Welcome to the town of Highland Beach Town Communion meeting. Um, and I'd like to call the meeting to or order. If we can have the roll call, please. >> Commissioner Chinowski, >> present. >> Commissioner Goldberg, >> present. >> Commissioner Peters, >> present.
>> Vice Mayor Stern, >> present. >> Mayor Moore, >> present. >> Town Manager Laby >> here. >> And Town Attorney Ruben, >> present. >> We could all rise for the pledge. I alian for it stands one nation under God
indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Any changes to the agenda? Seeing no changes, if we could have a motion to approve the agenda. >> Yes, I move to approve the agenda. >> I second that. >> All in favor say I. >> I. I.
>> Motion carries. Moving on to presentations and proclamations. And we have a very special proclamation today honoring Gertude Kazovski and it is our 103rd birthday which is uh amazing.
And I'd like to tell you a little bit about um Miss Kaz Kazki. Gertude Kazowski uh recently celebrated her 103rd birthday on May 16th. So she's a little more than 103. Uh she was born on May 16th, 1923 in Brooklyn, New York,
and grew up during the Great Depression, developing the resilience, determination, and compassion that have characterized her remarkable life. And after earning a degree in chemistry from Hunter College, Gertrude contributed to
the nation's wartime efforts by working in various physician laboratories in New York City and several army hospital laboratories during World War II. Very nice. And together with her husband, Dr. Harold Kazowski. She raised two children
and later pursued a successful career as an interior decorator and became a distinguished collector of the James McNeel Whistler artwork with her collection now part of the Frick collection and being shared with the public.
And whereas following the passage of her husband Dr. for Harry Kazoffski. She moved to Highland Beach in 2017, fulfilling a lifelong dream of living by the ocean at the age of 95. And whereas Gertude Kazoski resides in
the Highland Beach community with her son, embracing the town's unique coastal character, library exhibits, and the kindness and friendship of its residents. Now I therefore Natasha Moore, mayor and the and the town commission do hereby do hereby proclaim
May 16th, 2026 as Gertude Kazosski Day and extend our heartfelt wishes to Gertude Kazoffski on celebrating her 103rd birthday and wish her continued health and happiness in the years to come. So,
>> and if the commission wouldn't mind if we could uh stand in front of the podium and bring her up and um presentation It's not I just have to tell a little story about it. Peter lives in my building
talking and at 103 she still cares and calls her son where are you Amen. >> Microsoft. Okay, moving on to the next item on the agenda. Cam Milani's request for amendments to the settlement agreement.
If Cam, if you want, Mr. Milani, if you want to come to the podium. >> Hi. Um, thanks for having me. I know I've got a couple of requests in front of you. So, I'd like to just in the interest of time for everybody as well just focus on them separately. So, I'd
like to start with the Alta V the Alta Villa development that we've got which is on the west side of A1A which is known as the townhouse development for everybody. So, we're here on a couple of requests for there. Um little bit of history. We entered into a
settlement agreement with the town decades ago uh under some certain development standards that were consistent at the time which allowed us for about 40 ft of height uh from the eight mean feet 8 ft above mean high water line. It was a different type of
calculation than you have today but it's roughly 40t um it's above that line. Uh today your standards actually don't really have a height maximum. They just say 35 ft above the garage basically. Um which is effectively for most
developments in Highland Beach about 46 ft. So we're here today to ask for um uh if you want to call it a variance or an exception to our current settlement agreement that will allow for us to match current c current uh Highland
Beach height standards. So that's one request. Um the second request is a bit of a surprise to probably everybody here and us that we discovered recently. Uh so we pulled our building permits and we're advancing our construction of the
of the site even at the 40 ft. Uh we've discovered that we have a bit of a property line problem with our neighbor Bokeh Highlands. Um we can't we tried to resolve it amongst ourselves but haven't been able to do
that. Uh we believe we own about 25 or 20 feet there and I believe that they believe that they own 20 feet there. Um our settlement agreement with the town includes this disputed 20 ft. Uh our building permits include these 20 ft. We
have a building on the 20 ft. Um, so we're asking the town if they can give an us an extension of time to our settlement agreement to allow for enough time for us to work things out with Bokeh Highland either amicably or
through a courtmandated process. Um, so that's my request for the Altiva uh development and I'm happy to come back up to talk about the other one. I'm I'm sure everybody wants to talk about the Alta one. I I think you should go ahead and uh do
everything at one time. >> Yeah, do everything at one time. All your items. Go ahead and discuss it now. >> Sure. And I'm happy to come back up if you have any other questions as well. Okay. So then on the east side, we have my mom's house. >> I was born there. I grew up there. She's been there for 52 years. I know that
this agreement has been on our books for quite a long time. And you know, as much as we all like to be ready for deadlines as they approach, sometimes we're not. and she's not ready to bulldoze down her house. So, she won't stand up here and
ask you guys for an extension. Sorry. She won't ask you for an extension on her house. Um cuz she's too proud. I'm here to ask for that extension so that I don't force her to move out of the house. if she'd like to stay there a
little bit longer. I'm asking for a 10-year extension there to allow her to stay a little bit longer in the place. She has a lot of memories there and so I don't think it really costs the town anything to just grant her a 10-year extension to stay in the house a little
bit longer. So, I'd like to view both separately, but that's her request on the on the east side. >> And that those are all the items. >> Those are all the items. >> Okay. Okay. What's that? Oh, well, hold on. Hold on. >> Okay.
>> So, um, so this is a presentation, but I guess I'm recommending that we take public comments at this time since, um, >> we'll hold questions back. >> Uh, no, maybe go ahead and ask your questions now and then, um, we'll have public comments after your questions.
So, go ahead. >> Yeah, I'm going concerned. Um, without the extension, uh, what would be the next step? >> Uh, on which parcel? yourself as far as the I understand the height and item two where you said you need an extension. >> Yes. >> Um without that extension, where does
that put you? >> Um just in a standard building permit process, as I understand it, I'd be in a standard building permit process um to either build as is, you know, with the permits that we have on disputed land or
um extensions to those permits pursuant to statute. Uh there's probably a variety of different steps that could take place in the absence of an extension to the formal settlement agreement, but um that's probably where we're at.
>> Okay. I'd be curious to hear from the community what your objection to the extension is, but I we'll wait till I'll wait to hear that. >> Okay. Okay. >> Any other questions before >> question on the disputed 20 ft? Has there been any mediation? Has there been
any attempt for both parties from your point of view to talk about it and see if they can come up to a solution? >> Yeah, and we have had some great chats with uh the representatives of the community. It's been some good faith discussions and um unfortunately in in life sometimes you just don't agree,
right? So um yes, we have had lots of them um but just have not been able to resolve them. >> Has there been any formal mediation? >> No, not formal mediation. No. No. >> Okay. Thank you. Yeah, we haven't even started any kind of litigation yet, but
and that may not even be necessary and we may still be able to work it out. Um, I'm not saying that that's happened yet, but I'm just giving ourselves enough runway to anticipate if that does happen. >> I do have some questions, Cam. >> Okay.
>> Uh, with respect to the um the 20 ft. >> Yes. >> Now, you've had this property. How long? When did you take title? >> We've had it. Well, geez, my father probably in the 70s and then we You want
a little bit of a history on it? I actually have a map here that that can help you kind of identify. Do you do you want me to hand it up? >> No. No. Okay. >> You don't have a ready number? I mean, I I know this is as a result uh you're here before the commission because this is a result of a settlement agreement.
This is not a variance that you're coming clean, right? >> Yeah. So um there are other considerations and other laws that uh that govern uh but for this is uh what was 1995 the agreement. >> Yeah. So we've owned the property. So
this particular dispute at 20 ft. We had a property dispute with the developer of Boca Highland in 1982 and we had a quick claim deed to each other. We gave him 20 feet and he gave us these 20 feet and that was the settlement and we have a deed for it. So
that happened and then in look this is I'm not a lawyer but this is kind of how I understand the story in 1989 it looks like he just sold it off again to someone else. >> So you've had uh legal counsel throughout I would assume your family has had legal
>> Yes ma'am. Correct. >> And um one would assume that you would have reason um to uh check the title. >> Gosh. No. We've never had a reason to check title. In fact, we have a settlement agreement with the town of Highland Beach that includes this title.
That includes this 20 ft. Our settlement with you includes the 20 ft. Our building permit includes the 20 ft. Our unity of title includes the 20 ft. >> But we are not involved in that dispute nor the designation of the 20 ft on or off. We know what you represented the
town um in uh in the litigation. And um uh you did have counsel again when you appeared with your mother before the county commission >> relative to the parking. >> Yes, ma'am. >> Is that right? Too. Okay.
>> Um with respect to um the height now, you're not seeking um to uh just put aside this agreement. Let's forget about it. Let's tear it up and let's start from scratch and take
advantage of all the zoning and uh setbacks, etc. Correct. You're you're picking out just the height from this. >> I was trying to be as surgical as I could. Yes. And I can Yes. Yes, ma'am. >> Why should the town do this? Why should
they give you a benefit >> that would not otherwise in your to the other residents, the other owners? Uh that's a great question. Um so when we developed the settlement agreement back in the day, building standards were slightly different. Um
market expectations were different, ceiling heights were different. Um so we didn't anticipate waiting this long and then here we are today saying, "Oh my gosh, we can still build three stories, but the ceilings will be 8t tall and in
some places seven." I don't think that's a marketable product in Highland Beach. So, in order to achieve um a I don't want to call it a greater density, but from your perspective, you're going to miss out if you want to call it what do you get. What I think you're losing if
you don't grant the variance is a significant tax base increase um at zero cost to the town because we will be able to build an entire other story. But you can you can build the even the exact number of units
>> um pursuant to the agreement. >> It just wouldn't be at the height that you would like. Correct. >> Um I' we'd have to make a massive reconfiguration of the site. Who knows what it might look like. But you're correct. We can still build nine units today if we make them smaller, for
example. We could um I'm not asking for a unit increase at all. I'm literally just asking for a height increase. Um, I could squeeze nine units if I made them smaller or we did something else, but we're we're so pod invested in the the design and the building permit process.
Those are expensive processes. So, it's too costly for us to redesign the whole building. >> So, it would be a difference for you. bottom line would be just in the um uh uh the uh buyer's cost the excuse me the the price
that you would obtain whether you would I don't know how much you contemplated selling the units for but you'd still have the nine units eight units seven units but as many as certainly as many as the uh request was made and granted
in a costly litigation I may say >> town incurred quite a bit of legal fees Now, that's correct. It would still be nine units. I'm not asking for more units. I'm just asking for essentially higher ceiling heights. >> Now, if you if you did um uh if we did
grant that height and uh can you address how that would impact your belief on how that would impact your immediate neighbors? >> Sure. Um I would I would describe it as minimal. Um, in our opinion, our humble
opinion, um, our neighbor direct literally adjacent to us has permission to build an unlimited height of a building and we're our neighbor is going to propose to build a 46 ft building and we're at 40 ft. So, the impact is
already consistent with what's going on literally adjacent to our site. So, I don't see a large impact. Again, that's very selfish and if you want to look at it from that from my own perspective, I think it's just different than what we have, but not different
from what this town permits currently. So, it's an expectation management exercise, not an impact. >> All right. It uh moving to the other the residence property on uh the ocean. >> Okay. Yes. >> Um
your mother was before the commission. and I believe it was in 2023 requesting the 10-year extension and that was denied. You're aware of that? >> Um, I'd have to go back. Did she ask for a 10-ear extension back then? >> I believe you were with her. >> Were you not?
>> I thought you were debating something that we didn't yet agree to. I Are you talking about the agreement regarding the park and >> No, now I'm talking about the residence. She wanted a 10-year extension on building in accordance with the
agreement. >> Okay. I just don't recall. I'm sorry. I just >> So, that was in fact I believe it was 2023. >> Okay. >> Now, with respect to that uh property, >> um is it your understanding that your mother doesn't have to
I mean, she could remain in the house and still build the rest of uh the designed property in accordance with that settlement agreement. Are you aware of that? >> I don't know what you mean. We have >> She doesn't have to move. She could stay there.
>> Oh, sure. Yeah, of course. You don't have to move, but then she would lose the settlement agreement if she didn't. >> Well, she could still construct of the other I believe it's it was a phased project. >> Okay. >> All right. Is there a particular reason
uh your your mother you said is not going to address us. Uh are you aware of any reason uh for a change of circumstances between 2023 and today with regard to the request for the 10-year extension? >> I again I don't remember exactly what
you're referring to in 2023. If I think I remembered, we might remember it slightly differently, but no, nothing has changed since 2023, and my mom is still residing in the place. The the rationale for the extension would have been the same. >> Okay, that >> but if you're saying that she could, you
know, maybe phase it and not maybe necessarily bulldoze down the house and not lose the the permissions, that sounds great. Like that would also work. >> Do you have legal counsel advising you on that property as well? >> Oh, yeah. Yeah, we have legal counsel.
>> I'll pass now. I may have other questions afterwards. >> I I just have two quick questions. So, Cam, you're not asking for extension on the west side at all, just the east side. >> I'm asking for both. So, I'm asking for 10 on the east side. So, I my mom
doesn't have to bulldoze down the house, but u Miss Goldberg has come up with perhaps an alternative solution. I don't know. Um maybe we'd have to discuss it with the building official as it relates to that. But no, we are requesting also a 5-year extension on the west side
um to deal with the property um boundary dispute with Bokeh Highland. I mean, we have a permit to build over there in Boca Highland. We just have a property boundary dispute. So, I don't want to >> go too far and then something happens in a court proceeding
and we have to undo everything. Right. Yeah, my my actually my second question would probably be for Jeff. Can they build if there's a property dispute on that? Um, you know, >> there is no property dispute. >> I mean, if if if they don't own that
property, is that uh come up? Well, you want you want No, >> unless there's some sort of court order that they can't build, they can build. Unless it's somehow encumbered or the court determines that they cannot build,
they can build. I mean, there's a dispute, yes, but it doesn't prevent them from going forward unless the party with whom they're in a dispute obtains some sort of injunctive relief preventing them from moving forward. If that answers your question.
