 is agreed to.

[3:27:43] >> Mayor, F2 was department head over those items.

[3:27:51] >> Oh come okay.

[3:27:52] >> That's what I was saying was duplicative.

[3:27:54] If we bring it in-house, we would need someone.

[3:27:56] >> Correct.

[3:27:58] >> That's the same person.

[3:28:00] >> So we can dispense of that one.

[3:28:02] >> G1.

[3:28:04] I don't understand what the issue is with transition.

[3:28:09] If you need a transition, I believe

[3:28:11] it should be negotiated when the transition need arises.

[3:28:14] I don't see the need to talk about a transition

[3:28:17] in a proposal.

[3:28:19] Other than to put the requirement in.

[3:28:21] That there shall be a transition negotiated between company

[3:28:25] and the contract manager.

[3:28:29] >> Talking in and out for that one?

[3:28:32] >> Any transition.

[3:28:34] >> At least some defined.

[3:28:37] There is no transition.

[3:28:39] >> You can say 180 days or less.

[3:28:42] Depending on what the commission says.

[3:28:47] >> I thought it was historical, as far as --

[3:28:51] I didn't see it that way.

[3:28:54] On this paper, Commissioner good, I didn't see it this way.

[3:28:58] I didn't see it this way in the workshop.

[3:29:00] What I'm looking at is , you have companies who have

[3:29:07] participated in a transition process in the past.

[3:29:11] The document of that transition process

[3:29:14] went, so that staff can verify the accuracy

[3:29:18] of what is submitted.

[3:29:20] Not what you're going to do.

[3:29:22] What you're going to do is a contractual commitment.

[3:29:24] This is a historical -- am I off?

[3:29:30] >> You're blending with what the second one is talking about.

[3:29:33] The historical.

[3:29:35] >> Commissioner, what we did is -- >> Point taken.

[3:29:39] I'm blending again.

[3:29:42] >> The idea that we put in the RFP is that the vendor should

[3:29:46] have to provide a plan transition and transition out.

[3:29:50] And then the historical perspective that goes in there.

[3:29:52] The plan is going to be finally negotiated

[3:29:55] with selected bidders.

[3:29:56] We separate the questions to help give you some clarity

[3:29:59] on how to move through this.

[3:30:01] >> Do we need g1, g2 enough?

[3:30:03] I mean it's an evaluation committee.

[3:30:06] >> We left it up to the commission.

[3:30:08] We heard conflicts during the discussion.

[3:30:11] >> Is she even necessary to be put in the bid?

[3:30:15] >> That's what the mayor is saying.

[3:30:17] >> I don't think so.

[3:30:18] I think you can say that in the event of termination

[3:30:23] for convenience, that a transition shall be negotiated

[3:30:30] without City commission approval,

[3:30:32] not exceeding 180 days.

[3:30:35] >> I can agree on that one.

[3:30:36] That we can just take off g1.

[3:30:41] >> I don't know.

[3:30:42] Allow me to say my piece.

[3:30:46] >> Go ahead.

[3:30:47] >> I think we need to have some form of transition plan out

[3:30:51] prior to a contract being signed and executed.

[3:30:57] Then it's terms of the agreement that requires the contractor

[3:31:03] to do certain things.

[3:31:05] Because if they're leaving, they're

[3:31:07] not going to negotiate your best interests.

[3:31:10] >> I'm with Commissioner good for the record.

[3:31:13] >> What do you want said?

[3:31:17] You've got to come up with terms for transition out.

[3:31:21] >> In terms of transition out, then the transition is

[3:31:25] negotiated in the contract.

[3:31:28] >> If I could, the existing vendor is the only one required,

[3:31:32] if they bid -- >> Any negotiator would establish their transition

[3:31:38] out terms.

[3:31:41] >> Out for both.

[3:31:44] >> Not the current out. >> Fair enough.

[3:31:51] >> (Indistinct)

[3:31:52] >> I think we hit a home run on that one.

[3:31:54] >> Agreed.

[3:31:56] G2.

[3:31:57] I think we covered it.

[3:32:00] >> This is the second part.

[3:32:02] Should the proposals be required to provide examples

[3:32:06] of transition out plans based on their experience

[3:32:08] and similar contracts.

[3:32:09] This is historical practice.

[3:32:11] If they left and joined another city,

[3:32:14] should they be required to provide us

[3:32:16] how those transition worked?

[3:32:20] >> I don't think that's a question I would ask them.

[3:32:25] I agree with Commissioner good.

[3:32:28] We should ask that of the city.

[3:32:31] I don't see this as being a need.

[3:32:34] Does anyone disagree?

[3:32:36] Okay.

[3:32:36] H1A.

[3:32:37] We are almost there.

[3:32:40] >> During the workshop, it was discussed that we should have

[3:32:43] possible outside members of the evaluation committee.

[3:32:47] This first question is, how many members

[3:32:49] should serve on the evaluation committee?

[3:32:52] Typically, retain five members.

[3:32:54] There was discussion about asking possible outside members.

[3:32:57] We're asking, one, for the total number of people that

[3:33:01] should serve on the committee.

[3:33:03] >> I'm going to say this.

[3:33:05] It doesn't matter.

[3:33:06] I think it should be an odd number.

[3:33:08] It doesn't matter to me whether it is 5 or 7.

[3:33:11] I don't like the idea of bringing people

[3:33:14] in from outside the city.

[3:33:16] I think that is not good form.

[3:33:22] I would not be able to support that.

[3:33:25] I does it matter to me whether it's 5 or 7.

[3:33:31] I think six makes it complicated for math.

[3:33:36] >> So that is just H1A.

[3:33:39] That's just how many numbers.

[3:33:41] Can we say how many numbers we'd like?

[3:33:44] I agree it should be an odd number.

[3:33:52] >> Mr. Gomes, we spoke about this earlier today.

[3:33:56] Large bids like this , how many members have historically under

[3:34:03] your leadership have served on committees?

[3:34:05] What is the appropriate number?

[3:34:08] >> The standard is five evaluators.

[3:34:11] >> Why would we break from tradition and risk a bid

[3:34:14] protest?

[3:34:16] >> I think the question and the reason they put in the -- >> --

[3:34:22] the commissioner, would be a break from tradition.

[3:34:25] >> The reasons the options were given as alternatives was

[3:34:28] because Commissioner good mentioned adding additional

[3:34:31] people from outside the city.

[3:34:34] >> Basically, H1A could be a blended discussion.

[3:34:38] Because that was there, we had to determine

[3:34:41] the number of members.

[3:34:42] Then see if we're going to bring someone from the outside.

[3:34:48] >> I'd say leave it at five.

[3:34:50] If the decision falls to bring outside people, then seven.

[3:34:59] >> You would take up H one b first.

[3:35:05] >> Let's decide how many people to bring from the outside

[3:35:07] and then decide on the number of.

[3:35:09] >> I think it should be done.

[3:35:10] I think it's bad form.

[3:35:12] I can't support it.

[3:35:14] >> I think two people from the outside.

[3:35:17] >> I think we need some outside.

[3:35:19] This has a long term contract.

[3:35:22] It's got a lot of relationships.

[3:35:25] >> For that reason I am good.

[3:35:27] I think we need to define if you're

[3:35:29] going to bring two from the outside and what they look like.

[3:35:34] >> Would they want to get paid?

[3:35:36] >> No.

[3:35:41] >> (Indistinct)

[3:35:42] >> So we're going to go out for volunteers.

[3:35:45] >> Professional Curdy city to city.

[3:35:48] >> I sat on municipals in Miami dade County,

[3:35:52] when I was a comms director from the county.

[3:35:56] >> In your day, I appreciate that one. (Laughs)

[3:36:03] >> You're never in public relations.

[3:36:05] >> That's why you never got a call.

[3:36:06] >> You never got a call.

[3:36:09] >> I'm good with commissioners good and Rodriguez on it.

[3:36:13] >> I'm uncomfortable going outside for the mere purpose

[3:36:18] of it was mentioned during the workshop of corn.

[3:36:23] I have a general sense of what companies may or may not

[3:36:30] be interested in bidding with the city of Pembroke Pines.

[3:36:34] Those organizations have served on board.

[3:36:38] There are some deep divides amongst industry.

[3:36:46] We are not asking six jurors to say if someone's guilty

[3:36:52] or not guilty in a peer review.

[3:36:54] This is not a peer review.

[3:36:57] I do not know how we avoid the potential conflict or the optics

[3:37:01] of potential conflict.

[3:37:03] If we go outside.

[3:37:05] >> I agree with you.

[3:37:06] How about if the other two are retired contractors?

[3:37:10] >> They can have a bad experience with one potential

[3:37:12] vendor.

[3:37:13] Listen, I thought the idea and listening to the workshop,

[3:37:18] I thought really hard about it.

[3:37:20] I just did not know how you get past one.

[3:37:25] How do we even put it out there?

[3:37:28] The mere fact, I mean, we are looking

[3:37:33] for people who just brings a lack of control of a process.

[3:37:40] It breaks us from nontraditional.

[3:37:42] So Mr. Gomes, and anticipating this as a possibility,

[3:37:51] and we spoke about this.

[3:37:53] Have we ever gone outside on the committee for someone --

[3:37:58] has an individual ever served on a committee who never worked

[3:38:02] here before?

[3:38:03] >> Not in my time.

[3:38:06] >> Or mine.

[3:38:08] >> It happens all the time in government.

[3:38:11] >> It happens all the time, and number two,

[3:38:13] I'm going to flip it on its head.

[3:38:15] I'm going to say that we've had the same vendor for 17 years.

[3:38:18] And we haven't changed your evaluation process.

[3:38:21] Optics matter.

[3:38:22] From my perspective, I do think it's not

[3:38:27] unusual to have someone from the outside.

[3:38:30] Like I said, I sat on dozens of them

[3:38:32] in Dade County for municipalities.

[3:38:34] Doral had me come in to interview candidates

[3:38:37] for their chief communications officer.

[3:38:39] City of Miami.

[3:38:41] Etc..

[3:38:41] Just because we haven't done it, doesn't mean it's bad form.

[3:38:46] It's routine.

[3:38:48] >> Isn't there cities and a lot of cities have internal bidding

[3:38:54] departments.

[3:38:54] So not having worked with any of the vendors at some point.

[3:38:59] >> And I stand for the record, commissioners the follow up

[3:39:05] questions to deal with credentials.

[3:39:08] When this was proposed, we specifically talked about Boral

[3:39:11] and we talked about other things.

[3:39:13] Identifying which credentials is going

[3:39:15] to be a very challenging thing and we bring this up

[3:39:18] only because this is a very small

[3:39:19] and the building department is a very small world.

[3:39:22] It can't be smaller than public relations.

[3:39:24] That's all I'm gonna say.

[3:39:26] They jump ships.

[3:39:27] When we're out to bid in 2009, there was three.

[3:39:32] >> I've been on 90% of what you proposed on.

[3:39:35] >> I think it's going to be difficult.

[3:39:38] >> So I'm going to ask, can we get around seven members and two

[3:39:42] from the outside?

[3:39:44] >> Yes.

[3:39:45] >> I agree.

[3:39:46] >> I thought you meant five total members.

[3:39:50] Seven.

[3:39:51] >> Seven, with two of them from the outside.

[3:39:55] >> Nine is too many.

[3:39:57] >> Seven members with two from the outside.

[3:40:00] Are we good?

[3:40:02] I am channeling my doctor Phil.

[3:40:06] >> Mayor for clarity.

[3:40:11] Seven and two is 9 or 7 total?

[3:40:14] >> Two of them are from the outside.

[3:40:17] >> Mayor, how do we identify credentials?

[3:40:22] Staff would want to avoid anybody

[3:40:25] avoid working in the building department world.

[3:40:28] Outside of those to try to avoid conflicts that we just

[3:40:31] can't see on a regular.

[3:40:33] >> Attend lookback period.

[3:40:36] >> Do the best you can.

[3:40:38] The City Commission.

[3:40:39] Work with attorney and figure it out.

[3:40:41] >> We believe in you, Mike.

[3:40:45] >> I appreciate the confidence.

[3:40:48] >> H4.

[3:40:51] >> H3 and h4.

[3:40:54] >> May I say are you comfortable with the direction given

[3:40:57] the staff.

[3:40:59] Ultimately double

[3:41:02] >> I'm listening.

[3:41:04] >> Ultimately, the selection process for the two outside is

[3:41:06] going to be selected by OMA.

[3:41:08] Mr. Gomes, City manager.

[3:41:11] Who is doing the selection process of the outside?

[3:41:16] >> May I respond?

[3:41:18] >> Are you asking who would select the two outside that

[3:41:20] would be joined by the insiders?

[3:41:22] >> Yes.

[3:41:24] >> The manager.

[3:41:26] >> Same manager.

[3:41:27] >> Same manager have to validate the appointment.

[3:41:30] Obviously we have some legal role

[3:41:33] in the context of who's hiring.

[3:41:35] >> Looking for people who may want to serve in the capacity

[3:41:38] of a selection committee.

[3:41:39] How do you go about doing that, from a legal standpoint?

[3:41:44] >> From a legal standpoint.

[3:41:47] From a legal standpoint, I'm asking the city attorney,

[3:41:51] how do we go about doing that?

[3:41:54] >> Manager through the hospices of those that work within

[3:41:57] the department of that administration.

[3:41:59] Can put out some form of document

[3:42:01] soliciting the availability of the parties and persons that

[3:42:04] would be available to serve in this capacity.

[3:42:06] As volunteers, not a paid position.

[3:42:09] >> All right.

[3:42:10] Okay.

[3:42:11] >> Mayor, to the extent possible to make sure that the method

[3:42:15] of requesting assistance, doesn't rarely cause a conflict.

[3:42:21] >> If, God forbid, we're unable to fill or have any interest

[3:42:26] in that role, what happens?

[3:42:31] >> You go back to five.

[3:42:32] That's h4.

[3:42:34] >> Is that a consensus of the commission,

[3:42:36] if the positions can't be filled?

[3:42:38] Is it default back?

[3:42:41] >> That's the question h4.

[3:42:42] That was my response.

[3:42:44] If you can't find these other two people, you go back to five.

[3:42:48] You move it along.

[3:42:50] >> I can live with that.

[3:42:56] >> On the document, I disagree.

[3:42:58] >> If you can't find them, you move on.

[3:43:01] Any problem with that?

[3:43:03] >> I disagree.

[3:43:05] You guys can continue.

[3:43:07] >> H four is done.

[3:43:10] I one.

[3:43:11] What communication restrictions should

[3:43:13] apply to the members of the city Commission?

[3:43:15] I don't know why this is in here?

[3:43:17] We already have an ordinance.

[3:43:19] >> I asked for a code of silence.

[3:43:22] I asked for it in the workshop.

[3:43:24] I know there's discussion and there wasn't much favorability.

[3:43:27] There wasn't much support for it.

[3:43:29] >> I believe the code of silence is a code of ignorance.

[3:43:33] I want to hear from everybody.

[3:43:36] >> Mayor, I presume that you're not calling me ignorant.

[3:43:39] >> I'm not calling you ignorant.

[3:43:41] I'm saying a cone of silence is a code of ignorance.

[3:43:44] I want the public to be able to talk to us.

[3:43:47] We do not make this decision.

[3:43:49] We may have to review on appeal.

[3:43:52] >> That's fine.

[3:43:53] >> In that case, I want to be informed.

[3:43:56] >> The code of silence would end at the point that the selection

[3:43:58] committee was done.

[3:44:01] >> I believe there's consensus.

[3:44:03] >> I believe now and when the committee is finished.

[3:44:08] [Cross-talk]

[3:44:08] >> What about the committee is finished.

[3:44:10] I want to know about it.

[3:44:12] >> Potential bid.

[3:44:14] >> I'm sorry come on I agree with you.

[3:44:16] It's not necessary.

[3:44:17] I don't even think it's ethical.

[3:44:19] We don't make this decision.

[3:44:22] >> Let's ask the city attorney's.

[3:44:24] >> It would be ethical.

[3:44:25] It's a question.

[3:44:27] >> Why don't we delegate the whole thing to staff.

[3:44:30] >> City attorney, the mayor's questioning double city

[3:44:34] attorney.

[3:44:37] >>, sir.

[3:44:39] >> Was there a birthday party over there?

[3:44:41] >> They're just asking questions.

[3:44:43] >> I'll be honest with you.

[3:44:45] This item is moot.

[3:44:46] It's already been decided and our purchasing ordinance.

[3:44:50] It's already been decided.

[3:44:52] The code of silence issue was debated here and it was decided.

[3:44:57] The fact that it's even here.

[3:44:59] >> It's here because it was a comment that I made.

[3:45:03] At the meeting.

[3:45:04] That's why it's here.

[3:45:06] Everything that is on here because it was input from each

[3:45:09] and every one of us.

[3:45:11] >> I understand that.

[3:45:13] >> You don't have to support.

[3:45:17] [Cross-talk]

[3:45:17] >> I'm not going to change the procurement ordinance for just

[3:45:21] this one solicitation.

[3:45:24] We have a procurement ordinance that

[3:45:28] already deals with this issue.

[3:45:30] I think it is moot.

[3:45:33] >> We have a consensus that it needs to move on.

[3:45:36] >> The consensus to move on.

[3:45:38] Item two.

[3:45:39] >> Same item.

[3:45:41] >> If the commission volunteers.

[3:45:43] That's done.

[3:45:44] You've got all your guidance?

[3:45:45] We are finally finished with the buildings department RF.

[3:45:51] >> When can we expect that.

[3:45:53] >> Yes.

[3:45:53] We're going to have a five minute recess.

[3:45:56] >> We haven't voted on it.

[3:45:59] >> This is the consensus of the document.

[3:46:01] >> We're bringing back the item.

[3:46:04] >> When will that happen?

[3:46:07] >> Can we address that?