>> Okay. Answers. I'm good. >> I don't have any additional questions. I'd like to hear the public comment on it. Go ahead. >> So, just quickly, I uh I did forward lens uh memorandum from 23 just to kind
of um what the process is. Uh just so we all know and transparently that this you can consider this. Um, we just have to be uh mindful to follow a matching process under 3010. Um, which is how we
got to the settlement agreement just to keep it clean, transparent, and public. >> Msider what again? Reconsider. >> There are requests by the Milani family. You can consider them. You have the ability >> both the five the extensions both extensions. But >> you can do that. Um but again uh you'll
notice a quite extensive uh discussion here and I know uh we talked about it in 23 is that the settlement agreement was drafted in the public's interest uh and in the best interest of the residents and the citizens. Traditionally, you would see some type
of exchange of benefit and I believe Miss Goldberg was talking to that. Is there what is that exchange to retain or preserve or in your discussion with the public determine it's in the best interest? We just want to make sure we make that clear that we're preserving
that public interest element of a settlement agreement. U which is how we got to this point. Um and also just you know careful that if we do make any modifications we are open to legal challenges by those that during the
process make comments. They preserve their right to challenge this any type of modification you should make. So just be mindful of it. I sent it to you guys just so you have it. It's the same one from 23 just so we follow that same process. >> And the benefit that Cam brought out was
a tax benefit if I'm clear. >> What? >> Well, yes. I mean that's that's that's him. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> So we just you know just be mindful of keeping that public interest in the back of your mind as you move forward in the discussions. So what if
you are compelled we've preserved or made those statements that public interest is protected in the residents and citizens. So just that kind of is the overarching elements we want to make sure we preserve moving forward. Um, and then it also provides the best
protection should a legal challenge be filed. So, we just want to follow those processes. And then, uh, mayor, if if you set a time for the public comments, you know, three minutes, I think, is um, would be sufficient. >> Okay.
>> Um, so I'd like to open it up for Oh, thank you very much. And, um, we'll call you up if we need you again, Mr. Milani. Thank you very much. Um, I see Maggie's hand first and then I'll go to you. Um, state your name uh before you do your comments, please.
Thank you. >> Maggie Chappelier, Failure Drive, resident of Highland Beach since 1985. Before many of you wonderful people that live in this town, Highland Beach was
always a small community that worked well together. I enjoy the fact that Mrs. Melania is here. She's a wonderful resident of Highland Beach. And there's going to be a park named after their family, which has been contentious, but
I really appreciate the park, the land that her family agreed to sell at market value to the Palm Beach County. I I made some notes as Cam was talking. Uh I am a developer as well. My husband and I,
we've been developing for over 30 years. So, I have a few comments that maybe someone can piggyback on this. Number one, I did a Papa search and clearly it says that the lot the parcel in question
is owned by Bokeh Highlands and I don't think the town should get embroiled in that matter. Um, but if there was a mistake, I'm on Cam's side that if he was supposed to get it and he can legally prove it, leave the town out of
it. We don't need any more legal fees. Uh, the other thing is the mother's house. I believe that what they have right now is they can build two houses on the ocean plus a little villa, a little small house. He should move forward with building his mother uh the
little villa. And while she's living there, they can tear down the house and follow what they set out to do back in the 90s. So the argument that I have to get my mother out of there doesn't hunt with me. Uh so uh go ahead, build the house
for your mother. I think you could make it ADA compliant and help her out. It does have to come up to law and ordinance laws. you know, I don't know if it's a flood zone or whatever, but he should take that into consideration,
whatever the code is. Uh, I'm also very concerned about surfaces in Highland Beach, and we'll get to that when we go to the west side of the property. So, why should you have more height on the ocean? It's going to kill the views of
all the people on the west side. It's I I wouldn't want it. I think that would be detrimental to your neighbors. Yes, I agree, Cam, that taller ceilings are all the rage, but uh I don't know I don't know what you have in your settlement
agreement. Um, as a developer, one of the due diligence things I always do is I check to see, do I own this property? So, Papa, property search, I just did it and sold your properties. You should try to
make a deal with your next door neighbor. I think they're entitled to two town houses. Just put those together and you'll get more density your neighbors north of you. That's what I recommend. Um I have a question for Cam. Um you think you could get five six
billion dollars a unit. You will not because you have no views, you're going to be crammed and you're not going to have much in the terms of amenities unless Bokeh Highlands is kind enough to let you under their beach club. Now, you could take your mother's property and you could cut an easement down so that
people can go to the beach. That's an alternative. I was looking at all this. I'm trying to help you figure this out. Um, you keep saying you have nine town houses, but according to what I've read, you only have seven. I don't know why you keep referring to nine. You have seven. According to what I've read, I
could be wrong. I'm not representing you as a developer. I'm just giving you some ideas. I if it were me, I would start a new agreement if they won't give you the extension. Now, if I lived at Bokeh Highlands, I would definitely not give
you the extension because you're just going to sue me. So, but you could negotiate them for that little piece you want to add a little more towards where their pool is. They have some pool, tennis court, where their road is. I understand they're not going to build
those tall buildings you were talking about. So that argument's been discussed. Um I I do want to benefit the people of Highland Beach at all costs. And you are your mother is one and I look out for your mother, believe it or
not. Um it's only fair that the town looks at both sides of the equation. But so far I'm thinking about the Bokeh people because you're going to do well. You're going to get seven town houses in this beautiful community. The ceiling height we discussed the tax base
argument doesn't that Doug doesn't hunt. Okay, that's such a small thing. I You're never going to get five six million dollars. Can I continue please? I just have a few more >> 30 seconds more because we've got a lot of people who want to >> Okay. If you add more square feet, you're just going to cram this
development and I wouldn't do that. Uh I didn't know the fact that he was causing us legal fees. Uh, you leave the town out of it. Just work it out with Bokeh Highlands. Uh, the height will impact your neighbors. Did I ask you the question? Are you
planning on flipping this? >> I That's what I keep thinking that you're trying to get the most density you can get. Flip it. Thank you, Maggie. Thank you for your comments. Thank you so much. Evelyn, you want to come on up? >> Yes. Evelyn David, 4740 South Ocean
Boulevard. Okay. Where to start? The settlement agreement was reached after a long nasty lawsuit that cost the town a lot of money and it was signed in 1995
and it ran for 30 years. It's already 31. If you can't build it in 30 years, why would we think another five years is going to make any difference? Let's start with that.
And then we can go to the 40t as opposed to 46. Well, the 40T in that agreement was at ground level. Now they're looking for 46 feet starting at the first floor and putting a garage underneath. That's
not a six-foot difference. That's probably a 16 foot difference. So, I think we need to be very clear about that. The agreement doesn't say from the first floor above the garage. It says from the ground.
Yes, the ground has to be filled in. So, it it's not below par, but it was from the ground. 8ft ceilings. Well over 50% of this town has 8 foot ceilings. If people didn't want an 8ft
ceiling, we wouldn't sell another condo in most buildings. So that's that's a facious argument as far as I'm concerned, and I hope you agree. All right. Um they did ask for five-year extensions at
least twice before this that I can remember and both times they were told no. And one of the really big reasons was there was an ask, but there wasn't a give. And if you give them something without
getting something valuable in return, you can be charged with spot zoning. You are giving her something no one else could get. You're not allowed to doubt if you try. Don't be up to lawsuits
because the next builder that comes in, and there are a couple of empty lots that will have builders, they're going to want the same kind of things. They're not going to want to be held to current zoning. They want to amend that agreement with
the settlement agreement. I mean, understand that when you settle a lawsuit, it's very different than just somebody coming in and asking for an exception. It It's a whole different animal.
But that agreement gives them way more than just limiting the height. The benefits of that agreement are zero lot lines. They can build right up against the fence to the next property
over. It gives them 10 feet from the street as opposed to a bigger setback. Within the community itself, there are very few setbacks. There's a lot of benefits. If they want to open that
agreement up, I would open it up and say, "You want to go by current code?" Fine. Current code. All of it. Not just one piece because that one piece benefits you, but it doesn't
benefit the town. It doesn't benefit the people in this town. I saw a rendering that supposedly came from the Milanis that is horrible to put it in a word because
it's like this big block. current code for the past several times it's been amended is going for less density not more and to have this big block to be to be
fair beare nothing against the Bronx but it looks like a project in the Bronx with a garage underneath is going to block views of the neighbors behind them it's going to this massive
thing and a garage underneath That's way beyond anything that our code currently envisions 10 extra years on the other side. She doesn't have to leave.
She doesn't She can stay there. Nobody is saying you have to leave. Now, it may be that under the settlement agreement, if they don't start building now, because that's also subject to the 30 years because it was part of the same agreement,
she may lose some rights under it. Well, that's a tradeoff. Thank you. >> Thank you. Thank you very much for your comments, Eve. I'm Eve Rosen and I live in Boca Highland and I just want to say what she
said. But additionally, let's be clear. Um, you have a request in front of you which is a very recent request for a t timed agreement requiring action by the Milanis now asking for 5 years of an
extension on the west side development. To say that the dispute about the 20 feet is most important and recent is a little bit of a misstatement as there were discussions about that 20 ft
several years ago with the late Doug Hillman and those discussions sort of petered out if you will. I'm sorry. Um I didn't mean to use petered. Um but the point is then the discussions were
revived very recently as the time frame for putting shovels into the ground to do that development became near to it. So again what is in the public interest?
public negotiated this agreement 30 years ago with time frames which seemed extraordinarily reasonable with a lot of difference to um them to the Milanis in terms of zoning requirements and now
asking for a change only in one zoning requirement height without any change with respect to setbacks density or any other factor that's in that agreement. doesn't seem to be in the public
interest. So, with that said, I think Evelyn stated an awful lot of um items that are absolutely relevant and I want to thank you for your time. >> Thank you. Anybody else want to come up and make a
comment? Please state your name before your comment. >> Marvin Silver, resident of beautiful town of Boka Highlands. Let's keep it beautiful. The zoning requirements that people fought for,
let's keep that going. Let's not change them. And let's make sure that all agreements going forward follow those requirements to keep our town beautiful and at a density that is also wonderful.
Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Good afternoon. My name is Steve Rosen. That's my wife, Eve. Uh I would just like to talk about the 20 foot uh portion of Brown, the so-called disputed.
As my wife said, we had gone through this before with them and they never said they owned that piece of land. They never claimed to own it. They never paid any taxes on it. They never maintained the ground. It was a nice green space
and it was up until a couple of weeks ago. And what Cam neglected to tell you was they covered that whole area with black earth. So now all that grass, all that green
space is black and it's an eyes sore. And whatever happened to the idea of having green space? Are isn't the town supporting that? I always thought they did. So now we have the issue of granting an
extension to the company that owns that land, the so-called Milani West Side. And I say we should not do it because they have not been good citizens
of Highland Beach. That's all I have to say. Thank you. Any other comments? Anyone else want to come up and say anything? No. Okay. Um, hearing none. Any additional
comments from the commission? >> Yes, I have a comment. Um, in my business career, I really believed in when growth stops, decay begins. Uh, it's been something I've lived by my entire life. And I've read several of the letters that are here where it says
we have too much construction going on in Highland Beach. I've read it. I understand it. Uh, if that was truly the case, those of us that are going through certification in all the buildings uh could debate that topic. And uh when we
drive into the town and we see 3 miles of paradise, I wish the authors of that quote could be here today. I get it. I truly understand the situation as far as the height. I really do. Where I'm challenged right now is on the extension
and it could be lack of knowledge, understanding, but I'm challenged by that because my history of working with developers has always been we need a little bit more time. we need a little bit more time. And there's nothing new about that. And I think Maggie said that very, very well. But where I'm
challenged right now is why wouldn't I give a 5-year extension? And I've heard the history and everything else. But looking at the property, looking at Highland Beach right now, looking at what's left in Highland Beach, and in the future over the next 10 years, I can
see knockdowns because the amount of land available uh is really small. So, as a commissioner who's looking at the community as a whole, I don't live in Boca Highlands. I have many friends in Boca Highlands. So, I'm not talking as a resident, but as someone who's looking
at the community as a whole, I am challenged by why wouldn't I try to work this out? And I understand past history, but I didn't live through it. So, that's where I'm really challenged. And I just want to make that point that right now I am challenged by not giving the
five-year extension. Um, and I'll pass it on to my other commissioners. >> Uh, many letters, many comments, uh, were made. Um, some here today, many, many more, uh, through emails to the
town. Um, that's very important for us here on the commission because we represent you. We represent the public. We represent Highland Beach. Um with regard u I just want to clarify
with regard to the east side it's my understanding that the request is once again 10 years not five extension um there has been 30 years now the uh request the application was made several years ago and we had this very
discussion and we had the discussion that there didn't appear to be any uh benefit benefit to the public. There was no consideration as aptly stated uh by Evelyn. Um and this is a contract. This
is a contract uh reached through litigation, costly, but everyone had lawyers and it was by I assume I wasn't involved. Um a hot topic for a while and um and lots of work went into this
agreement. Lots of work. Let me say um today also that of course any changes you know a an extension let's say on the east side of 10 years that change through an agreement a mutual signed
agreement would run with title uh effectively anyone that would take title thereafter could be a sale the next day we have no control over what happens after it
leaves our offices. So someone else would have the benefit of another 10 years to sit there and have that authority under under that agreement. That was not contemplated. That is not a desire. There's not a desire that I as a commissioner would uh
would want uh for the town. That ambiguity, uncertainty. and and similarly on the on the other property any extension granted would assumably run with title. Um but um with respect to these changes
and the uh it's very apt this it would be considered if there's no consideration a spot zoning that would be challenged and um we would lose uh after costly litigation. So the town
uh does not want to be involved in any more litigation with respect to this. Um, I think that as far as the home, from what I can see, if three years ago a request was asked, it was denied. To my knowledge, there's
no construction, no change has taken effect except today coming in again for the very same relief without any without being forthcoming and offering what is the benefit that the town will
have. What is the benefit that you the people of this town will have by granting the 10 more years? I don't see it. There's also um the benefit that there is a residence there. They can be occupied. I assume they are occupied. So
there are many options. They can continue with the with the agreement. Um do whatever they choose to do. She can stay in the home. I don't need to get into the particulars, but um it doesn't seem to be dire circumstances, emergency
circumstances um um no benefit to the town. So I would decline um that application with respect to that with respect to the height again in the time with the height. Um
why that? It could be anything to pick an agreement apart. Now I want this, now I want that. Um uh and the benefit there's a great benefit to um uh to the family to the owners. Um but again
there is no consideration for that. It's just a desire to change an agreement. So I would decline that as well. >> Yeah. And um also back in 19 that Evelyn was saying I mean that was brought up in
19 we bought up in 23. M fact Evelyn was on the board then we all went through it. I mean uh I feel sorry that Miss Milani can't live there but maybe Maggie had some good ideas. Maybe she could do that. The 4T I mean I got an 8ft ceiling
and I'm very happy uh with my ceilings there. So uh but I I can't see anything. I mean, we're up here. We listen to all the residents and I hate to say it, but there's all the residents were against this and we're your voice. So, um I'm I'm along with that. There's nothing in
the public interest to open this up again. >> Thanks, Mayor. >> Yeah, I I have nothing to add to to those comments. Thank you. >> Yeah, I I um agree with uh what the commissioners have said so far. Um it
does seem there were some comments we received that were in favor um of the of adopting the um request, but I'd say the overwhelming majority of what I've seen um is to reject um any
any request for any change. Um, for me, what's critically important is that we have the settlement agreement that was passed down by the courts. And, um, I I personally have no appetite to
open that up and subject the town to any additional legal fees. Um, I I like the clear cut and dry um of the current settlement agreement that we have right
now. Um, you know, I don't want to discuss the merits or, you know, whatever of the settlement agreement. To me, it's just pretty black and white. We have the settlement agreement and um there clearly is in my opinion no
benefit to the town to make any to try to open that up again. If anything, it's to the detriment of the town. Um, so I am u very much in favor keeping in line with what the prior commission decisions
have been which is not to make any changes and to continue with the current settlement agreement as was decided by the courts 30 years ago. So um that's my opinion. Go ahead.