[3:46:09] >> We're done.

[3:46:11] >> We'll come back to us with an RFP.

[3:46:14] >> Can we draft adopt >> We do not have to vote on anything.

[3:46:19] They're going to come back to us with an RFP.

[3:46:22] They've now been told.

[3:46:24] Bamba you want the RFP.

[3:46:26] >> I don't need it back.

[3:46:28] >> We need approve and draft and adopt tonight.

[3:46:31] >> What do you want to do?

[3:46:34] >> I'd like to follow the agenda with the agenda reads.

[3:46:36] The discussion of possible action action requires a motion.

[3:46:40] >> I move that we go out to bid as amended,

[3:46:44] based on our discussion tonight.

[3:46:47] >> Is there a second?

[3:46:49] >> That means we're putting it out.

[3:46:51] >> It would have to second.

[3:46:54] >> Hold on one second.

[3:46:55] We have to wait for the vice mayor.

[3:46:57] >> I don't want it to come back on the 16th.

[3:46:59] I want it to go out.

[3:47:01] We've got eight >> We have a motion and a >>

[3:47:07] The timeline will change.

[3:47:08] The timeline didn't think that we were doing it.

[3:47:12] >> There's a motion before and a second to approve what we just

[3:47:15] did.

[3:47:16] >> My question is, this timeline change.

[3:47:20] >> No.

[3:47:22] >> Are we good and ready?

[3:47:24] >> It'll come all the way back to us in March still?

[3:47:27] >> Yes.

[3:47:28] This is anticipated.

[3:47:30] Obviously there are certain items we have to evaluate

[3:47:33] and we have to do reference checks.

[3:47:35] Might be different things that affect that timeline.

[3:47:38] Estimated timeline in March.

[3:47:41] >> All in favor say aye.

[3:47:43] Any opposed?

[3:47:44] It passes unanimously.

[3:47:51] We now have reports of the leak and report representatives.

[3:47:58] >> Today we had our director's meeting.

[3:47:59] A couple things were discussed.

[3:48:02] League of Cities MPO representatives.

[3:48:09] Commissioner Rodriguez: Today we have the directors leading

[3:48:11] and a couple things were discussed.

[3:48:14] There's an amendment three campaign going on.

[3:48:18] I will share the link with you guys.

[3:48:21] I believe the cities have done so.

[3:48:25] They have general educational information online

[3:48:30] that is more broad than what was brought to us regarding

[3:48:33] amendment three.

[3:48:35] Some specific stats and statistics.

[3:48:39] They went ahead and provided for each individual city.

[3:48:42] If you guys would like to look at the Pembroke Pines

[3:48:45] document they put together, it was really good.

[3:48:48] I would like to ask who provided the information to them

[3:48:51] for the League of Cities or did they take it from our website?

[3:48:57] Mayor Castillo: I'm not sure.

[3:48:59] Commissioner Rodriguez: There was a document League

[3:49:02] of Cities put together.

[3:49:08] Jonathan is saying it was prior to BCCMA

[3:49:15] and my assumption is we were able to look

[3:49:19] at it and fact check.

[3:49:21] I saw a number on there and I wasn't too sure.

[3:49:25] Our finance department checked it.

[3:49:28] I think it is a good tool for us to put out.

[3:49:33] They also checked with their legal counsel, which

[3:49:36] is our legal counsel, regarding whether it is factual

[3:49:41] or has any promotion of yes or no.

[3:49:49] That is a factual document only.

[3:49:51] It is something that could guide us come especially when we

[3:49:54] are trying not to advocate.

[3:49:58] The next general meeting is in two weeks, I think.

[3:50:03] I have to check the calendar.

[3:50:06] I may or may not be in attendance.

[3:50:11] The next one is the general meeting.

[3:50:14] I think we are all invited to go.

[3:50:18] Afterwards, October will be in Coral Springs.

[3:50:22] I forgot the date. --

[3:51:01] Mayor Castillo: Do you have a report city manager?

[3:51:07] City Manager Dodge: I don't.

[3:51:13] Commissioner Schwartz: I will be as brief as possible.

[3:51:17] Give me one moment so I can pull it up.

[3:51:22] There's been a lot of change in our country, let alone our state

[3:51:28] and city, since I placed the item on the agenda a week ago,

[3:51:35] Tuesday.

[3:51:36] I have a couple of things I want to put in context.

[3:51:42] I support our police department.

[3:51:47] I want to make sure they have legitimate and lawful tools

[3:51:51] to protect the community.

[3:51:53] By supporting law enforcement and protecting privacy rights

[3:51:57] of the public, we as a commission

[3:52:01] are responsible to do this and support police.

[3:52:05] When information on the public gets collected,

[3:52:09] we have a responsibility to understand

[3:52:11] what happens to the information after it's collected.

[3:52:14] How long has it been retained, who searched,

[3:52:18] and what happens with it is shared outside the police

[3:52:27] department.

[3:52:27] What happens to this information?

[3:52:30] These are legitimate questions of government oversight.

[3:52:34] My item doesn't allege the police department

[3:52:39] or anyone else has violated the law.

[3:52:42] The item in context and pretext access

[3:52:48] to examine our policies so that the Commission and public

[3:52:56] understand where we stand.

[3:52:58] Since I placed the item on the agenda,

[3:53:01] circumstances surrounding the city's license plate reader

[3:53:06] program have changed.

[3:53:15] The police department has said that they suspended the license

[3:53:21] plate reader program.

[3:53:22] That does not eliminate the need for the item before us tonight.

[3:53:25] In several respects, it makes questions contained

[3:53:28] in the item more important.

[3:53:30] Suspending the operation doesn't tell

[3:53:33] the commission what happens to the information already

[3:53:35] collected.

[3:53:36] It doesn't tell us who previously

[3:53:37] had access to information.

[3:53:39] It doesn't tell us information generated by our cameras

[3:53:46] were accessed by outside entities.

[3:53:49] It doesn't say what information was shared

[3:53:51] and what information remains in existence.

[3:53:53] It doesn't tell us what information may have already

[3:53:56] been analyzed or derived from the original information.

[3:54:00] It doesn't tell us what contractual rights

[3:54:02] or obligations continue during this suspension process.

[3:54:05] A suspension of the program doesn't necessarily

[3:54:08] terminate the contract.

[3:54:10] Those questions remain.

[3:54:13] With that come a discussion of possible action regarding

[3:54:18] retention of data collected through the city's automated

[3:54:22] license plate recognition system and the city's agreements with

[3:54:27] Flock Safety -- the purpose of the item is to direct the city

[3:54:35] attorney come up with the city manager and chief of police,

[3:54:39] to conduct a comprehensive review of the city's LPR program

[3:54:43] and the city's agreement with the flock group.

[3:54:46] The review should address collection, ownership, access,

[3:54:50] retention, disclosure, sharing, artificial intelligence, machine

[3:54:56] learning use, commercial use, and ultimate disposition

[3:54:59] of information generated through the city's license plate reader

[3:55:02] system.

[3:55:03] Let me explain why the review remains necessary --

[3:55:08] as a part of my review, I requested

[3:55:11] the department's general orders governing our license plate

[3:55:16] reader system.

[3:55:17] The city's own policy tells us what the technology collects.

[3:55:22] The system takes a digital photograph

[3:55:25] of vehicles of license plates entering its field of view.

[3:55:30] Information is timestamped in GPS code.

[3:55:33] Stored information can include an image of the vehicle

[3:55:36] and close up image of the license plate, GPS location

[3:55:39] and time and date of the scan.

[3:55:43] There are legitimate reasons for the police department

[3:55:46] to use the technology.

[3:55:47] The general order explains it assists law enforcement

[3:55:54] in locating missing persons, locating stolen vehicles,

[3:55:57] identifying wanted vehicles, and assisting investigations

[3:56:01] involving vehicles of interest.

[3:56:03] Those are legitimate law enforcement purposes.

[3:56:06] But our police department recognizes

[3:56:09] that access to this information requires limitations.

[3:56:13] Four years, general order has restricted authorized database

[3:56:17] searches for law enforcement purposes.

[3:56:20] I believe this is appropriate.

[3:56:22] That led me to another question --

[3:56:25] if we are restrict what our own employees can do with

[3:56:29] the information, what restrictions apply

[3:56:32] to the corporation providing technology and handling

[3:56:35] information generated through the system?

[3:56:38] That brought me to the agreement with Flock Safety

[3:56:41] the agreement provides city retains

[3:56:43] ownership of the data and flock says that they do not

[3:56:47] own or resell the data.

[3:56:49] But the agreement contains another provision

[3:56:51] that requires careful city review, City Attorney.

[3:56:55] The agreement separately addresses

[3:56:56] what it calls anonymized data.

[3:56:58] Under that, flock retains rights to receive and use

[3:57:04] analyzed information from these are worldwide and Royalty free.

[3:57:17] This includes training machine learning algorithms

[3:57:22] and improving the Technology I don't know if this violates

[3:57:32] the provision of the law.

[3:57:33] That's why I want the city attorney to review this.

[3:57:37] I want to know what what this means for Pembroke Pines.

[3:57:41] I want to know what occurs in the process of converting

[3:57:45] information, collecting to our system,

[3:57:47] including the anonymized information.

[3:57:49] I want to know what use and distribute means.

[3:57:52] I want to know whether the information derived by the city

[3:57:55] system can be used to train machine learning technology

[3:57:58] or develop other products.

[3:58:01] Most importantly, I want to know whether Florida law permits

[3:58:05] these activities and whether our contract adequately

[3:58:09] protects the public.

[3:58:11] There's another important distinction --

[3:58:15] I previously asked if the police department received

[3:58:18] public records requests for the information collected

[3:58:20] from flock cameras.

[3:58:22] I was advised that no public records request for flock data

[3:58:28] from our cameras were made.

[3:58:32] There has been no public record request whatsoever.

[3:58:36] I appreciate the information the police department provided.

[3:58:39] However, public records requests are only part of the issue.

[3:58:45] My question is considerably broader.

[3:58:49] This is why I'm asking about access, sharing dissemination

[3:58:56] outside agency access and vendor access.

[3:58:59] This commission needs to have these questions answered

[3:59:08] because here's the thing that made me most uncomfortable --

[3:59:12] we have a general order that was provided two days after I placed

[3:59:17] the item on the agenda.

[3:59:20] I believe this was last Tuesday.

[3:59:25] I received the general order on the 27th.

[3:59:29] The general order we currently have that includes information

[3:59:35] disseminated to the public in social media and how we have

[3:59:43] auditing programs in place --

[3:59:47] and what's answered in the memo --

[3:59:51] has been in effect since the 26th of August, 2026.

[3:59:56] That's last week.

[3:59:58] Prior to that, after receiving a general order,

[4:00:03] I asked for revisions.

[4:00:05] I asked for all revisions regarding Lpr's.

[4:00:08] I think the police department and clerk's office for providing

[4:00:11] this information. --

[4:00:14] I thank the police department and clerk's office

[4:00:17] for this information.

[4:00:18] The general order did not include auditing

[4:00:22] and there was no requirement for the Police Department to do it.

[4:00:28] This requires vigilant solutions and flock safety

[4:00:31] for maintaining LPR safety devices the May 2024

[4:00:35] general Order ended with a section addressing database

[4:00:38] and records retention.

[4:00:40] There was no separate section establishing quarterly LPR

[4:00:45] audits.

[4:00:47] This revision included on the 26th of August is when I

[4:00:53] welcomed.

[4:00:53] I think it's a great thing.

[4:00:55] If I asked our police chief what a general order is,

[4:01:00] he would most likely say it is the policy of the department.

[4:01:04] If I asked whether all officers follow general orders

[4:01:08] to the letter of the law -- have we ever had a officer not follow

[4:01:14] a general order under his command?

[4:01:17] We don't have the tools or any evidence

[4:01:21] that audits have been conducted, specifically on LPR s.

[4:01:27] There are other general orders that may or may not

[4:01:29] have been followed.

[4:01:33] I'm not saying or insinuating that there's been misuse.

[4:01:41] But the reason why this entire discussion has come up

[4:01:47] nationally is because Pembroke itself

[4:01:51] has failed to protect our constitutional rights.

[4:01:55] The governor took action, sheriffs took action,

[4:01:59] and the chief took action.

[4:02:04] Even though the cameras can save kids

[4:02:08] from Kidnapers, legitimate law enforcement purposes,

[4:02:15] there's too much information we don't know.

[4:02:21] I'm not expecting a response next week

[4:02:24] for the review I'm asking for a.

[4:02:33] This is a moving target.

[4:02:35] I went back to our original general orders

[4:02:37] that were established by former Chief, when we had mobile units.

[4:02:45] We now have polls in the ground.

[4:02:48] It is all in the backup.

[4:02:52] When I see this yellow paper , it takes it out of context.

[4:03:01] Whoever asks the question, it was

[4:03:06] based on last week's general order, not what

[4:03:09] occurred and has been the policy of our police department

[4:03:15] the last two years.

[4:03:19] I say this not to cast dispersions.

[4:03:23] All I'm asking for is a legal review.

[4:03:32] Let's figure out what data was collected.

[4:03:35] If our police department has an opportunity to do a lookback

[4:03:41] period since 2024, up until August 25th of 2026 to see

[4:03:50] our officers conduct an audit during the period,

[4:03:55] if the administration believes that warrants transparency

[4:04:03] to provide the public confidence ,

[4:04:09] that we are not caught up in some other things we see

[4:04:13] in other communities throughout the country,

[4:04:16] I welcome that I'm not asking the commission to direct that

[4:04:20] but I welcome it.

[4:04:23] With that being said, I would like

[4:04:27] to have consensus that we allow our city attorney, police

[4:04:32] chief, and city administration to do a deep dive.

[4:04:35] Let's find out more.

[4:04:38] One of the things I discovered in past contracts is our data

[4:04:45] was going to the Miami Police Department.

[4:04:47] That's where it was stored.

[4:04:49] It is all in the backup.

[4:04:51] Now we have the city of Miami and their practices

[4:04:57] and their servers and however they do it.

[4:05:03] This is a big thing.

[4:05:09] I want to make sure our public privacy

[4:05:11] and constitutional rights are protected as the fabric

[4:05:16] and foundation of this country.

[4:05:18] With that, mayor, I'm not looking for a motion.

[4:05:25] I want a consensus.

[4:05:27] Firmly in my heart I believe we are all seeing this

[4:05:31] through the same lens, that we just

[4:05:35] don't know enough now to make any kind of decision

[4:05:37] but we certainly need to know as soon as possible

[4:05:40] and share that information.

[4:05:42] If there's another city, municipality, town,

[4:05:48] or state government that finds something --

[4:05:57] or even members of Congress --

[4:06:02] I welcome all that information.

[4:06:04] It is very rare for a city commission

[4:06:05] to be talking about something that

[4:06:07] impacts every single one of us that lives in this country.

[4:06:11] We always deal with the local stuff.

[4:06:14] This is super big.

[4:06:17] I did my absolute best to find out

[4:06:20] what the financial considerations are.

[4:06:23] I don't think we need to ask those questions tonight.

[4:06:26] That is part of the review.

[4:06:30] But by all means, so a program isn't

[4:06:34] a termination of a contract.

[4:06:36] Mayor and commissioner good, you and I

[4:06:40] share the red light camera and that whole situation

[4:06:43] and the contractual and financials.

[4:06:49] I'm thankful for the time you've given me tonight

[4:06:53] to talk about this.

[4:06:55] I want to thank the police department.

[4:06:58] We are the first city in Broward County to do this.

[4:07:01] Unless someone did it since we were sitting here,

[4:07:05] we are the only city to have suspended.

[4:07:08] Pembroke Pines leads.

[4:07:10] People look at us because we lead.

[4:07:13] I think that's a good thing.

[4:07:15] With that I yield the floor.

[4:07:19] Mayor Castillo: I want to thank you

[4:07:21] for bringing the item forward.

[4:07:23] This is one of those things I've rarely seen in my time

[4:07:29] as an elected official or my time in government, where

[4:07:34] I can say from the bottom of my heart that everyone is right

[4:07:37] and everyone is wrong.

[4:07:39] I want to explain to you where we are at in my view.

[4:07:44] I want to thank the chief for his courage

[4:07:47] and the City Manager for his.

[4:07:52] As mayor of the city, I announced

[4:07:55] that I was encouraging them to suspend the program.

[4:07:59] I did that because we are in a situation where

[4:08:08] two big a percentage of our residents

[4:08:10] have lost confidence in this tool.

[4:08:13] You've heard me say before -- and it is not a rogue political

[4:08:19] speech but what I believe to my core --

[4:08:22] government works for them and not the other way around.

[4:08:26] No matter how good a tool it, if it doesn't

[4:08:30] at least get the support of a simple majority of people,

[4:08:37] it needs to be looked at.

[4:08:41] The fact that it isn't getting the support I feel it needs

[4:08:46] to get is reflective of a couple things in my view --

[4:08:51] first is the absolute ugly cynicism in the US right now

[4:08:56] that has bled, despite my every effort to keep it away,

[4:09:02] into the city.

[4:09:04] I think it was inevitable that this would happen in.

[4:09:07] I think people forgot how truly benevolent we are.

[4:09:11] Even though we come and argue and there

[4:09:13] are issues and whatnot, we come here trying

[4:09:17] to do what's best for the city all the time, whether passing

[4:09:21] a budget or passing an ordinance.

[4:09:24] It gets overlooked because of the absolute ugliness

[4:09:27] of politics right now.

[4:09:29] I've never seen a political environment this revolting

[4:09:33] in the U.S. In my lifetime.

[4:09:36] It is not a partisan comment.

[4:09:40] I think it stains all of us.

[4:09:43] I think it is quintessentially an American.

[4:09:47] The Pembroke Pines Police Department

[4:09:49] is about catching bad guys and keeping us safe.