>> May I just add one other comment? I would also strongly encourage mediation on the disputed 20 foot space in order to solve that issue and hopefully come to an agreement between the two parties so everyone can move forward.
>> Yeah, good point. >> Um, so do we have consensus? Um, >> so >> do we? >> I would have a question for Len. >> Yes, sir. David's recommendation, uh, Commissioner Stone's recommendation as far as mediation,
um, would that take an extension or can that just been be done in the normal course of business? >> That could be done in the normal course of business. >> Normal course of business. >> And I think as some of the residents said, it's not the town of Highland Beach's issue. There's an issue between
two private parties. And so if the consensus of the commission is to just leave it, then there's no action you have to take. If the consensus or a majority of the commission did want to entertain a modification, then we'd initiate the process. But if the consensus, if there's not a motion to do
that, then the agreement will stand as it is. >> Okay. >> Are we good? Are we good? I'm looking at you. Um, Commissioner Chazati, just because you said you had uh struggling with >> I think John's comments um I think we
have to listen. You know, we work for the community, >> right? We work for the community. Uh whatever our personal opinions are, our feelings are, we work for the community. And I think it's obvious by the comments that are being made, uh the direction that we have to take. >> Okay. Yeah, I agree. I completely agree.
Thank you everyone for coming out and sharing your your um opinions and feedback and interpretations. It it really um that's that's how we make this work. So, uh we really appreciate um everyone coming out. So, um, yep. So, I
think the consensus is to stay with the settlement. Yeah. >> We did receive 29, uh, emails and public comments and 26 were opposed to what was presented. >> Yeah.
Okay. Thank you very much. That helps. That that count helps for sure. >> Okay. So, we can move on. Thank you very much, everyone. Now we go. >> Moving on to item C, 2026 hurricane
preparedness presentation by fire chief Glenn Joseph. >> Afternoon everybody. Mayor, commissioners Glenn Joseph, fire rescue. We just wanted to give a quick update on the hurricane season for 2026 and let
you know uh or remind you to take steps to prepare. Is it? >> Yes, I'll speak louder. I guess >> my Barry Malo voice. I don't Barry >> Mandalow
>> Barry White. >> It's a good day. It's a good day. Anyway, >> according to the National Weather Service, um we are expecting a lighter than normal hurricane season this year. >> Excellent. >> Uh primarily because there are some issues with the weather that would make
storms that occur and in the Atlantic less powerful. although they're still expecting three major storms in this uh season which runs from June 1st to November. So um it only takes one bad storm to make us
have a miserable hurricane season. So we should always prepare for the worst. So uh again just a reminder some of the risk. You know, we usually measure hurricanes based on wind speed, but as of the last few years, most of the fatalities have come from water type
events, either surge or freshwater flooding or rip currents. We've seen a little bit of that in the last few months here as well. So, we want to take uh precautions and preparations to make sure that, you know, we look at the risks and uh
prepare for it in a way that's reasonable and makes sense. So, uh, we are at in an evacuation zone. Anytime there's a category 2 or above, we have to evacuate the island. And it's a mandatory evacuation. Of course, we're not going to drag you out of the house, but we'll certainly strongly, strongly
recommend that you not be on the island during a storm of that magnitude because we will be gone. The police will be gone. The fire will be gone. Your war will probably be turned off. Power will be no no longer available. Elevators. So, it's in your best interest to make
plans now because the height of our season is between July and and September, October. That's when we get usually get our worst storms. So, make those recommendations now. Now, I have worked storm shelters in the past uh over the years. I've been at this for a
little bit and it's not really the place that somebody living in three miles of paradise would want to ride out a storm. It's not exactly the Taj or the Ritz. So, if you have an alternative plan, meaning make a friend with somebody on
on the mainland that has a nice house and uh we'll accommodate you and your pets because >> yeah, >> it's usually a better experience all variety. You know, you could have a hurricane party and >> commune. But I've been in I've been in shelters. I've worked many shelters and
it's not really a place. Think I 95 at rush hour. People going in and out and you know just annoying you to death. So make make plans that if you are going to if you since you have to evacuate that you have a place that is you know
comfortable for you. >> Do you have any room chief >> on the roof? >> I have plenty of room and if somebody needs to stay with me by all means we'll pull the air mattresses out. We'll make it happen. We'll keep you posted through the
community connect uh if you've already signed up for that and it's just a QR code. Sign your family up and if you have any special needs uh will let us know that. Also code red which everybody I hope is signed up for. And you should also get a uh battery powered hurricane
uh weather radio to keep give updates cuz the TV might not work. Your internet might be down. So the radio is always the last good choice for getting good information. If you are going to need to go to a shelter and you have special needs, for instance, you're diabetic or you're dialysis patient or you mobility
challenged, then you need to make arrangements for that ahead of time. And in the hurricane guide, which has just been updated for 2026 and the city clerk's going to have that available for you, uh the clerk's office, uh all the numbers are in there, so you could actually register ahead of time. They'll
even pick you up, but again, you must register and they'll pick you up ahead of the storm to take you to wherever you need to go. So, uh, always make that plan. If you have pets, there only special shelters that allow pets. You also have to pre-register for those as well. So, if you have a pet that and you can't find a good friend, I strongly
encourage you to find a good friend on the mainland uh that will accommodate you and your pets, then by all means, uh, make that u telephone call and they will come uh we'll help in the last minute, but there's a lot of people here. will not be able to transport everybody that may need help. Securing
your home. Um uh you know the usual um should test your shutters if you have shutters down. Make sure your shutters are working. Oil grease the parts. You don't want to be looking for both at Lowe's, you know, on when the storm is bearing down on us. Okay? So have somebody come over
uh practice your shutters, operate the shutters, oil them up, make sure they're working well so you can do it very quickly. if you have an electric car. Uh, okay. So, we've seen what happened on the west coast with electric cars from storm surge. So, they probably want to relocate those somewhere on high
ground. So, I was talking to somebody from P uh uh Punta Gorder. They had the hurricane conference just uh two weeks ago and they said they had 27 fires, house fires after the la the latest storm last year. 27. Seven of them were caused by electric cars that were left in the garage and they were inundated
with water. And 17 were caused by guess what? Power tool batteries. Yeah. So if they get wet and they sit, they look good, but then they short out and then they'll cause a fire. So if you have chargeable electronic equipment, either wrap it in plastic and tape it
down and put it high up, remove it. But if you come home and you stuff it in wet, don't leave it in the house. Take it outside. Put it in the yard at least 20 ft away from the house. that way if it catches on fire, it's not going to burn the house down. So, just little things like that will help us uh keep it safe throughout the storm season. Uh
when you're returning home, the police are going to block access until get the all clear, which means the police department and the fire department will go through every road, every uh and make sure the trees not in the way, no power lines down, there's no flooding, you
know, and so this and then they'll do the all clear. You will need ID to get back on the island. So if you have to evacuate then by all means bring ID with you. You know secure your documents, insurance papers and all in a safe place
you could access them. Uh better yet take pictures of all of your valuables in the home >> television. Put the serial numbers down. There's some apps right now you can take a picture, put the serial number and it archives all that stuff for you. If you have a an emergency in the house, water damage or storm damage, you could
actually be able to accurately quote what your stuff costs so you could get a good settlement. >> The seniors there from from our experience last time, the seniors who stay in the building, we have several that would stay in the building. What is
the process in that? We will strongly strongly encourage them to not be in the building because I told you number one the police are not going to be here. We're going to evacuate. I'm going to take all the fire trucks off this because they cost a lot of money. Put them on on the mainland and secure them so that we don't damage them. We
will come in after this to has passed and if you are in community connect and you let us know that you're not going to leave then with the first people we check on will be you. Anybody that that stayed over time we'll check on you first. But that may be depending on the severity of the storm. It may be 12
hours, 18 hours, 24 hours and depend how much damage and access and all that stuff. So we certainly would strongly encourage you that if you are planning on not or you are mobility challenged is to have a plan. Um and then call us up. We'll help you make that plan. But certainly uh you need to have a plan to
not be here during the storm. >> I have Are you finished? >> I have a question. um generators. >> Okay. >> Do they run a risk? >> Well, uh the generators may be inundated
depending on the storm. So, generally most buildings and I don't make the rules for your building, but most buildings will uh turn them off, you know, because during during the storm because because there'll be nobody here. It's nobody. So if you are in a flood plane and flood zone, if you keep the
generator running during the storm and it gets inundated with water, it's going to kill the generator. >> All right. So you you mentioned batteries. So I have a little vacuum cleaner that you take it off. I mean, I don't know anything. I don't know if it's ionized or
>> I have lithium ion. You mean >> Yeah. >> Is that a problem? Is that >> If you in the first floor, it may get wet or you may have a window break and then wet. Yeah, >> I would wrap it in a trash can, tape it down nicely, and put it higher up, >> you know. So, just put it above. That
way, it's not going to get wet if the windows break or if you get flood uh tides coming through, storm surge. >> Now, I I know my uh uh my condominion um they sent around hurricane instructions.
I don't know if anyone read them, unless they just trash. They don't. But is it um um your booklet is very well presented, very easy to read, attractive. Is there a a possibility either we could get it online or hard copy? >> It will be. It'll be on the website. You
can download the PDF, >> distribute it again >> and you'll have hard copies at the city clerk's office. So just pick up copies there. If you need copies and you can't find one, give me a call directly. Everybody number. I will print one up and bring it to your house. >> Thank you. Thank you.
>> Thanks, Chief. I got a question. You're always going to get that one person that will not go. >> There'll be more than one one, but uh do we kind of tell you because I think I think Craig said that they would check when they come back the first they'll
check on those people first. >> Correct. >> When they come back. So the same thing with you. We'll >> right. We'll usually do that what we do. We do a task force. We'll do LEO law enforcement officer fire rescue in a truck and then we'll go to and check on each individual property. So, it'll be
one of each and then you could um I hate to give you an option, but uh go on uh you know your community connect and and let us know through the community connect that you will be riding at the stomach at home. We'll check those first and see if anybody's there and then we'll go from there. >> Okay. Thank you.
>> But on the other hand, if your uh HOA president or your community president knows of certain people that are mobility challenge will not leave leave, make sure you let us know. So, let your president know to let us know at fire and police and then we'll know to check on them before we leave and check on
them right after we get back. >> Okay, good. >> Excellent. Thank you. >> Anything else? Okay. Thank you very much. Have a great >> Yes, please. Please. >> So, next item is public comments. Any
additional public comments? Okay, seeing none, moving on to ordinances. Um, we have a proposed ordinance. Um, an ordinance of Oh, I'm sorry. Oh, sorry, did not. >> Please state your name.
>> David Newman. We live in the town houses of Highland Beach. We've been there for about seven or eight years. Um, there are three issues that I want to address briefly. Uh, one is the leaf blowers which has been raised.