[4:09:53] You all heard me recite as statistic

[4:09:56] that has been verified that came out of the police department.

[4:10:00] Last year they reduced crime by one third.

[4:10:04] One of the reasons they are reducing crime, as well

[4:10:08] as other cities, is because they are using technology

[4:10:11] intelligently.

[4:10:12] The intelligent use of technology

[4:10:15] shouldn't be dismissed.

[4:10:18] If you are an amber alert and have a child in your car,

[4:10:23] it is hard to find you unless we know your license plate.

[4:10:27] During the days we had red light cameras,

[4:10:30] which were placed on the ballot while I was no longer serving

[4:10:34] on this commission, I believe 76% of Pines residents

[4:10:43] as to get rid of it.

[4:10:45] One lady called me up and said that I supported red light

[4:10:49] cameras.

[4:10:50] She asked me what I thought now and I

[4:10:52] told her to drive carefully.

[4:10:55] With those two words, she said, o, I get it.

[4:11:04] Those red light cameras helped us catch the murderer from

[4:11:15] Friday's.

[4:11:18] That guy was caught through another city's red light camera

[4:11:22] but we found him.

[4:11:24] We prosecuted him.

[4:11:26] That person is now serving justice.

[4:11:30] Chances are we wouldn't have caught that individual

[4:11:34] had there not been technology.

[4:11:36] Here's the thing about technology --

[4:11:41] it's on our school busses now as we speak.

[4:11:44] It is in front of our school zones now as we speak.

[4:11:47] When we go to Publix, it is there.

[4:11:54] When we pull out a cell phone, you are on video.

[4:11:58] It is all over the place.

[4:11:59] You cannot escape it.

[4:12:01] But that doesn't escape a police officer in another jurisdiction

[4:12:05] misusing it , casting a horrible opinion.

[4:12:13] One dumb cop created a whole problem

[4:12:17] for the entire United States because they

[4:12:21] couldn't discipline themselves not to misuse a tool.

[4:12:27] But it goes further than that.

[4:12:30] I'm not happy with any of these companies.

[4:12:34] It has only been alleged as far as I know,

[4:12:38] but if it can be verified they were selling this information ,

[4:12:46] who would want data about me going to Publix to pick up

[4:12:50] a gallon of milk?

[4:12:52] I personally don't get it.

[4:12:56] Commissioner Rodriguez: The company is charging you

[4:12:59] how much you pay for it.

[4:13:03] Commissioner Schwartz: It shows up on your cell phone

[4:13:06] when you walk past the store.

[4:13:07] Mayor Castillo: Maybe you are right.

[4:13:10] Maybe that is how it is working now.

[4:13:14] The state of Florida is the one that authorizes all camera

[4:13:21] technology for law enforcement.

[4:13:23] No one else does.

[4:13:25] That's why we have permits with them.

[4:13:27] I think governor Desantis did the right thing.

[4:13:32] Let's hold out that his cameras on the turnpike,

[4:13:36] which are there to collect tolls, are still up and working.

[4:13:40] It is only the ones in neighborhoods

[4:13:42] that catch bad guys that he had a problem with.

[4:13:46] Someone else will have to figure out that logic

[4:13:49] because it doesn't compute for me.

[4:13:51] Let's hold that aside.

[4:13:56] They are the ones who authorized all camera enforcement

[4:14:01] tools used by police and law enforcement in the state.

[4:14:08] It couldn't have happened any other way.

[4:14:13] They need to figure this thing out.

[4:14:15] I was surprised the governor didn't

[4:14:19] ask for a special session.

[4:14:21] I'm not familiar with all special session rules,

[4:14:25] but it seems to me when it comes to something this serious,

[4:14:29] they should get together and have a special session.

[4:14:33] They should bring in all these folks from flock and everything

[4:14:37] else to fess up and find out what's going on.

[4:14:44] They should create some guidelines and guardrails

[4:14:49] for this program that might have the hope of regenerating

[4:14:55] public trust in a system that's catching a lot of bad players

[4:15:06] without creating an atmosphere that may think they're being

[4:15:13] surveilled by the government.

[4:15:15] That is certainly not what this is supposed to be.

[4:15:19] This is supposed to be a tool that doesn't surveil the public

[4:15:24] but locates, defines, and identifies people

[4:15:28] known to be wanted by the law.

[4:15:32] I encourage the suspension of this program.

[4:15:36] I did not direct it.

[4:15:38] I encouraged it.

[4:15:40] I did this because I felt we had a decline in confidence

[4:15:45] from our people.

[4:15:47] As to review in the past, I practically

[4:15:52] don't think it is necessary.

[4:15:55] I don't think it is necessary to audit the police department

[4:16:04] by our city Attorney.

[4:16:06] I agree that he should provide us with the legal memo

[4:16:09] but he's in the business of defending the city,

[4:16:11] not doing operational reviews.

[4:16:13] He's in the business of defending the city when sued.

[4:16:21] Commissioner Schwartz: I wasn't suggesting the city attorney.

[4:16:23] That would be the police department's

[4:16:25] internal mechanisms.

[4:16:26] Mayor Castillo: Maybe they want to do it.

[4:16:29] Another way to do it would be the Commission auditor.

[4:16:31] I hesitate to send the Commission auditor in the police

[4:16:40] department because the optics look bad.

[4:16:45] When the police department says they

[4:16:47] are unaware of any instances in which the technology was

[4:16:51] misused, I believe the.

[4:16:54] I happen to know that they don't tolerate this kind of behavior

[4:16:58] and would have acted on it.

[4:17:00] I don't feel we have to go back in time

[4:17:04] to dig out some misdeed that we have every assurance

[4:17:08] to believe never occurred.

[4:17:10] I am more interested in sending a resolution very firmly

[4:17:17] to this governor.

[4:17:19] I think we should share it with both gubernatorial candidates,

[4:17:23] because the current governor is busy packing up because he

[4:17:27] will be out of there soon.

[4:17:29] We should make sure the next speaker of the House

[4:17:31] and president of the Senate have our resolution,

[4:17:35] demanding they call a session if they need to in order

[4:17:40] to assign staff and possibly the task

[4:17:47] force through FDLE, involving law enforcement

[4:17:53] that is involved, to come up with necessary guardrails.

[4:17:58] In the minimal amount of time, we

[4:18:01] could roll this out to the residents

[4:18:02] and say there's been a reboot to this thing.

[4:18:08] These are the circumstances under which,

[4:18:12] if it is used again, it can be used again.

[4:18:19] I'm very proud we took the step we took.

[4:18:24] It is certainly a step that police chief and City manager

[4:18:30] had within their disposal.

[4:18:31] Neither of them acted outside of their capacity.

[4:18:34] It was not a directed step.

[4:18:38] As a mayor, I encourage it because I

[4:18:42] feel there is a decline in public trust.

[4:18:44] I don't think it is necessary to audit our police

[4:18:48] department to look for some sort of misdeed that has

[4:18:54] no indication it ever occurred.

[4:18:58] I would rather spend our time not

[4:19:01] looking into some potential past thing we have no indication

[4:19:07] about.

[4:19:07] I instead would like to focus on solutions going forward, which

[4:19:13] are at the state.

[4:19:15] It is the state that authorized the use of the tool,

[4:19:18] it is the state that needs to come up with the proper policies

[4:19:21] to deal with it, and I have to tell you that protecting privacy

[4:19:27] extends far beyond license plate readers.

[4:19:30] It includes red light cameras.

[4:19:33] There are still districts that use them.

[4:19:34] It includes body worn cameras.

[4:19:39] There's already guidance that is involved there

[4:19:45] and we may need a strengthening of it.

[4:19:49] It shouldn't just be about license plate readers.

[4:19:51] It should be about how law enforcement uses

[4:19:53] all camera technology in order to ensure

[4:19:55] the constitutional rights of the people are protected.

[4:19:59] There has also been a lot of misstatements.

[4:20:03] In his legal memo , the city attorney will tell you that 20

[4:20:18] some odd times the Supreme Court has ruled that uses of these

[4:20:24] camera tools do not violate the Fourth Amendment.

[4:20:28] You have no right of privacy when you go into a public place.

[4:20:33] It doesn't exist.

[4:20:34] That doesn't mean the government has the right

[4:20:37] to sell information that would violate your privacy

[4:20:42] in some other manner.

[4:20:44] But if you are a criminal, you don't have that right.

[4:20:50] I really think we have to step back from this

[4:20:52] and understand that everyone is right and everyone is wrong.

[4:20:56] Yes, this tool is helpful.

[4:21:00] God forbid, if your child was on a bus stop tomorrow morning

[4:21:05] and someone came and snatched them,

[4:21:09] ardently as you may want to argue against these cameras,

[4:21:12] you would want them on the street to find your child.

[4:21:22] If a member of your family got horribly injured

[4:21:26] in a hit and run and you happened to catch their number,

[4:21:29] you would want a camera to find them and bring them to justice.

[4:21:36] That's what this technology allows

[4:21:38] people use to get away with this years

[4:21:41] ago when Bonnie and Clyde were in business.

[4:21:45] We have cameras today and there is no reason that can't be used.

[4:21:51] But if Steven is driving down the block

[4:21:55] to buy some flowers for his bride, that's no one's business.

[4:22:03] He should feel free to do what he wants to do or go to a movie

[4:22:10] or go down the block to the store or whatever

[4:22:13] and not feel he's being surveilled.

[4:22:16] That's what the problem is.

[4:22:18] That is my view of it Commissioner.

[4:22:22] I think we should resolve as a city commission

[4:22:26] to petition the state government into very specific action,

[4:22:31] to come up with rules that allow this tool to be used in ways

[4:22:36] that regain public trust.

[4:22:46] Vice Mayor Hernandez: I want to opine quickly I

[4:22:49] want to thank the chief Vargas it wasn't an easy decision

[4:23:00] and we spoke multiple times, including

[4:23:02] when I was on radio being interviewed on your decision.

[4:23:12] I know Captain Muller was involved

[4:23:16] and he spoke with Out Left.

[4:23:21] I spoke to Alf multiple times and you and your team

[4:23:28] called him.

[4:23:29] It wasn't just an email response.

[4:23:32] We need to commend the Pembroke Pines Police

[4:23:35] Department because you pick up the phone and call.

[4:23:39] You offer to meet with Mr. Salvy.

[4:23:43] That is commendable.

[4:23:45] Not all police departments in large cities like ours do that.

[4:23:49] To the Chief and command staff, thank you.

[4:23:52] I forgot the other captain.

[4:23:55] I know I said Woolard but whoever

[4:23:57] the other one was that called me personally, thank you.

[4:24:00] Far be it from me to criticize the governor

[4:24:04] but it wasn't that long ago that governor Desantis was advocating

[4:24:11] that our 67 counties and municipalities purchase

[4:24:14] flock cameras.

[4:24:16] He's on record.

[4:24:18] He said it at press conferences and he said it everywhere.

[4:24:22] I will not get into the politics of it.

[4:24:25] I find it interesting that there are nasty headlines coming out

[4:24:28] of Tallahassee right now, particularly

[4:24:31] with his administration and handling of it.

[4:24:33] All of a sudden he announces to take the flock cameras down.

[4:24:38] This is convenient in my view.

[4:24:40] Actually, it isn't.

[4:24:41] At the end of the day, that is press 101.

[4:24:45] Deflect when there is a crisis.

[4:24:47] Make an announcement.

[4:24:49] Take the attention away.

[4:24:50] Governor Desantis is at fault for the lack of clarity

[4:24:53] he encouraged counties and municipalities

[4:24:56] to purchase flock technology, the expenditure of tax dollars,

[4:25:02] and now he's going back on it.

[4:25:03] Rather than encourage it and tell counties and cities that

[4:25:10] since Tallahassee loves to preempt local jurisdictions --

[4:25:17] like our city or Broward County --

[4:25:20] from carrying our own laws and regulations,

[4:25:47] They did not provide any guidance out

[4:25:51] of Tallahassee of how we should handle technology that

[4:25:54] moves faster than humans do.

[4:25:57] Technology is changing every single week.

[4:26:01] It wasn't that long ago that principle Peter Bear

[4:26:05] at Price Charter didn't have to worry that students at Pines

[4:26:10] Charter were using ChatGPT.

[4:26:13] Now technology has advanced so quickly that it's

[4:26:16] difficult for us to catch up.

[4:26:18] It is incredibly unfortunate that instead of having a partner

[4:26:23] in our governor and a partner in the legislature, we don't.

[4:26:32] We are left as a local jurisdiction to clean up.

[4:26:39] That sad.

[4:26:40] I commend the chief.

[4:26:44] There are other states --

[4:26:46] Florida is one of them -- where they have a data bill of rights.

[4:26:51] You as an individual has a right to determine how much

[4:26:55] of your data exists out there because data brokers --

[4:27:00] I know this from my private consulting work --

[4:27:08] buy and sell data.

[4:27:11] To Commissioner Schwartz's point,

[4:27:14] this is why your data shows up on your phone.

[4:27:19] Your data is repackaged and sold so advertisers

[4:27:22] can determine what will pop up.

[4:27:24] I don't think you have Instagram,

[4:27:27] but this is how they determine what pops up on social media

[4:27:32] or when you open a newspaper.

[4:27:36] A digital newspaper.

[4:27:41] Florida has this kind of agreement but it is narrow.

[4:27:46] It's limited to companies with a aroun a --

[4:27:54] with around $1 million in revenue.

[4:27:57] I'm okay with all the proposals here

[4:28:00] and not just sending it to the gubernatorial candidates.

[4:28:04] I believe one is in Broward County next week we

[4:28:08] should send it to them and the incoming House speaker,

[4:28:12] the incoming Senate President.

[4:28:14] That is predetermined prior to the legislative session.

[4:28:21] We have to wait until November to see who is in what seat.

[4:28:28] Ultimately, it is immensely frustrating.

[4:28:32] I don't believe you did anything wrong.

[4:28:36] I don't believe the Pembroke Pines Police Department was

[4:28:41] careless in any way and it actually has to do with

[4:28:45] a technology that you didn't create but were encouraged

[4:28:51] to ask the previous City Commission --

[4:28:55] I came in afterwards and I think it was just prior to me being

[4:28:59] appointed --

[4:29:03] Mayor Castillo: -- no, we had it for ten years.

[4:29:10] Commissioner Schwartz: May 2024 was Chief Vargas's General

[4:29:12] Order.

[4:29:13] You were with us on that point.

[4:29:15] Vice Mayor Hernandez: I was appointed May 15th.

[4:29:20] Commissioner Rodriguez: He's --

[4:29:25] Mayor Castillo: He's talking about when

[4:29:27] we started these things.

[4:29:30] Vice Mayor Hernandez: The point is

[4:29:32] this was brought about by the governor not the chief.

[4:29:37] Thanks, chief Vargas, it's not easy being

[4:29:40] a police chief in a large city.

[4:29:42] It was difficult to make that decision.

[4:29:43] You have my support and so does your command staff.

[4:29:46] Thank you.

[4:29:53] Mayor Castillo: I have two people signed up to speak.

[4:29:56] Commissioner Rodriguez: I want to speak.

[4:29:58] Commissioner Schwartz brought up the idea

[4:29:59] of continuing to look into what that contract actually stated

[4:30:03] and what the atomized data actually came up with.

[4:30:16] I went to a conference in Baltimore in the summer

[4:30:19] and they brought up that you may only be sharing data internally

[4:30:25] and not elsewhere, but there's a caveat in the contract

[4:30:33] and the vendor can take that information.

[4:30:36] They say they split the data up so it isn't as obvious who

[4:30:40] is who, but they repackage the information

[4:30:43] and eventually sell it.

[4:30:44] Currently in the market, there is no vendor that

[4:30:48] doesn't have that part of it.

[4:30:50] That technology wouldn't be as cheap

[4:30:52] as it currently is for us to be able to use it otherwise.

[4:30:56] Not that they are the cheapest of cameras,

[4:30:59] but if a product is cheaper or free, you pay with data sharing.

[4:31:04] Most of us have Gmail, Google Maps, or Apple Maps.

[4:31:10] The reason they don't charge for their products

[4:31:12] is because you are paying for it with your data.

[4:31:18] There's a lot of discussion online not just in our city,

[4:31:25] but across the board -- and I think people like to be

[4:31:31] selectively angry when they cannot control something

[4:31:33] because they can come into City hall and ask to turn off

[4:31:38] their cameras --

[4:31:40] that opens up everyone's mind to show how surveilled

[4:31:44] we are in the general public.

[4:31:47] Here I think the issue came and was so rampantly taken

[4:31:51] on by governments, states, and a couple other agencies

[4:31:57] and the criticism was that the state now had that data,

[4:32:05] instead of what 1st May perceive private companies that sell us

[4:32:11] products.

[4:32:14] The vendors sold safety to us and we sold

[4:32:17] them the data of our residents.

[4:32:20] This happened unknowingly, because these

[4:32:23] are very nuanced conversations, as we've all come to see.

[4:32:27] Thankfully come out we are opening our eyes to this .

[4:32:37] My suggestion --

[4:32:39] and I don't think this will occur even in the next couple

[4:32:45] months -- is to do a huge investigation on our end of all

[4:32:49] our contracts.

[4:32:50] We have contracts for cameras and a million sorts

[4:32:55] of things that take in data.

[4:32:57] Where is the data going?

[4:33:01] We have cameras in our schools and there's protections

[4:33:05] on where that data can go.

[4:33:07] I've been doing research on baby monitors

[4:33:12] there are closed circuit baby monitors and people recommend

[4:33:16] that.

[4:33:17] It is easy for someone to hack a WiFi baby monitor or a camera

[4:33:26] in your home or a Bluetooth.

[4:33:31] This is in relation to the A LPR and LPR cameras,

[4:33:38] but when we are provided any kind of service,

[4:33:43] where does the data go if it is collected?