>> You may want to get close to the mic, David. >> The leaf blower issue of the people that are using think about, you know, the issue of expenses and whatever, but having this
gas right next to it seems kind of ups. >> Well, I I could uh comment. They made it illegal, right? It's illegal for us to do any limitations on >> it's illegal for us to um disallow
>> gas blowers. The Florida >> statute was passed and said this local governments are no longer able to regulate leaf blowers. So, we're not allowed to pass any regulations. So, the legislature would have to change their mind, but I think we can tackle it. >> Second was the intersection
US1 and L right now it's not a problem you're going to be just light during the season and it's absolutely unnecessary it's it's frustrating because
a problem and yet the commission doesn't do anything about the racist but of course this is I don't know that I'm speaking from people department or is it I called spokes
it's not our problem but the majority of people going part of just a matter of cooperating with neighborhoods probably I'll be happy to work with
but I just don't know every season there's always a 10 or 15 50. So why is this going on? Why is this one? >> So this is you making a public comment where this is not banter back and forth. So you are just stating your public
comment and you've got you're running out of time. still and I think our community the beach needs to address the issue is getting worse and worse town all the way
can go by and text this but it's pretty I haven't been in the ocean in weeks I go the beach the beach it's not fun to clean the quick. You know, mayor, thank you for a comment. You know, I'm not sure what he's looking at, but I know that when I
go out to the beach, uh this equipment there digging it up, burying um I'm not sure how far down the beach that goes, but we we don't have the problem uh as far as the area that we're in, the Coronado, because that whole area all
the way past where Judy lives is it's it's it's very very clean. They they they take care of at least once a week. No, I'm I'm not sure who's paying for that, Marshall. I know we're not at the cron. >> Yeah. No, everybody. >> Property by property. >> Property property. >> Property by property. Yeah. >> Private property.
>> So you guys pay for it. >> So it's coming of the age because I haven't seen that. >> This is nature. >> Y pretty clean. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Thank you very much. Moving on to ordinances. We have a proposed
ordinance, an ordinance of the town commission of the town of Highland Beach, Florida, amending chapter 23, signs and advertising of the town code of ordinances by amending section 23-5 permitted signs to increase the maximum
square footage of a permanent sign from 10 square ft to 32 square ft to increase the maximum square footage of an ingress or egress sign from 3 square ft to 32 square ft. and by amending section 23-8
appeals to provide an an appeal process for granting an increase in the maximum square footage of a permanent sign, providing for the repeal of all ordinances in conflict, providing for severability and codification, and providing for an effective date. Nice.
Hi, good afternoon uh Ingret Allen Town Planner. Um, I decided to approach this item as I did um at the March 3rd, 2026 town commission meeting, which was to start off with a brief public hearing history on this. I provided that in your staff
report. Um, it was uh heard by the town commission twice. It's been to the planning board twice. So, as I said, I just do a just a very brief overview. Um, if the commission recalls, this all came about as a result of a public comment that was made on November 4th of
2025. Uh, you had the president of the board of trustees for Villa Magna come up as a public comment and address uh their concerns about some signage that they want to put or I should say new signage, permanent signage that they want to put along their frontage on A1A. Uh, they submitted plans to the town,
but those plans show the sign too large. those signs were too large in in accordance with our town code. Um, on December 2nd of 2025 at the commission meeting, you actually placed the item on the agenda so you all could discuss it further. Uh, you had some consensus and
you had given some uh direction to the planning board. Uh, you asked them to consider appropriate standards for maximum sign size. How large is too large? Should larger condominiums have larger signs? You ask them to look at colors and illumination of signs, safety of pedestrians and roadway including
visibility and sight lines. Uh you ask them to consider what is the right signage look for the uh for the town of Highland Beach and also to consider an appeal or a variance process and also look at other municipal codes. On January 8th of this year, the planning
board made the following recommendations. They wanted to go ahead and increase the sign size using Boca Raton sign code as a reference. Now in Bokeut Bokea's code, if you have five multif family units or more, it's a 32 foot sign. And if you have a minimum of
50 multif family units, it's a 72 foot sign. Uh the board also uh recommended allowing for a variance procedure uh for a sign and um adding a universal rule for all condos regardless of the size of the condo that any sign should fit in
with the overall property and the building and use similar materials. Then on March 3rd of uh this year, the commission uh you directed staff to go ahead and draft an ordinance and the ordinance which is on page 61 of your packets. It includes and this is based
on the direction from the commission increasing the maximum size area of a sign both for ingress and egress signs as well as permanent signs to 32 square ft. Now the ingress and egress is currently three square feet permanent signs are 10 square feet. Uh you also add asked us to add a process for an
appeal uh which would first be considered by the planning board. They would make a recommendation that would be the advisory board and then it would come to the commission for a final uh decision. Again, that would be for an appeal for a sign code. And then the other item that you all uh wanted to
include in the ordinance was that if there is an appeal for an increase in the maximum square footage of a permanent sign that that can't exceed 72 square feet. So all of that is in the ordinance with the exception of one item, which was the planning board being the recommending board for a signed
appeal. Um, on page 55 of your packets, I provide a justification as to why uh staff went ahead and put the board of adjustment and appeal as the advisory board rather than the planning board. I'll just go over that real quick. Currently, it's the board of adjustment and appeals. Uh, they listen or they hear appeals of a decision, order,
requirement, determination, or interpretation of the town of a town official regarding the zoning code, which is chapter 30. The board of adjustment and appeals currently hears and decides requests for zoning appeals and variances for new and existing
single family homes and existing multif family units. And the board of adjustment appeals currently makes recommendations to the town commission on certain types of variance requests in the zoning code and the flood plane management requirements. So given we
have these established provisions for appeals and variances that calls out the board of adjustment and appeals, uh staff went ahead and just made that one change in the code. And I will state the obvious that the board of adjustment and appeals has the word appeal in their name. So figured I'd mention that as
well. Um on May 14th of uh this year, the planning board recommended approval of the ordinance again, which is on page 61 of your packet. So, the ordinance that's before you today is the exact same ordinance that the planning board reviewed and considered. Again, they recommended approval approval of that.
And um lastly, I looked in the building department. I mentioned this to the planning board to find the largest board that I could find and this is the largest one just to give you all a little bit of perspective on size. So, we have a 12 square foot sign obviously.
Um so if you decide to continue um the direction in which you know your pre which you had indicated in your previous speed meetings 32 square feet obviously would be a little bit less than this signage. Um and I'll be glad to address any questions that you might have. >> Yeah. A lot more. A lot more. This is
12. Right. >> Right. More. Excuse me. What did I say? Less. I'm sorry. >> A little less than three. Yeah. A little less than three times. Three times. Three times. Yeah. >> Yes. >> Yeah. I I do have a question on the I don't remember saying anything about egress and ingress but we're making it
32 square feet and core this nice booklet that uh Bokea Magna gave us there most of the main signs are 13 square ft 10 square ft 12 square feet their main signs so we're making the
egress sign twice as big as their main signs and I think that's not proportional >> again that was the direction, you know, the commission, you wanted those three scenarios and the three scenarios were the ingress and eress, right? It's
currently three square feet at 32. And then you wanted the permanent signs, whether it's on the principal uh structure or if you have an intra coastal uh portion, you can have a permanent sign there at 10 square feet, which would go to 32. But if the
commission is thinking differently on that, by all means, we're happy to revise the ordinance. But again, this was the direction that we got from the >> So, I can tell you why I thought that was a good idea. >> Was that >> just I can tell you why I thought that was a good idea. Um and that is because uh the direction
from the planning board was to uh look at other municipalities as an example and um Boca Raton um I believe has them all as the same size and and um for me
um I just thought you know why make the distinction ingress egress main I I just thought and make it larger than you know perhaps what anyone else would ever suggest. So I thought so for me the 32 ft at least covers what the request
is um because they were requesting something smaller um and it follows what some of the other municipalities do. So that was that was my
>> if I was pulling out of a driveway and I seen a sign this would be five feet longer. or could be four feet width that block my vision going out and and and uh >> but we're aren't we saying it can be and not to exceed >> not to exceed
>> we're just giving the the maximum >> right the maximum and if they want bigger home yeah >> that condo board um should act appropriately you know >> I mean I just think your main sign should be the biggest most you know
biggest sign for you to say and the rest of them be a little proportional that was my only >> but it could be right >> because mo most of them you go you go down bokeh all they're all proportionally smaller all the ingress and egress >> now uh if we do change uh uh change and
incorporate this ordinance uh everything that only takes effect prospectively >> right >> right um I have a question as to the permitting are all sign do you do you require
All signs being permitted. >> All signs require a permit. Unless it's a temporary sign, you don't need a permit. There are some nuances there, but yeah, there's some sign and when you look at the code, there are some signs that you don't require permit. Well, like a permanent sign for a condo would
obviously require a permit. >> So, um >> Okay. Yeah. >> So outside um um a condo on the street before entering right >> there would be a sign and that needs to be permanent. >> Okay. >> And if I just may add about the issue
with the permanent sign. Now um on the top of page 56 I provide you the definition of what our code has for permanent sign. So see means a sign used to identify your name of residence or apartment, condominium, building, motel, hotel. Now the comparison table that I
provide on page 76 with the other municipalities this is based on permanent signage. Now every city may have a different definition of permanent signage but when you look at them like they use a term bokeh uses ground identity wall identity sign. Uh
Deerfield Deerfield Beach uh uses building identification sign or freestanding sign. So I don't know that ingress and egress was considered here. I think these are more like the monument type signs. So, just something to be mindful. Um, I don't see any reference
here to specifically an ingress or egress. It's more about those permanent signs that identify your name. Again, the the definitions may vary by municipality, but I just wanted to put that out there. >> You know, I I had no problem with Bill Magna's request. I've had more comments
about the Burma signage at Seagate. Uh, I've had more people say to me, um, how do those signs there's a repetition of signage? I've had more comments and they're not big signs, but for some reason people found them not as tasteful as they would like, but I understand
that to identify each building while they did it. But I've had less comments when we saw um Bill Bagna putting they were experimenting out there and people were going by. They had no problem with that, but they had more problems with some of the smaller sides. >> Well, maybe maybe it was um because it's
not pretty. >> It wasn't pretty. >> Yeah, >> that's correct. >> I don't know. Was that >> that's a good good description? >> Did it need Did it need to under the current code? It needed to. >> We've had more comments about that. >> I'll talk to you.
>> They look nice. What you proposed was nice. >> Um I'd like to just draw your attention confusing with the permits. Uh page uh 63 or three. Uh uh uh which one? Uh B on the top. a street sign and then it says
no permit. Yeah, as I said, there are some signs, there's some nuance where certain types of signs you don't need a permit, but that's why we're saying for like a permanent sign like a what they're proposing. Um, >> so we just have to clarify that because that run it inconsistent,
>> right? I mean when you look at um if you look at page 62 uh section 235C you know that's uh talks about the permanent signage that's 32 square feet which is underlined and being proposed and the strikethrough is under 10. So yes some
of these other signs I mean the the gist of this amendment was about larger monument signs right permanent signs for condos. Um, it wasn't really to look at other types of street address signs. Oh, again, unless we get different direction from the commission.
>> Believe the street address sign is the actual number. >> Oh, okay. Yes. >> So, that's where they're saying you don't need a permit to put the street number on the >> But that's a permanent sign. >> Street address sign. >> That's a permanent sign.
>> Well, again, it's I think it's a it's called out, so it's different, right? It's address here. was u there was reference I I I didn't um highlight it in my notes um u but it said
I don't know if there's confusion with well wait if you have a private dwelling I believe it said that the streets sign on you didn't need a permit because that was already taken care of um through the process of occupancy giving them good
occupancy to move in but when you have condos and you have from the street you're going to have like you do a seaggate, you know, like a bit there's four different entrances. >> So, uh there's the numbers on these signs, >> right? >> So, where does that fall? It's permanent
sign. It's a street sign. Right. >> Right. To me, it's it's called out separately in the code. We're not proposing to change that. Again, we didn't get direction from the commission to change any of that existing language. >> Okay. But here, it does say no permit is required. >> Right. And when you look at the code, if
you go to page 107, um I mean we have some prohibited uh signs here. Um and there's some other section here that talks about but again keep in mind these are the
permanent signs which identify or name um a residence, apartment, condominium, building, motel or hotel. This is identifying or name, not necessarily an address. That makes sense. But >> and that requires a sign and does not require a permit.
>> It does require a permit. >> It does. >> It does. >> So why should there be a difference if there's a name or a number? Again, the item as discussed as part of a public comment back in November was about changing the maximum size for permanent signs because what Villa Magna
wants to do is um increase have a larger sign that they could put up, right? So, because their current sign doesn't need it, but >> then you also need FDOT approval, right? >> Right. We in our code it clearly says that um if there is any type of sign on the rideway that you obviously need FDOT
approval. Yes, that's in our code right now. Sign code. >> Oh, >> now how far out is is the >> You're in public. You're in E. >> I'm in FDA, right? >> Yeah. Where can you can you express for the community how they know where is
FDA? Where is the um that problem? >> Right. Well, um, you you could always go to the property appraiser website, Palm Beach County, and you could see the ride ofway. I mean, really, you should look at a survey of the property. It'll typically show, but if you go to the property appraiser website, you could
see the the ride of way of FDOT along A1A. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> The old golden rule is 50 feet from the center line. >> Yeah. >> Usually in front of, you know, >> plus or minus because the center line moves, but generally 50 feet on each side. We have 100 foot right away, right?
So, so then you have to get the okay from EPOS >> because they're going to check for sight lines. So, that's why the ingress and egress sign can't be too big naturally because you have to be able to see around it, over it, cars moving in each direction, frangible, it's got to be able to break away. Yeah.
>> Yeah. Okay. >> Sight triangle. Yes. Y >> So, are we um violating by doing 32? We're We're good with that. >> You got to get F DOT's approval. >> Okay. >> Right. You have to abide by this fight triangle. Yeah. >> So the 32 feet that's being proposed is
not an issue for that. >> I mean it would be kind of odd. I give what Commissioner Peterson saying like you said in and it's like 36 square feet right at your drive. That would be kind of odd but at the same time you you couldn't put it that size because of the sight lines and all your moving
directions. The sign naturally has to get smaller to see around it and over it. Otherwise you're obstructing traffic and creating traffic hazards and FDOT will never approve it. So >> So they're the agency. So, should we make it smaller so that we know it would >> I don't think you need to. I think it's
going to just the practical nature of the signs because if you cut it to half say to what is that 16 square feet and somebody has a 17 square foot design. >> Could you imagine what that condo group would do? >> Just kidding. >> Um, yes. So I guess it's kind of that
protection line you could go up to this that practical reality because you're not going to have an an ingress or egress sign >> outside of the rightway, right? >> So FDOT's going to control it anyway. And your sight lines, heights of vehicles, turning movements. >> So that's all going to control and shrink the sides down.
>> So if I take my sign out of the F dot area to put one back in, I got to need a permit. like if I pull it out, >> you always need our permit. If you're in the rightway, you need F DOT's permit. Um if you put a sign, I guess in the
dune, you'll never get approval, but that would require FD approval. So >> yes, >> just for the size of the ingress, egress. >> Yeah. I mean, I I think it's too big,
you know. I mean, if I put my igress, if I put a sign that size there, you would I got complaints now, they can't see. They got to pull out to the road. So, that would be big. And I I always think your main sign should be your biggest sign. You know, that's what my feet. I
mean, we jump three to 32 feet up. It's kind of maybe cut it in half, 20, I don't for the I mean, that's a 12t square feet. Look at the size of that. That's pretty big. How does everybody else feel about that?
Any other comments on that? >> I think he makes a valid point. >> So, you want to throw out a number that we should consider? You want to say 20? >> I say 20. I was going to 12 is good, too, but 202.
>> Yeah. I mean, I think that's good for having your number and your entrance and that. That's That's pretty That's a pretty good size. 12 feet. And I know uh Villa Magna was suggesting 10. So that covers that. >> Let's cover that. >> Yeah. 12 square feet. >> How about you? What do you think?
>> That's big enough. >> Mr. >> I agree with Don. >> Yep. >> All right. So >> I'm I'm in agreement of that of uh what we what did you say? 12 >> 12. Yeah. 12. >> So >> that's pretty good. >> I mean, how about Judy? You want to chime in?
>> I'm very I would change it. Yes. I think that's certainly big enough. >> Okay. So it sounds like we have consensus for the ingress egress to make that >> 12 instead of 32 12 square feet. Okay. Yeah. Thank you for bringing the prop
because uh always helps, right? >> Yeah, that was >> and this is your first read. So um I guess when it comes back to second, we can have that revision made. >> Yeah, because we're making is for the ingress egress from 32 to 12. So that's
a minor enough change. It is not a problem. So is it appealable? >> No. Whoever whoever makes the motion just say a motion approves subject to reducing the ingress egress to 12. >> Say that again. >> So whoever makes >> he's making he's moving. He's
>> not. So the motion if someone were to make the motion the motion would be to approve the ordinance subject to reducing the size of the ingress egress signs to 12 square feet. >> You can make that motion if if but I don't know if you're done with your discussion. And we could still progress with the
>> Yep. It'll go to second reading and it'll come back amended. Yep. >> Yes, ma'am. >> Now, this does not have an ordinance number that I can refer to. Is that a reason? >> Yeah, >> it'll come back. >> It'll come back >> on second. Re
>> and um I don't know really a motion. >> Are we ready for the motion? I >> Are we ready? >> I I guess I just say the board of appeals change makes It was the the motion to approve the ordinance >> conting.
>> Yes. Subject to reducing the egress and uh ingress signs from 12 >> from 32 to 12. >> Perfect. Thank you. >> I second. >> All in favor say I. >> I.
>> Motion carries. >> So we're moving along. We are moving along. Well, we're not done. We're not done. What? So, what's the next step now? >> It'll come back second reading. >> So, it'll come and then they can proceed. >> It'll be adoption. Yeah, it'll be it'll
come back for second reading and adoption and once it's adopted, they can submit for permit. >> So, it'll come back mid July July 16th and for second read. Yeah. Sorry. We have this procedural >> submitted and unless right.
>> So, four weeks. Four more weeks. Yeah. Thank you for your patience. >> Thank you. >> But under the old >> Okay, moving on to >> But they didn't get after that. >> Moving on. That's okay. Moving on to the next item. Consent agenda. There's none. Unfinished business. There's none. New
business. Um item A. Approve and authorize staff to purchase and install a new carrier chiller for the 3616 building HVAC system from Carrier in the amount of $110,34.25. utilizing the OMNIA
partners cooperate cooperative purchasing contract number 159051. This item aligns with the fiscal year 2026 strategic priorities plan capital improvement plan number 26-003.
Eric, >> good afternoon. >> Good afternoon. >> Uh Scandendrick, town manager's office. Uh Pat and Sergio couldn't make it today, so they just asked me to come up and take any questions you guys might have about this purchase. >> Any questions? >> Nope.
>> No, no, it looks um looks good. Contract looks good. >> I think we need the chiller. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> No questions. So, do we need a motion to approve? Yes, we could have a motion. >> Yes. Motion to approve and uh approve
this purchase and authorize authorize the staff to purchase and install the new carrier chiller. >> Second that motion. >> Do you need the further language? >> Um I got it. >> Is that sufficient? Okay, >> I got it. Thank you. So, Commissioner
Goldberg, >> yes. >> Vice Mayor Stern, >> yes. >> Commissioner Chinowski, >> yes. >> Commissioner Peters, >> yes. >> And Mayor Moore, >> yes. Motion carries. Item B, approve the award of the bid and authorize the mayor to execute a
contract with Laorta Contracting LLC Incorporated for replacement of windows in the amount of $78,36524 in accordance with invitation to bid number 26-002 water treatment plant building department with an option to replace
town hall windows. This item aligns with the fiscal year 2026 strategic priorities plan capital improvement plan number 26-011 and 27-006. >> Yeah. So this one was my project. Okay.
>> Uh so we issued the invitation of bid back in March. We received 11 bids and Leaporta came in uh as the lowest at right about under 80,000. Uh their references were good. They're actually the contractor who did the roof on this building. So, we've been happy with their work in the past. Uh, all their
paperwork checked out and we are recommending uh using them to do both sets of windows, the 22 in that building and then it's think it's four. Yeah, 14 here. So, it's from this set of double doors north. Uh, so we're not replacing
any of these, just everything on that side. >> Okay. Any discussion? >> No. >> No. If we're all in favor, could we have a motion? Yes. Now, what are how would you like this phrase? There's going to
be I do the motion to approve and award uh the the bids and authorize the mayor to execute the contracts with La Pora Contracting LLC and uh >> that's it. That's it.
>> Yeah, the contract references both. >> And I'll second the motion. >> Commissioner Goberg, >> yes. >> Vice Mayor Stern, >> yes. Commissioner Chinowski, >> yes. >> Commissioner Peters, >> yes. >> And Mayor Moore, >> yes. >> Motion carries. >> Thank you. >> Thank you very much. Moving on to item
C, resolution number 2026-00008, a resolution of the town commission of the town of Highland Beach, Florida, amending resolution number 2025-024 to revise exhibit B of the fiscal year 2025 2026
schedule of fees establishing fees and charges for town services, providing for conflicts, providing for severability, and providing for an effective date. Well, good afternoon, commission, vice mayor, mayor. Uh, I'll try to make this as quick and painless as possible. Uh,
the legislators passed HB 803. It forced us to go back and re-evaluate some of our permit fees primarily for the private providers. Uh, and part of it was they limit how much we can actually charge for uh, well, they didn't. They
limit how much we can charge to our actual cost for inspection fees. So we had some inspection fees that started at the reinspection fee actually started at 75 went to 150. You kept failing for the same reason 250 300 then it capped
there. Um we had to get rid of that. Uh we did some studies and broke down our budget and we used the complete year budget 2425 budget and found out that it cost us actually $13 about 84 every time we perform an inspection. That's our
actual cost. We have cap government. We have the cost of the building. We have the portion that we pay back to the town for existing in there. And uh so what we did is we just changed it to a flat $100 fee. And that's what's reflected in here so that we're compliant with the House
Bill 803. The other component was that the private providers wanted us to give more of a discount uh off of the permit fees when they're doing either plan review or inspections or both. the numbers that we put in there. I had to
again go and break down what it cost us per inspection, what it, you know, how many inspections by average we have per permit. Um, and then how much it cost us to do plan review and then what our base cost is just to exist with our, um, administrative costs. So, doing that,
um, again, so I'm going to go back with the $100 inspection fee, we exceed what they want because we're actually charging less than what it cost us. Okay. Uh and for the private provider discount, what we're doing is we were
giving a 9% discount for inspections. We g may change that to 13 9 for plan review. We changed that to 13. And then if they do both inspections and plan review, they get 26% off. Now, previously it was 18%. So that's the change on that end of things. So those
are really the only two items that were changed. There was actually a couple small little uh errors that I found in the previous uh scrier errors that I took care of with the comma and things like that which you may find in there. Uh but we put everything in there
explain how we got to those numbers. Uh and those numbers exceed what's required by the state statute so that we're looked at in this way until they change it next year and we have to amend it again. How much of a a discount um
overall? I understand from 8 to um from 13 down 9 to 13. Um why not more? Why not charge not more of a discount? Why not charge more? Why did you go less rather than to meet what our out-of- pocket cost is?
>> Because we had to meet the statute. And the statute the statute and I I did have some discussion with with Len on this. We went we had some discussion and some email back and forth to make sure that we're compliant cuz there's some misunderstanding. The when you look at
like a summary, it says that we have to give 25% off if they do inspections or plan review and 50% off if we do if they do both. It doesn't say for the entire permit fee. It just says for that
portion of the permit fee that's attributed to what they're saving on plan review or inspection services. Okay, so that's how we were able to do and I was able to get it to this number to give them a larger discount because I didn't have a choice because at the end
of the day I had to at least hit that 25% mark overall. It just happened to work out that way because our overall costs uh the administrative component if we take away all inspections and plan review
>> our administrative cost to exist uh is a little over 50% of what we're charging in our permit fee. >> Okay. >> So it's about 25% to plan review 25. It's in in that range for those two. >> But those are how the numbers kind of worked out so that we're compliant.
we're doing at at the at minimum of what we have to, we're actually doing slightly more. >> Mhm. >> Uh we don't get a lot of private providers. I was actually able to convert some of the contractors that were used private providers back to using us because they feel like they're better getting a better service from us >> than they are from the private
providers. Uh >> and it's kind of a minimal with us. We've maybe received over the last year like 180 inspections from private providers. They mostly do inspections. They don't typically do the plan review, although they do occasionally. Um, and
we still have to do the review for the uh the zoning end of things to check for setbacks like on the generator to do the flood plane review. So, we still have to do that anyway that they're not allowed to do that. And some of the portions of the fire review has to be done by the fire department. >> So, we're we're giving them we're
following the statute to comply so we don't get in trouble. >> Okay. Any effect on budget? >> Pardon? >> Any effect on budget? >> Yeah, I think what I'm estimating is probably somewhere between $10 to
$20,000 we're going to lose a year in reinspection fees where people just continually fail for the same reason. Instead of having that progressive penalty where it kind of gives them incentive to fix it, we just have to keep charging them the same $100. But we are changing charging initially. It's
going from 75 to 100, but overall we're probably going to lose between 10 and 20,000 overall. Uh we'll see how it goes. So nothing significant in comparison to what percentage of our budget that is. >> Mhm.
>> Okay. >> If we are all in agreement, if we get a motion to approve. Let me um Yes. A motion to approve resolution number 2026- This is 0008,
>> I second it. >> Commissioner Goldberg, >> yes. >> Commissioner Peters, >> yes. >> Commissioner Chinowski, >> yes. >> Vice Mayor Stern, >> yes. >> And Mayor Moore, >> yes. >> Motion carries. >> Okay. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Jeff. >> Thank you. Moving on to item D,
introduction of potential uh proposed uh ordinance regarding regulation of ebikes within the town specifically along the state road A1A shared use path. >> Hey, ebikes. Fun topic. >> My favorite topic.
>> Oh, you should come up to North County sometime and see how how fun it is up there. >> Um okay, so we have talked about regulation of ebikes in the town of Highland Beach. it was primarily focused on the shared use path. Um you don't
have as many children as we have in say Palm Beach Gardens, Jupiter, North Palm Beach where this has become a crazy issue. Um, so in accordance with the council's general direction, I went ahead and I drafted a relatively simple ordinance basically saying that you
can't operate these motorized devices including ebikes with exceptions for uh devices for the physically disabled or you know for uh public safety personnel and all that kind of stuff that you cannot drive them on sidewalks within
the town and the shared use path. Now, the shared use path is the route because it's within the FDOT rightaway. So, we do not have so anything that goes on in our sidewalks in our subdivisions, fair game. We can do whatever we like. The
statute makes it clear we can do whatever we like. But when it comes to FDOT, right away we have to get the consent of FDOT. They have jurisdiction, but more importantly, they control the signage, too. So, we can't erect any signage or anything. So if we were going
to enforce our ordinance, we really would need to coordinate it with FDOT. So all I did for the town ordinance was basically do a general ban with the usual exemptions um to whom it would not apply. And then I took out a bunch of
old we had language that had been superseded by statute like 20 30 years ago. Um so I just took that out just to clean it up. Um, so but as I was doing this, the county comes out with an ordinance or at least a proposed ordinance. They haven't adopted it yet.