[4:33:47] We need to be conscious that maybe there

[4:33:50] are no vendors that collect data and we

[4:33:52] have to do a second look at what data is being collected.

[4:33:56] Is it worth what we are able to do?

[4:34:00] The conversation doesn't stop here.

[4:34:02] It continues to the data safety of all of our residents

[4:34:06] in the full scope of what we do.

[4:34:12] I agree that we may be not look back

[4:34:17] into every single part of it with the police department,

[4:34:20] but at least what we were able to handle.

[4:34:24] God knows where the data went.

[4:34:27] The retention policy was 30 days for some of these systems

[4:34:31] that we had.

[4:34:39] It was three years and eventually changed to 30 days.

[4:34:47] It eventually became seven but that is only

[4:34:50] the part we can control.

[4:34:51] The data is probably still being held

[4:34:54] by the flock company themselves or any of these other companies.

[4:34:59] I think we have to put parameters in.

[4:35:02] I do not want to burden the police department

[4:35:05] with looking into how flock does their data

[4:35:08] saving, other than what we internally could or could not

[4:35:15] do.

[4:35:16] I think right sizing these audits

[4:35:21] and making sure all of our legal paperwork

[4:35:26] and contracts are looked at in accordance to the data line

[4:35:32] to see where the data goes, evaluating

[4:35:34] if we are okay with sharing certain types of data.

[4:35:39] How do we work on that?

[4:35:40] Is there another product and is there

[4:35:43] something else, well more expensive,

[4:35:44] has a closed circuit with the data?

[4:35:46] That is it on my end.

[4:35:54] Commissioner Good, Jr.: I think everyone said everything

[4:35:56] that is needed to be said.

[4:35:58] I'm ready to adjourn.

[4:36:05] Mayor Castillo: I have Ben Olson from Davie, Florida.

[4:36:12] There's nothing wrong with that.

[4:36:13] You are our neighbor and state your name

[4:36:15] and address for the record.

[4:36:28] Community Member: My name is Ben Nelson and I am your neighbor.

[4:36:33] I came today because I am a victim of flock

[4:36:36] and wanted to explain how I am.

[4:36:38] I'm also a fourth generation rancher

[4:36:41] in Hinton County, Florida my family owns property there.

[4:36:45] Four years ago, my neighbor and myself learned that the Army

[4:36:53] Corps of Engineers we're going to use eminent domain to take

[4:37:01] over our property. -- advocating for a private property rights

[4:37:07] and the rights of critically endangered animals on those

[4:37:10] properties is something I do.

[4:37:12] In 2024, I released evidence that they primary Panther

[4:37:15] habitat was flooded out, despite these lands not having property

[4:37:19] on it.

[4:37:20] I proved this with surveys from the 1800s to the 2000.

[4:37:25] We recently learned in July that a few days after I released

[4:37:28] this information, the Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission

[4:37:31] illegally accessed the driver and vehicle Information

[4:37:34] database, or DAVID database to use flock cameras to spy on me.

[4:37:47] It is not just me.

[4:37:48] Many people are being tracked with this tactic.

[4:37:53] I go to Everglades restoration meetings, South Florida

[4:38:03] meetings.

[4:38:04] I do not make threats.

[4:38:07] I go to meetings and fight for my family's habitat.

[4:38:11] When I was fighting for my family's land,

[4:38:14] I was taking care of my mother through early onset dementia

[4:38:17] I got her audit logged back.

[4:38:20] They illegally searched a woman nine years into dementia,

[4:38:25] using information to track her son.

[4:38:27] My father and family had their Information illegally

[4:38:36] accessed 50 times.

[4:38:37] Myself, my family, and friends are

[4:38:39] being tracked by flock cameras and this

[4:38:41] is the first verified systemic abuse of the cameras.

[4:38:44] It's no mistake that the state is coming out

[4:38:49] in opposition to it because this has come down in a few weeks.

[4:38:52] We found out a long time ago we were being tracked.

[4:38:56] If we don't do something in the next few years,

[4:38:58] it will be you and your family and friends.

[4:39:01] As a person being tracked for advocating for wildlife,

[4:39:06] I think you are a hero, Mr. Schwartz,

[4:39:09] to stand up for stopping these draconian devices.

[4:39:18] There is zero measurable correlation

[4:39:21] between the increase in actual number of cameras we have

[4:39:24] and the decrease in crime.

[4:39:26] It is other factors.

[4:39:27] They don't correlate to the cameras.

[4:39:29] These cameras are antithetical to the founders

[4:39:32] intent for our country.

[4:39:34] Benjamin Franklin expressed that those

[4:39:35] who give up essential liberty for temporary safety

[4:39:39] deserve Neither liberty nor safetY.

[4:39:58] Neither we are not your canaries in th coal mine.

[4:40:15] I thank you and to answer your questions you cannot audit what

[4:40:20] FWC or other agencies do with the cameras.

[4:40:22] If you run an internal audit on the network for April 29th you

[4:40:26] would see an FWC investigation that is redacted.

[4:40:30] That is about me.

[4:40:31] You cannot see what you did with your own cameras.

[4:40:34] I will not keep talking because this is a public forum

[4:40:37] but I'm happy to engage with you and your staff

[4:40:39] to give you full details, because this

[4:40:41] is the third meeting I've gone to today about this.

[4:40:44] This is disgusting.

[4:40:45] This is real.

[4:40:46] This is why the state is changing all these things right

[4:40:48] now.

[4:40:49] The FWC is illegally stalking individuals.

[4:40:51] Just to make a point, I volunteer for the agency.

[4:40:55] I hunt pythons with them and I make panther surveying for them.

[4:40:59] I was shocked when I was on the list.

[4:41:02] There are documentarians, journalists, lawyers,

[4:41:06] conservationists, and influencers.

[4:41:08] These are people that spoke out in the meetings

[4:41:10] because they care about wildlife being trapped.

[4:41:13] Thank you for your time.

[4:41:15] I know you are not running the clock.

[4:41:17] Thanks for bringing it to the public

[4:41:18] and thank you to the chief for suspending it

[4:41:21] for Broward County.

[4:41:22] This is very real and why the state is moving quickly

[4:41:25] behind the scenes if I can be so candid.

[4:41:28] Mayor Castillo: Thanks for coming forward.

[4:41:31] All the best to you and yours.

[4:41:36] Community Member: I'm happy to engage with you.

[4:41:41] Mayor Castillo: Thank you very much.

[4:41:44] I have Al Salvy next.

[4:41:53] Community Member: Thank you so much.

[4:41:54] Mine will not be that long.

[4:42:00] Vice mayor, city Commission city manager, city attorney city

[4:42:06] clerk, let me begin by starting with something trivial

[4:42:09] that a lot of people may not know.

[4:42:11] September is national Spinal Cord Injury Month.

[4:42:16] I'm not sure if you are aware of that.

[4:42:19] I know we just had childhood cancer month

[4:42:23] but is also national Spinal Cord Injury month.

[4:42:26] I bring that up because I want to talk about how this relates

[4:42:31] to the police department.

[4:42:33] Chief Vargas, captain whirlwind, captain Pereira,

[4:42:43] Sergeant Juarez, all of you do a fantastic job

[4:42:50] enforcing spinal cord injuries.

[4:42:56] There's enforcement around taking on speeders

[4:42:59] and taking care of people with disabilities

[4:43:01] in the city of Pembroke Pines?

[4:43:03] We talk about diversity and inclusion

[4:43:06] and Pines Police Department should be spoken highly of.

[4:43:12] It is the same with the fire department.

[4:43:13] You guys are doing a fantastic job to protect people like us.

[4:43:18] Thank you and your staff.

[4:43:20] Bringing it back, I want to coattail off

[4:43:29] my vice mayor and Maria and Tom and Commissioner Schwartz.

[4:43:34] I will not make this long.

[4:43:36] As a private resident, just like the resident mentioned,

[4:43:40] it is an invasion of my privacy.

[4:43:43] I'm an American.

[4:43:44] I left Cuba for the exact reason I'm living here now.

[4:43:48] I don't want to live in a police state.

[4:43:50] I think this is becoming a police state.

[4:43:52] Not only is it becoming a police state by having us tracked

[4:43:57] and invading my property without my consent, but also

[4:44:01] the fact of what this data is being used for.

[4:44:05] I'm not a criminal.

[4:44:06] I haven't broken the law in 65 years.

[4:44:09] Without my consent, my data should not

[4:44:14] be utilized for any reason that I'm not aware of.

[4:44:17] Selling my data is not something I consented to.

[4:44:22] These cameras are being installed in city locations.

[4:44:29] I'm not sure how they were approved but they are $2,500

[4:44:31] a piece.

[4:44:32] The total installation has been about $99,000.

[4:44:37] I don't know who is paying for this.

[4:44:39] I don't know if it is taxpayers.

[4:44:41] As someone on Social Security, it hurts my pocket.

[4:44:46] This is now suspended.

[4:44:49] This is a win and a loss.