Now, the county ordinance I I I've read it a hundred times and there are parts of it that still don't make sense to me. Um, it's it's sort of vague. The standards that they use, they kind of say, you know, requires operation with due care and prudence, you know, with regard to pedestrian
activity, attendance circumstances. I'm not sure how you enforce that. Um it does prohibit operation on sidewalks and share use path. They call it share use path but within designated commercial or high pedestrian areas except except we're specifically authorized. Again,
who's going to designate that? You'll have the same issue with uh within the A1A rightway that you'll have with FDOT with the one that I drafted just for the town. Um it does though, the county ordinance does contain more safety requirements. Um, they require a helmet
if you're under age of 16. Then they have all these youth safety requirements that if you're you have to be 16 if it goes over 20 miles an hour. It actually attempts, which I I give them kudos for this because this appears to be where the problem is, uh, prohibits a parent
or legal guardian from knowingly providing, supplying, or permitting a minor to operate a device that does not meet the operational limits in the statute. because what happens is you get these ebikes and then they're able to modify them to go way faster than they were ever intended to do. Um so that is
a legitimate problem and they also talk about having more people on it than it's intended um than it's designed to hold. Now the county ordinance the way the county has proposed it would apply countywide even within the municipalities but the municipalities can opt out. So, you don't have to be
abide by the ordinance. And it's really unclear to me and um in reading the county ordinance like who's making all these determinations of what's a high pedestrian area and and it really seems like within Highland Beach, it's really
like an A1A problem because the concern is you have pedestrians, you have bicyclists, now you have motorized bicyclists and other sort of devices. But the problem with and the county ordinance has not been adopted yet. So we don't have to make that decision. It's just from the town's perspective,
it's really this the the elephant in the room is this FDOT. Will they ever agree to it? Would they ever agree to allows Highland Beach to eliminate ebikes and other related devices from the shared youth path if they're allowed in Bokeh and they're allowed in Delray Beach, you
know, and if if those municipalities don't feel the same. I feel like maybe if there was a united effort among those at least three municipalities that maybe there'd be a better chance of approaching FDOT and trying to get this
um done. but it's going to require their cooperation and it may require the cooperation of our neighboring municipalities as well. So, that was really just an overview. I mean, um, you know, the ordinance itself is pretty straightforward, at least the one that I drafted. I don't think the counties is all that straightforward, but it hasn't
been adopted yet, and I assume it will still go through a few iterations before it is. Um, I know the chiefs have been discussing it. I discussed it with Chief Hartman and um my other police chiefs, but um FDOT is is that's the wild card here. So, I just wanted to sort of
introduce like what our options are. We can draft our own and I did draft one. It could be modified to whatever the commission's liking. You can wait and see what the county does and then decide what you're going to do and try to get answers to these enforcement questions of which I have
many or you know you can just I guess those are your two options or you could just leave it be and not and not regulate. >> Hey Len, it's really an A1A problem but even it really is and you see it and it's it's it's a respectful situation. Do you say something or do you not?
What's even more bothersome, I see more golf carts now with children hanging out of the golf carts going down a A1A. I don't David, it's and I I and I see more and more people buying these golf carts and there's no regulation, but I I've
been behind a couple of golf carts where they've had three or four kids hanging outside. There's no helmets, anything, and they just go right down A1A. So, it's it is a problem. I think I think uh our police force probably has to have more of an impact than the resident
because people complain but they I don't know if Chief Hman wants to go that route. >> Yeah, I was googling last night um Florida's ebike laws and I didn't know they just said they July first they're coming with a new law now. Um if you're a class three they don't want you on
sidewalks or usage. They want you on um the bike pass or the road. Um, and then I guess in each category they give locals can restrict more. So I guess that would be us. And then it says uh that if you're riding a bike on one a
common path uh or a sidewalk, if you come 50 ft with a pedestrian, you have to you have to give a warning, right? You have to give a warning when you pass and you got to give the pedestrian right away. So I guess the state laws that would be the FDOT. So
I mean we could enforce that once that becomes law. It it can be enforceable because it's a state statute and we can enforce it with even within FDOT. The issue with FDOT is the banning of the of the uh
the motorized um vehicles from the FDOT rightway. >> See the problem with the see a class one to a three. They say three shouldn't be on here, >> right? Because that's and these kids, like you said, they're taking the governors off and actually they're making a class four now. They're going
60 miles an hour. >> So, and matter of fact, I think there's a lawsuit up the line where the person that got hurt is suing the family for permitting the the daughter to ride the ebike and I guess killing a person or >> I think that's what the county was
attempting to do about the parents knowingly providing these. But, you know, I'm not even saying the parents would know if they modify them, but you know, some parents, uh, they probably do know. I don't know. >> I I have a couple questions. >> Sure. >> Um, first of all, I like what you wrote
up and I think that really fits the needs of the town. Uh and question number one pretty simple one is is it written or guidelines anywhere where someone who has a um motorbike or a
scooter and so forth has to go with traffic in the proper lane. >> What's go with traffic? You mean >> other in other words, somebody going north has to go in the bike lane on the right
and not go against the bikes and the traffic on going south. You follow what I'm saying? >> No, I do follow what you're saying. I just don't know off the top of my head whether there is I mean it makes sense. We're always taught like you're supposed to go because people like to go against traffic so they can see what's coming.
We're always taught that the proper way is to go with traffic. I don't know if it's in the statute. It might be. I I'd have to look though >> and if it's not it it's probably we well again it's FDOT right away the bike lanes it gets into that whole issue again >> because I can I can envision more with a
a youngster and if we we pass and it has to go into the lane that the parent says oh go just right along here where they're going north or south rather going across the street. So I I asked that question. The other question I have, if we were to just want to pass
something like this, is there any communication that could be had with FDOT as to that feeling relative to this thing for the town? And yes, it would be great to have Del Rey and Bokeh do the same thing at least to Linton and to Spanish River.
>> But if not, is that going to be an obstacle with them or not? You know, >> I don't know. But I I do think well and that that was sort of the the gist of the memo was that I think if the commission wishes to move forward, we do have to coordinate with FDOT. I have and
I have not had any communications with FDOT. I don't know what their position is on this. I mean, maybe they're amendable, maybe they're not. I I have no idea >> because I would just add I think the situation is going to get worse, not better. And it's an accident waiting to happen. And I just pulled out another
article. Everybody's looking at these things as far as uh the commissions and introducing different. I think we ought to be ahead of the curve here because it's the right thing to do. >> Agreed. And I mean, we could always also adopt the age requirements. I mean, if that's something that the commission
wants to do as well, >> make it 16 and above to ride these. >> They must wear a helmet and everything. It's that's sort of the easier way because we were we were actually talking about in North Palm Beach the other uh meeting a couple weeks ago and it was like well maybe we should adopt the age
at least that's something and then the it gives the police I mean the police there which I'm sure your department's the same they're really trying to educate they're not you know they're not trying to arrest kids or go after their parents they just want everyone to abide by the rules and trying to educate them
what the rules are and that might be an easier thing to enforce. I don't know if it'll make a difference from a safety perspective perhaps. I mean, you definitely don't want, you know, 11-year-old kids riding these ebikes. So, >> and what are what is the penalty?
>> It's the penalty is we would have to if it's our ordinance, we would have to enforce it. Um, we would enforce it through our code citations. So, it would be whatever the schedule of penalties, we'd have to add it and determine what the appropriate penalty would be. >> Read somewhere. I don't know if it was uh this this article. It it
>> Oh, I think I >> it's not in the resolution. Was it? >> Oh, I think it is actually >> one class two. >> I think we made it a >> class that you know if you find them it's so minimal.
>> Yeah, it you know we would have to enforce it. It'd still be a civil infraction. We would just have to enforce it by citation. But we could enforce the state laws July 1st. I guess the new laws coming in Manila. >> The state laws I believe we can enforce. Yes.
>> Even within the the DOT right away because it is a a law of general application. >> Well, I I would propose um that an effort be made to address it with EDA. >> I agree. I I definitely agree. There's
no reason not to. No, there's no and and there's no reason not to and we're going to come up against it anyway. So, and that and as I said, that was really where I was aiming is if and it seems like the commission does want to do something if it can. So, I think the next step is to reach out to FDOT
and see how amendable they are to it. >> Cuz um could you clarify again because we we cannot adopt this um ordinance without FDOT coordination. we could adopt it, but we wouldn't be able to enforce it within the the A1A right away
without because um and really we wouldn't be able to you'd have to have signs to say that it's prohibited and you that the signs are the the primary thing. >> Okay. >> Jurisdiction gets a little wonky about who has the jurisdiction because general municipalities can regulate traffic
within their jurisdictional limits. It gets a little crazy when you have the the state roads versus the county roads versus the local roads and who has the jurisdiction because generally we you know a state road A1A we can enforce traffic we can enforce all those other things even though it's a state road. Um
so it I would like to talk if we're going to talk to FDOT about the jurisdictional part but also the signage part. >> I think that's two different components that we would need to address with them. So I agree with that to if everyone else
agree. Yeah. Um >> Okay. >> And I don't think we can stop the ordinance at this time. >> No. No. It's >> Yeah. But let's keep the momentum going. >> Yeah. >> Doing we can >> do you need a motion or anything? >> Nope. Okay. >> Thank you. >> Thank you very much for
>> Hey, now we're good. >> All right. >> Longer. >> Is it time to leave now? I think next time we should do the money at the beginning >> when we're brighteyed. >> I agree.
>> Agreed. >> Well, when I first got here. >> Hello. >> And I got a lot of participation here. >> Well, we promised to >> the last comedian gets the greatest audience. >> Yeah, that's that's true. >> Right. >> Uh well, thank you. Uh, you know, it's
it's um it's that time of year and um uh have a brief presentation for you. We we're at 75%, we're still waiting on some information, i.e. changes in pension uh the the the pension rates, those are usually set by the state of
Florida. They usually come out in July. uh health insurance renewals, property insurance renewals, things like that that typically happen uh towards uh July, August sometimes, but nothing major. We we we but we did bake in some
assumptions, you know, a little bit higher. We've already done this presentation to the FAB uh last Tuesday. Um and um and and they uh I I I didn't think they got any any major comments back or anything like that, but that's why we put in there.
We're about 75%. We're we're still waiting on on some things. Uh uh so these right here are just kind of the the the main headlines, you know. Uh we uh we assumed property what we got back from the uh uh from the uh the what
the property appraiser that uh our increase is about 4.1%. you know, uh, keep in mind and and I have a graph in here. We used to be at 13. You remember? You remember the days 13 point something percent or whatever. It was a little crazy, but anyway. Yeah.
And and keep in mind, too, in 2026, we really focused a lot on our capital, you know, we uh we we really did and and part of the chiller item that that you just approved, uh, the sewer relining, right? And and all these things. Uh so
that that was kind of heavy uh right now and and oh by the way we just finished our first full year of the fire department you know and you'll see some of those uh you'll see some of the numbers fluctuate right why 23 22 23 was was like this why you know keep in mind
just reminding you we we were maintaining two fire departments at the time right and we were building uh this beautiful building behind us uh and you know we also have some other assumptions you know staff compensation, health insurance, pension, as I said before,
uh, general insurance crisis. So, I've got a question for you. Yes, sir. >> Okay. >> It seems the odd to me and what's kind of happening with insurance and policies tend to be going down a little bit on property and so forth and we just put new roofs and we put new windows in and we've got in there an increase of 7 to
10%. How do we justify that? >> Well, we're just looking back at history. Now, I know like individual condos have had a lot of changes. This is more general liability uh insurance. This is workers compensation. Keep in
mind now we have a full year with our own fire department owned staff there. So, you got workers compensation insurance is in there. Uh we we also uh uh you know, we have marine vessels. We just just one, but we have a whole uh
police force for that. So, I'm just accounting for that. I hope I'm wrong. Right. I hope that it comes back at 2%, right? Or or or less or whatever. But that that's just a general ballpark figure. >> They're they're saying the property insurance is coming down, so we'll
probably be flat on the property insurance piece. Flood, it's different. Like you said, workers comp will be different based on claims, things of that nature. But on the property side only, it'll be flat for us is what uh >> yeah, >> uh Brown and Brown has been telling us. It's going to be it's going to be flat.
And then the liabilities going up, right? Because didn't did they end up making the the what they call it? Sovereign um >> true. So the sovereign immunity goes up on our general liability insurance will go up to cover to match the state stuff. So that's going to
>> Isn't that part of general insurance? All of it. Yeah. The property we it's going to get it's getting better, >> right? But other vehicles are are better, but again, like you said, sovereign immunity limit. Yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah. So, again, we're we're just
trying to be conservative and and uh and and right now in the 75% budget, you know, we'll we'll hone tune that. >> Uh, you know, let's not forget about >> I have a question for you. >> Thank you. You always do, and they're very good questions. >> Uh, you know, we here are a list. I'm not going to read them all, but here are
a list of our 2026 uh accomplishments so far. And uh uh here's what we've always tried to look at is keep in mind some of the bigger projects what we've said is as we come closer to uh after permitting
design or what have you if we bring you a major budget at that moment in time we'll also come with a budget amendment. Okay. But right now we have some small little projects here. nothing like we used to have in 2026 with the sewer relining or or or or what have you. And
so, uh, this is just again an overview. >> So, with piggybacking what David had on there, you see those two yellows. So, when he gets into our cash reserve positions on unassigned, those two projects are tied up in that unassigned. It's not been budgeted for those two projects. So, when he says unassigned,
it's a strong number. Just remember loosely we've committed and um I don't know if commitment would be the right uh word u but those two projects fall within that that chunk when we get to that part of the conversation. >> Um
yeah so again preliminary that's what we're talking about now. uh you know we're we're still confident that uh we can maintain our our millage rate for the FY27 uh fiscal year at 3.5875 >> assuming no change in the law in the property tax.
>> Yeah, there wouldn't be a change for uh FY27, right? Correct me if I'm wrong. >> That's correct. And it's the end of the conversation. We're going to have a big jump off on that part at the after the budget presentation is >> Yeah. >> The future, right? What what does that hold for us?
>> It'll change. Right. Right. And and so but this is again big picture. And keep in mind we've had this since October 1st, 2022. And and uh uh this slide right here, I think it's number six. If I I just wanted to show you this right here was kind of these are the inner
fund transfers that we do, right? So we we uh that way other funds um uh take a propri take take a share of the overall overhead and pay their fair share per se. And so, and so that's what we've always done. We've always had the
sewer fund transfer money over to the water fund. We've had the water fund transfer money over to the general fund, building fund transfer its its proportionate share. And so, I just wanted to kind of break that down to you to show you what's moving in between the funds.
>> So, the sewer fund was that 220 before? >> So, you increased it to 300. >> Yes. >> That's uh the max. on. No, >> it's a proposed. >> Yeah, I mean we'll look at days cash when we get to that sewer fund and what that does, what that looks like, right?
>> You know, uh and again, >> I think we should do more. >> Yeah, >> I think we, you know, >> if we can. >> Absolutely. >> And so, uh but this right here again is just a history. Keep in mind, look, look at the FY22. That's when, by the way,
that's when our our water system wasn't yet strong enough to be self-supportive, right? our water and sewer systems at that time weren't able to be uh self-supportive at that time. And so what was included in our millillage was to send money over to cover their debt
service for the agreements that they had. But you can see like over the time where we're at now uh is just the general fund as well as the small little uh debt we have for the for the building behind us.
This right here is uh this right here. We we've looked at this many times. Uh this is obviously the change in in taxable values and what that percentage changed. That's when I said, you know, it was in FY23 24 time frame that we hit
over 13%, right? Change in uh in taxable values. Well, now that's starting obviously to come down. You can see I think our lowest point in in this period of time that we're looking at was 2.3%. uh and that was in uh FY, it looks like
FY21. And so at the end of the day, we're starting to come down. Now, our five-year forecast, we didn't think that we were going to be coming down this quickly, but we did. And so, but it's okay. And so, uh, but we just wanted to kind of show you that, uh, as we revamp
our five-year forecast, um, we'll change those assumptions. Instead of instead of assuming 5% and then 4% and kind of settling at 3 and a half to 4%, we may lower that down uh, for for for the
future. And right now, keep in mind that um you know, when we talk property taxes, you know, that's that's over 73 plus percent of your of of of the money that that that that comes in. >> So any any modifications to that,
>> right, significantly change >> how we do business. And so but but that's that's uh that's a a next year challenge. But um so uh but but and there are the other sources of revenue you know uh that that we get uh just
wanted to show you that. So now let's focus on the general fund when you're looking at this uh chart and and every fund is broken out by revenues and then expenditures. And I went from left to right. So the far left you'll see these
are actuals. I put in there my estimate for FY26 when we're in now, but we have actuals for 23, 24, 25, and now I'm estimating where we think we're going to be at for 26. And I also have the
budgets for for those ensuing years. And so, um, you know, at the date we're looking at, okay, a high level 75% overview, what are we looking at? Well, we know that a 41 4.2% 2% increase in property values at
the current millillage. We know that that'll generate about $600,000, you know, of uh of of additional of additional revenue. And so we put that in there and and our charges for services. That's mainly uh the trash,
you know, the we have a contract which is just a pass through uh for for our garbage collection. We know that that increases. And then we obviously just have a general increase for our transfers in that also increased. And as we fine-tune the revenue side of life,
uh we'll get we'll get better insight into these numbers uh as we go along when we hit the 100%. Uh but uh we we uh we anticipate that uh you know our contract with solid waste, you know, will increase by 7% because we signed a
a a long-term agreement with that. And so we've baked all those all those numbers into on the revenue side. Now let's look at the expenditure side. The expenditure side, same idea from left to right. You have actuals, you have our
budget, and really the far right hand side just shows you the difference between the FY26 and the FY27 preliminary budget. That's all that's showing. And so we took into account changes in cost of living per uh police
or fire uh contractual agreements, staffing staffing levels are pretty much set. I think we might have a few positions open, but nothing major. Uh increases in in operating uh the the the fire and rescue department. Remember, we
just came out of our first year, you know, everything's brand new, right? Uh and so uh so that's good. But we still squirrel away money every year and we'll get to that for replacing these major million-dollar pieces of equipment that we have out here. So, we've baked all
that in. And so, as you can see here, what you know what what we're what we're really showing here is is that okay, our expenditures will increase about 4%. Okay, that's that's not too bad. If you think that inflation is about two and a half, 3%, right, that that's really not
not too bad. Yes, sir. >> Question, >> your comment would be what an incredibly smart decision. Uh, and and if I were to estimate, I
would say you're probably saving $2 million. I I without a doubt I would think that their budget would be 8 to 8.5 to $9 million per year. Per year and we have more staff
concier service better relationships with obviously it's night and day. I the interest rate alone on the debt is is phenomenal, right? And I the the commission and the management continue
to do the right decisions at the right time. They seem to have some crystal ball that says now's the time to do it. >> Statement >> without without a doubt, without a question. Yeah. Yeah. And so uh so but anyway, so these right here are the
expenses. Remember, we're looking at the general fund. Uh this right here is by departments. Okay? So, remember the general fund is the only fund that has departments. The rest of the funds, they have their water
department, sewer department. The general fund is the one that has and here's our list of departments. Remember the good old days when we used to have a post office? Well, that's, you know, obviously no longer there, but uh yeah. And so I want you to keep in mind that each department each department that's why I put it in the the little balloon
there. Each department includes labor and related costs which would be your payroll taxes, health insurance, pension, uh uh workers compensation, all those costs that it has. But it also includes their that department's
operating cost and in some cases like for example the police department, they've got a small little loan for their radios. uh any debt service related to those departments. But here you can see an overall by departments, you know, what did it what did it increase? Some departments increased,
others department, you know, uh decreased. And so uh yeah, so that that's kind of what we're looking at here. >> Why, excuse me, why the big change in the library? Uh the big change in the library is uh for their capital for their for for their
>> I think you have bathroom >> bathroom real mess and the uh kitchen break room. It's not a kitchen like with an oven or anything but just their break room for micica's delaminating falling. It's just a it's a mess. And if you've been in the library bathrooms
>> I think they've reached >> uh reached their age. I mean I guess the toilet's still flush but it's kind of rough in there. and we've replaced the line getting into it. So, >> um we're looking to just do a bathroom uh rehab. Now, >> if we get during this discussion or some
information becomes available, that's, you know, those are things that we have to um I think maybe not in the immediiacy, but in the long term, you know, capital is going to be our strain. Our choke point is our appetite for capital with restraint on tax revenue. So, we just got to that will start being
our balance moving forward. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. But good question. But yeah, that's an and good and good thing, right? Because you were able to focus on, wow, why the big change there. And right away, keep in mind each of those departments have their own capital budget as well. And so they had put that on there and management uh said, okay,
fine, we could see a need for that. Let's let's include it. So, uh this right here is the general fund. This right here is our uh reserves, right? I wanted to break it out into three sections really. Okay. So the top
section there, that's from our audited financial statements for FY23, 24,25. I estimate obviously what what 26 is going to be. And then I also estimate based on this budget what FY27 is going to be.
Now, keep in mind that um 16 and a half% of every budgeted item goes into budget stabilization and
plus another 16.5% goes into disaster recovery. So, you'll see that number changes every year. You see budget stabilization, disaster recovery. we earmark those funds for that specific purpose. Okay? And so, and so at the end
of the day, you'll see that the next one on the far left hand side has fund balance on the general fund where I then turn it over to here is what I'm trying to show you on the right side is is hey,
as a general fund unrestricted or unassigned, what unassigned means is this. It doesn't hit any of those other buckets, right? We don't, you know, we might have $12 million in the general fund. But, you know, as we can see in u
uh I'm sorry, in uh 2025, our audited figures, you know, we might have $28 million, I'm sorry, 10 10 $10.2 million in total, right? But you can see how it's segregated. Two uh 2.8 8 million is
for disaster recovery and budget stabilization. $500,000 now is in our firerescue public safety where we're trying to squirrel money away for for any future major equipment changes. Other other is
those items that we are currently in a contract for. So we have to segregate that, right? So we have to segregate that so we know not to spend that. And so when we look at what's really unassigned, like what's free cash for the commission to choose with what they
want, when you look at it, we have about 80 to 90 days of free cash that you can do with what you want. Now you can lower any of your other restrictions that you have on there, but you know out of out
of about 10 or 11 million, yeah, 4.7 million is unassigned as as of now. So, >> but committed. >> Yes. Yes. >> Committed to what? >> Uh marine dock facility. >> How much is that? >> Uh I think we've got committed a couple
million for that. two million and then about >> two million from us or well how much was from >> the grant is we'll find out but it could be as much as a million it could be less they've never done a million so I'm guessing it's less the project estimates
2.3ish 2.5 is the whole project we get a grant for say a half a million750 we're still in for a million7 a million8 if >> the grant comes through >> if if the grant comes through if we want to continue with that and those are I
hate to >> I'm kind of foreshadowing what our conversation needs to be for the next couple years. we're that the appetite for capital we need to as David said this crystal ball we need to start having that crystal ball and needs to start having some
clarity of when we need to pull levers earlier rather than later and this is you know we had those two projects committed we got referendum approval from the uh the community for the others for the fire station the rebuild um that's we initially anticipated
that's about a million too that's probably grown since we started so We have probably 3 million committed between the projects out of the 4.7 which would take us to where we need. uh at some point in time based on my
uncommunicated independent conversations with each of you um you know I may recommend you know either we hit that budget stabilization a little bit harder or we create a preeemption fund that's kind of tongue-in-cheek to the legislature but we may need to set aside
money to plug holes in the early stages of roll out because the tax the property tax thing is structural so we may want to push cash into operating to kind of hedge the edges a little bit. So, we may want to assign more formally
some of those dollars to serve as our backs stop. We're in a great position. >> Oh, yeah. >> I I was very pleased. He said, you know, the FAB didn't have any comments, but they were very optimistic um for a group that generally isn't optimistic all the time. like, you know, you think about it, they're optimistic people, but when
you start talking numbers, so they they breathed a strong uh breath of optimism into my derailment, maybe sort of frustration with the legislature, but at the same time, you know, we will Highland Beach survives this. It's just
we have those handful of years where we may need some of that 4.7 to to to make it through, right? To to pull through that other side. And it may be the appetite for capital and where do we squeeze that, you know? >> Um, and the FAB did suggest that too is
that if we got to that point, they were willing to help you guys with, you know, capital and what we should or shouldn't be doing, making some recommendations. >> So, you're right. And and as Marshall said, you know, we have a fund budget stabilization. We have disaster
recovery. And if at any moment and oh by the way those dollars there are based on what's budgeted. So what our ordinance says is shall take 16.5% of the budgeted figure and put that into those respected
things. But we can uh we can kind of modify that or or we can we can look at that. But uh but anyway >> so should we form put like earmark some of that unassigned for those two projects? some >> I think we should like I s
>> I mean I guess I >> come from a bigger community where we would have assignments which is really formal and then commitments because a commitment you could easily without may possibly a resolution you could we're committing it to these funds to this project David and I and staff Susie know
the money set aside assignment is you're moving the money in it's under under resolution that it can't be moved under specific purposes but you could commit it to projects and you loosely have through the referendum saying up to X we've been authorized by the community
up to three and a half million. So you could set this aside and you know to say it's committed to these projects. >> It helps us on multiple fronts. Um I I think it helps us have real like those dollars are committed. we're going to need it to plug the hole. And when we,
you know, talk to our union reps at some point in time, depending on how it is, like we need to to be calm as we move through the next couple years negotiating our contracts, that, >> you know, >> we may want to do more, but we might
have to be practically bound by the the financial realities for a period of time. Because I thought the fire rescue line, isn't that kind of a comm like a loose commitment? Like that's a formal you guys. >> That is a formal >> solution and the fund balance policy saying we're going to set aside this and
then annually you can add more through a budget motion. You can add more, but we created a formal policy that says we're setting aside for fire. So you put 50. It's >> still easy to move around, isn't it? or now I thought is by by policy you could do it is through your budget but if we
were to do a >> oh sorry luckily I'm loud enough um uh you could do commitments as a secondary action or we can add in the policy that you can annually do commitments and refine that policy as David said we may
want to look at budget stabilization as 25% instead of 16.5% with a sunset we could be very creative um and we do you're right at the end of the day You could pass a resolution ordinance and change everything overnight if you had to. Yeah. But this kind of sets the boundaries and the
guidelines for management moving forward when somebody says, "Oh, you got plenty of money." Well, yeah, but there it's already as spoken for, right? You know, if you think at home, you know, I got a mortgage coming, I got my car payment. Those are commitments you got to make. Um, I mean, you could sell the car, sell the house, but I mean, those are bigger
actions than your month-to-month or year-to-year type actions. Kind of formalizes it a bit. And I think we'll probably get there. We have time. We'll see how it pulls. >> Yeah. >> And see see if it moves the needle. How close is this really going to be? And again, at the end of the day, uh I you
know, we're going to get to the other side of it. It's just it's >> kind of a little fuzzy and you'll see other stuff what I call general law issues. Yeah. >> Well, so I guess um I would be in favor and I guess I'm u would like to hear
everybody else's thoughts. Um, in my opinion, when I look at that top chart, >> um, the fund balance grows, um, 8.9 million, 8.3 million, 10.2
million for 2025, >> 11.6 up to 12.2. Mhm. >> Um I you know the budget stabilization that 16.7 that's um in all the literature as far as good practice how
much you're supposed to set aside disaster recovery again what you're supposed to set aside. We've earmarked money for fire rescue. When I look at this without thinking about other projects, having an unassigned amount of almost $5
million to me, my, you know, you know, for 2026 and 2027, having almost $5 million in unassigned to me seems like we're collecting money from the residents to just keep in our uh savings account,
which might be excessive. Um, but Marshall makes a good point. We have these two projects that we need to pay for. So for me for sure I would feel like that wasn't such
an excess if um we had um and I think it should be like loosely tied something that can be easily changed not something that because there when you deal with your
fund balance there are some like really strong um allocations that are made and you can't touch it. So, I don't want it to be in a place where you you know it's very hard to change. I want it to be in a place where where a kind of ear mark
and I don't know what the right procedural method is, but I would like to see two more line items on this chart that says that allocate some money for the
dock and for the um redoing of the old firehouse. That that is what I'm >> It look better. >> Yeah, >> it will because it'll look like we're not just putting money to put it in our >> See how well we all play together. I did that on purpose cuz I knew that
conversation was there. Plus, we have this pending uh emergent threat of you know, a property tax constitutional amendment. Uh you know, we should have the ability. So, I'm going to bring back a policy that's called commitments that you guys can do in the annual budget process. You can commit and decommmit
funds collectively during the budget approval process at any you know kind of like that keep it loose >> can then that can be modified by actual commission >> majority support by vote you'd vote to do it but you >> let me do it yeah let me let me suggest
that the things that are specifically like recovery and so forth are restricted funds the other funds are reserve funds And that the reserve fund you could move from one area to the other restricted should stay there.