[4:44:51] There is no right answer because it helps the police department

[4:44:55] catch criminals and locate missing children,

[4:44:59] but it hurts law abiding citizens like me

[4:45:02] that feel they are being watched and tracked.

[4:45:07] I want to say that everything that was said today

[4:45:13] needs to be reconsidered and audited.

[4:45:19] It is an abomination of our rights.

[4:45:21] I only learned about flock cameras less than a month ago.

[4:45:25] I reviewed it with leadership because I

[4:45:29] felt I was getting misinformation left and right.

[4:45:37] The great police Department approached me.

[4:45:42] Captain Pereira called me and Sergeant Hernandez reached out.

[4:45:46] I was getting a lot of support reassuring me that it wasn't

[4:45:50] used for various reasons.

[4:45:53] The police department of Pembroke Pines

[4:45:55] is honest and hardworking.

[4:45:57] They protect our lives.

[4:45:58] They put their lives on the line for us every day.

[4:46:03] That's why I have the highest regard for the staff.

[4:46:08] The last thing I want to do is have any distrust

[4:46:12] in our city law enforcement.

[4:46:16] Mayor Castillo: Thank you.

[4:46:17] You are an inspiration to us and we thank you very much.

[4:46:24] >> Before you close out the meeting,

[4:46:25] so we know the direction as city Attorney,

[4:46:28] the first thing is our partner, Mike Cirillo,

[4:46:32] is reviewing contracts we have with the flock company we are

[4:46:38] reviewing this and will report back to the administration

[4:46:42] as to where we are legally in regards to the suspension that

[4:46:46] has been lawfully entered by the police Chief and the city.

[4:46:50] We will work in that direction and direct you.

[4:46:53] The second part is the take away from the motion is that you are

[4:46:57] looking for some type of resolution of some kind --

[4:47:03] Mayor Castillo: There's a resolution.

[4:47:04] We need a legal memo from you and we

[4:47:07] need additional information from the chief,

[4:47:09] to the extent that it can be provided, about any suggestions

[4:47:16] to improve the program.

[4:47:21] That is what I'm hearing, Commissioner.

[4:47:25] I'm not hearing that we want to audit the police department

[4:47:30] but want to have some information from them about how

[4:47:34] to make the program better if that is possible.

[4:47:39] Information on what improvements can be made and information

[4:47:47] on our staff.

[4:47:49] We want contract reviews and resolutions

[4:47:52] to the state to work on this.

[4:48:00] >> We will come up with a resolution and work with

[4:48:05] our police and professionals.

[4:48:07] Commissioner Schwartz: With the institutional impacts,

[4:48:11] can we look at our congressional delegation?

[4:48:15] Mayor Castillo: I have no objections.

[4:48:18] Let's include the constitutional delegation and the Broward

[4:48:22] County delegation let's make sure the resolution gets

[4:48:25] the attention of social media.

[4:48:26] I want to see it posted in its entirety.

[4:48:31] Get it to the press.

[4:48:34] Let people know that we didn't just do this.

[4:48:37] We care about it and want to see a solution come out

[4:48:40] of Tallahassee, which is the only proper place it

[4:48:45] can come from because they are the ones that authorized

[4:48:50] the use.

[4:48:51] I have one last item on old business.

[4:48:55] I thought we had a productive and well run and presented --

[4:49:02] I think Lisa Chung and the city staff there --

[4:49:09] I think in one way we owe their presentation

[4:49:14] that educated and informed us about potential cuts that

[4:49:20] could happen with respect to amendment three,

[4:49:24] I think we owe that to all the voters in the city

[4:49:29] without objection I want to ask the city manager

[4:49:31] and attorney to sit down and figure out how we can email

[4:49:35] all registered voters of the City of Pembroke Pines

[4:49:39] and provide them with a personal copy of this information.

[4:49:43] I want to be very clear that we are not advocating

[4:49:46] for or against anything.

[4:49:49] However, a public forum was held in which

[4:49:54] information was presented.

[4:49:55] The information is now on video and being

[4:49:58] streamed on our website.

[4:49:59] I see no reason why they could not

[4:50:02] be provided to each and every one of the voters,

[4:50:05] so they can look at the information.

[4:50:11] >> I respect your views and those of your colleagues.

[4:50:17] We will look at the statute carefully.

[4:50:18] We've been asked by the administration

[4:50:20] to give guidance as to what 106.113 says.

[4:50:24] There are very expressed reservations and restrictions

[4:50:28] on the statute, which I would never choose to put anyone

[4:50:33] at risk with our mayor.

[4:50:35] I will be blunt about it and you will forgive me

[4:50:38] for being that direct, but there's

[4:50:39] a specific express reference in the statute in terms

[4:50:42] of sending things to electors.

[4:50:45] There may be other ways to get to electors or those

[4:50:48] who are paying attention.

[4:50:52] Commissioner Rodriguez rose the issue.

[4:50:55] You talked about utilizing social media.

[4:50:57] We will look at those options.

[4:50:59] Mayor Castillo: That's fine.

[4:51:01] Let's think of a few.

[4:51:02] Maybe we have to boost it or something.

[4:51:05] I don't know what the answers are.

[4:51:07] People are hungry for this to be educated about this matter.

[4:51:14] Commissioner Rodriguez: For factual and educational

[4:51:16] purposes, I agree people need to know more

[4:51:19] about the Powerpoint of that link.

[4:51:22] But that should not be shared on social media.

[4:51:25] It needs to be more concise and in a more shareable fashion.

[4:51:31] There have been other public forums

[4:51:33] that have been publicized.

[4:51:34] They have good legal teams as well

[4:51:39] that wouldn't put them in jeopardy

[4:51:41] but we could think about doing something of that sort,

[4:51:44] keeping to factual education and information

[4:51:48] only, to make that more accessible to residents.

[4:51:52] It was publicized but not advertised as widely

[4:51:58] as I might have appreciated some people to attend amendment three

[4:52:03] or the budget workshop we had.

[4:52:15] It would be a good idea for us to have

[4:52:17] a public forum on the topic.

[4:52:19] I would prefer for staff to have the presentation and not us.

[4:52:25] I'm hesitant to say we should send it.

[4:52:29] Social media doesn't count as sending

[4:52:31] and another public forum doesn't start as sending.

[4:52:33] Mayor Castillo: If you all want to put together public forums,

[4:52:38] that is fine.

[4:52:42] >> That is fair game.

[4:52:46] This is an important topic for all of us

[4:52:49] in the room and outside.

[4:52:50] It is less about the content because as I've seen the drafts,

[4:52:55] the content is factual and clear.

[4:52:57] They are not argumentative nor advocacy.

[4:53:00] The destination matters under the statute.

[4:53:03] I do not want to use an ugly word but it is "muzzled."

[4:53:11] we've connected many forums.

[4:53:12] You need to be very careful.

[4:53:14] We are being very guarded about making sure

[4:53:16] that although it's a topic upon which we have great concern,

[4:53:20] we don't want to misstep and violate the law unintentionally.

[4:53:26] Mayor Castillo: No one is suggesting we violate the law.

[4:53:29] I think there's a great deal of hunger for information

[4:53:33] that people can rely upon about this very important matter.

[4:53:39] We have that information and should find a way

[4:53:42] that is legal to disseminate.

[4:53:48] Commissioner Schwartz: Attorney, I appreciate your focus on this,

[4:53:52] utilizing third parties.

[4:53:54] The law is explicit to what information there can be,

[4:54:03] how it's gathered and distributed.

[4:54:05] It doesn't just impact elected officials but also the city

[4:54:11] administration.

[4:54:12] I look forward to getting your response

[4:54:15] at the appropriate time.

[4:54:17] It is serious business and I appreciate

[4:54:21] you protecting us from the law.

[4:54:23] >> Thank you very much.

[4:54:27] Commissioner Good, Jr.: I want to reiterate

[4:54:30] that facts are facts but probable solutions

[4:54:34] that were presented is not something I'm supporting at all.

[4:54:41] I stated today that one of the potentials

[4:54:46] was getting rid of all events.

[4:54:48] I'm not interested in supporting that in any case whatsoever.

[4:54:53] I will make that statement at the time

[4:54:58] it will be if it is to be.

[4:55:00] That's not a fact.

[4:55:02] It's a potential.

[4:55:03] It needs to be clear because I will not

[4:55:05] stand behind someone saying this until we

[4:55:07] go through the exercise of what we really are

[4:55:09] going to do to make it a fact.

[4:55:14] What the remedy to the facts is something

[4:55:17] I'm against having being published in a format that

[4:55:21] makes it look like a fact.

[4:55:24] Mayor Castillo: Thank you very much.

[4:55:28] Anything else?

[4:55:30] This meeting is adjourned.

[4:55:35] [GAVEL BANGS]

City Commission on 2026-09-03 6:00 PM - 6:00 PM 1st Budget Hearing & 6:30 PM Regular Commission Meeting (or at such time as the 1st Budget Hearing adjourns). Exhibits 5 & 6 were added on 8/27/26 & Exhibits 7 & 8 were added on 9/1/26 to Item No. 16. Exhibi

Agenda

Transcript