>> Yeah. Okay. >> Yeah. Yeah. You know, I also want you to keep in mind that I know $5 million is a is a is a lot of money, but you know, annually, if you go back, we're looking at for just the general fund, general fund unload, your your budget's over $20 million.
associations and the numbers I would not consider that excessive quantum association five million expect those kinds of reserve and that's where I like
said an emergency No. >> And anytime you question that, that's my opinion. >> But you already have that. Exactly. We have the budget stabilization. We have disaster recovery. We have money set aside. So there there is still
>> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. >> 78 million for all that. >> You have, you know, Yeah. You have 10 to 12 million. >> Right. >> Right. You know what I mean? And Right. Right. Right. And oh, by the way, just a few years ago, we were balancing two fire departments. took out a loan to but
we used up about almost $4 million $3.8 million of our excess cash to to pull the trigger on uh the building behind us. So I mean >> everyone >> well they can't do that anymore.
>> Yeah. Well, you know, I just to just as an observation um and this may be too simplistic and I think the governor's argument is in my opinion too simplistic when he talks
about all the money the towns have received over the years just because the property values are up. But when you look look at our numbers 2023 and 2027
significant gross >> 4 million. >> Now there's a lot of re I mean but there's a lot of butts to >> it's it's there's a lot of butts and a lot of complexity that >> political math does wants to simplify it which is okay that I'm not going to say
what people want to do. It's not my position on that. But from 2019 to this year, CPI, we've inflated cost inflated like 34%. And that's right off of the the federal government 34%. So if our
budget grows close to 34%, it's covering FRS's added 12 to 15% of every personnel dollar that's coming right from the state. Uh labor costs to get our police and fire somewhat in this planet for being paid. like those. As much as we
want to simplify it, the cost of doing business, construction, metal, concrete, asphalt, fuel, all that stuff continues to grow. And you can't just say it's it's marked on how many new people you get. It doesn't work for a town like
this. Um, but we've done well to keep it stabilized. We do have these funds. Again, we've committed them to projects loosely. We need to be a little more formal, protect ourselves from those type of attacks so they know >> because I I get it. You don't usually tax to save. It's a tax to spend concept of government, right? You don't want to
save too much. That does look like you're just squirreing it away for what? You know, so we just have to clarify this out for the public to know that no, we got a couple big old projects sitting there or >> we're going to, you know, take a hit and we don't want to increase taxes to
counterbalance potentially a supported constitutional amendment. That looks terrible, too. Like and you'll hear that rhetoric in the newspapers when you're reading it and like they're just going to pull that increase lever, right? A lot of governments aren't going to be creative enough or think it out. They're just going to pull the lever and say,
"Well, we're just going to increase to to match it." That's just going to infuriate the legislator even more and make them dig in and do other preemptive strikes. But it's disingenuous to the voter if they supported it, right? >> So, you kind of have to be careful on that. And with our cash position, we can
get through it without raising in increasing the millage rate. >> Yeah. >> In the short term, unless it really the wheels really fall off the bus, you know, but we don't know until it goes >> the projects that that uh are out there. We don't yet have it on the strategic
list, but you would know structurally. So, we're allowed, you know, the structural where that's not exempted, right? Or >> is that the right word for that? I mean >> after funds we can >> for for >> and we got a couple projects we have
that real time you know security center we thought would be a reasonable number we're finding it's unreasonable may have to go to the electorate to get it approved or value engineer it to a place of acceptable nature >> I think we're going to be doing that more we've been in a very great place
from fiscal planning and the prudence of planning for the what's coming ahead is just that the end point has just moved on us, right? the the >> the field goal post moved and now we got to re >> change that game plan somehow with at
this point we don't really know and we don't really know what those caps on growth do and if they get authorized for general law movement on spending it could really get in a weird spot fast and I mean by weird by how do you plan for
>> that political math and stuff like that it gets quick right >> but you know but in reality when when we started doing five-year planning, right? When when when we started doing that, we we've always committed that, hey, >> these are great times. Property values
are increasing. Let's hold the line with the millillage. Let's hold it because we know that that curve is going to start to come down. And when it does start to come down, we want to be able to have cash so that we don't have to keep uh uh
messing around with the millage rate. Do you know what I mean? When when it starts to come down. >> And it's interesting because I remember having the conversation with you all last year. I said we're almost to the point where we would naturally be looking at discussing millage modifications on our own regardless of
the state because we're coming to the backside of those large capital projects and we would be in a spot where we could calm down which supports some of the stuff we're going to talk later. >> This planning actually has worked quite well. Yes, >> we just didn't think it would be on
somebody else's term and not our own. >> Right. And and keep in mind too who we keep forgetting we also lost discretionary sales tax dollars, >> right? Keep in mind, you know, you can see where because Okay, so what you're looking at here is the top line is your
cash in all these different institutions. Okay, so we have operating accounts, we have investment accounts, uh we have money market accounts and so on and so forth. all that is uh uh restricted and and we have to apply Florida statute
laws as to what we can invest in. So that's where uh it's a slide number 14, page number 14. Okay. So that's where all your cash is invested at. The next group underneath that, that's how it gets allocated. That's how it gets
allocated to the different funds. >> Okay? So, when somebody says, "Hey, uh, I want to donate money to the library donation fund." Well, I can tell you right now, you know, as of the audit, that has $10,274
60 or 80 cents. I can't see from that, but so I know what that has exactly into it. And so, at the end of the day, we know exactly which fund has which dollars in them at all times. So, but ju I ju
just wanted to kind of show you that now. Now, by the way, that's different than fund balance, right? Fund balance is like your equity. Okay? Think about it as like your takes your assets less accumulated depreciation or takes your accounts payable, right? That you still
have to pay out and and so on and so forth. But this right here, you're looking at everybody's every one of your funds has instead of having this is what we call pulled cash. Okay? So, think about it like a partnership. If if you were in a law firm where you have a
partnership, well, this is the equity. There it is. But this is real cash. >> The 19 million. >> Yeah.$1 19 million. Right. Right. So, >> um >> the total of everything, right? I mean, a lot of it is >> 10 million is right. Is 10 12 million is
your general fund. Yeah. You know what I mean? >> Right. Exactly. But we're required obviously we have to keep them all separate, right? you know, and so it's just it's just our requirement. So anyway, I just wanted to kind of give you that. So in in essence, you know, our goal for FY27 is to keep the millage
the same, right? Take that extra $600,000 that we're going to that we're going to get. We're not going to we're we're not we're not going to tap into pulling money from reserves for FY27 yet. You know what I mean? We're we're
not going to do that, right? We're going to control maybe slow down a little bit of our capital spending. Keep in mind, right, we have labor, you have operating, and then you also have capital spending. Okay. For each department. So,
>> have you have you identified any one of those an example? What would be something like that? >> Well, well, >> the capital spending, >> right? Well, what we've done and and what we've we've committed to it, but we haven't yet budgeted for it. For example, if I come I'm gonna if I if we
go forward with the fire department annex building here, right? >> It's not necessarily included in these budget dollars. I would have to come to you for a budget amendment. >> I would say here's the engineering, here's the architecture, here's the construction cost. And your question
would be, well, David, where are we getting the money from? >> Right? And then at that moment in time, I would say, well, we're going to pull it from our excess reserves of of $4 million or what have you. So, >> so, uh, the next ones, and we'll I'll
speed it up. Sorry. I know that the later discussion is is more important. I'm sorry about that. Uh, this right here's your building fund. Remember, separate fund, right? You know, look at the here here. Look at what the building fund has, right? The building fund has three, you know, three uh well, right
now it has $4.5 million in in that, you know, in in in that fund there. So, that's the that's the building fund. So, let's go through the building fund. I am anticipating right now early adoption. I am anticipating that we're going to have a little slight decrease. You know, you
remember we still have the interlocal agreement, but I am starting to see Jeff and I were talking. We are starting to see, you remember, he was just up here, he was talking about changes in the permit fees, things like that. That's only $20,000. That's uh you know that that's really nothing. But I'm going to
be conservative, okay? And I'm going to say, you know what, I think our revenues are going to come down slightly in that in in that fund. I mean, it's been it's been growing phenomenally, right? It's been growing from 3% to 11%. I'm estimating that we're going to be at 6%
actuals. Those are your lefth hand uh uh fields there. And usually when you see appropriation from reserves, that means that we're pulling money out of that funds reserves to to to match to balance
the budget. So if I have expenses, I need to have revenue to balance it out. So, uh, yeah. So, right now, you know, we're looking at, uh, you know, transfers out. We've increased the transfers out to the general fund. We
increased that about $200,000. They used to, uh, they used to do, uh, you know, $500,000. Now, we went up to $700,000. Now, we're going up to $900,000. This is their equitable share to cover
their overhead. Just like we saw in the transfers of funds, the water department pays the general fund, the sewer department pays the water fund. All the funds have to push their their representative share of the overall running of the government.
>> Is it enough? Do you think maybe they should pay more? >> They uh it gets audited every year. So every year I've got to show the auditors my method of allocation, right? And so when you look at about when you look at what $900,000 is, remember your budget
is 20 millionish, right? You know, $900,000 big deal. It comes out to be like 3%. Yeah, we could we could definitely increase that if you know if >> bring it up to 900. >> Oh yeah. Yeah, we can. Well, right now we're anticipating that. >> Oh, good.
900. >> So yeah, can you do a million? like what what is limiting you there? I mean like how are you justifying it? Can you justify more? >> So they didn't pass anything in the last session. I think it's going to get revisited where they start to look at
these funds, enterprise funds, and limiting the amount of transfer to the general fund. Uh some communities exploit it, some underdo it like us. So there's a sweet spot. So, long as you never exceed 25% of the building department's operating revenue, you're
generally okayish. But the legislature could say, "No, it's going to be 5% or 10." And if we talk about these general law provisions, hold on to your hat, folks. Um, so
I usually try to keep it under 25%. I wouldn't go over that. I would try to stay under it so you don't draw attention to it. I think the auditor would start to question when the building department is, you know, a lot of their revenue is leaving. So long as it's like 25%, it's always kind of that
magical operating number. For every dollar generated, there's 25% your time, operating lights, >> the general manager's time, you know, accounting, >> we pay for their legal fees. I mean, like all that stuff is coming, you know, they're paying for that. >> But we pay for all that. I mean I I
think you know so 25% of what on this chart is it of the 3 million >> yeah so about three so what if if our budget is $2.9 million of expenses that right yeah >> keep it around that number would be my strong advice just so it doesn't draw
the eye of an auditor >> of the 2918 is that the number you're looking at >> so we're more but on I mean I I would go to four I don't know I would So I would go as high as you can. >> So remember GFream and Highland Beach, it takes like one project and your
revenue is like >> Yeah. >> all over the board. So last year when the Milani family applied for their permits, Jeff wanted them to wait a little longer, but they applied before the fiscal year turnover and it was $350,000 for one permit. That changes it. Or
GFream comes in with a project and they it's a $573,000 permit. It just changes everything. But you can't guess who's who's next. Yeah. >> But I mean, if you look at Jeff's May uh reporting, we're saw 50% on Highland Beach revenues. >> Yeah.
>> So, we don't know. But all of a sudden, just takes one permit or a couple of owners to say, "Yeah, let's do it this summer. Let's just get it over with." And then boom, you got two or three remodels on $3 million condos. And it changes the whole revenue stream, which, you know,
>> but they have a ton of reserve. So I And how easily can you move this around? Can it be 1.1 million one year, 700 another year? >> As long as just like anything else, we just have to have justified, right? I just have to show the method of
allocation, right? And right now we look at we look at all the general funds expenditures including legal or or whatever their proportionate share of insurance and things like that and we estimate a a percentage. And as long as we have a method of allocation, the
auditors are like, "Okay, that's >> But you're very cons any auditor that would come in. Dave, you are conservative." >> Yeah. >> I mean, this it's not it's not even questionable. >> Right. Right. Well, I want to be able to pull these alternate levers when we when we need it and and and that's and that's
not a bad thing. So, yes, we can look at a next a next. >> So, maybe in the future when we are really tight because we're not tight now, right? We It's not an issue. I mean, the only issue I'd say is I think the um fund balance for the building department is kind of high. Yes.
>> Um but uh you know, I I think that perhaps we could justify at some point in time when we needed I don't know to move it over, you know, move some of that reserve over. I don't know, maybe they should pay more, you know, more of the dock. Maybe they should pay more of
the old firehouse, you know. So, they're paying a lot for um the a lot of the capital the roof for the public cuz there's I can't find any record that the building department revenue was ever utilized to do any capital improvements. So, they're
sitting in our water plant and never paid for it. We paid it on debt service out of the general fund. So, they're going to pay for the roof, the windows, they're going to repave the parking lot. So, a lot of those costs are going to get back over and it'll chip away pretty well at that fund. But we'll probably
still be a little flush. Um, but we still have to remember and it's hard because they set standards on it that when we get those big permits, those are like two, threeear projects that we're carrying inspections and all that stuff, too. So, >> no, I agree. I'm not talking about
trying to spend future money that building that maybe the building department might collect. I'm talking about what's in reserves right now. Oh, no. I mean, that, >> you know, >> Yeah. >> Yeah. I would want to apply the whole five-year forecasting to the building fund and make sure we have enough and
all that kind of stuff, but I think we're like they have a lot. They're fine. >> Yeah. Well, look at Well, look at how many days cash they had, right? So, you know, let's define what days cash is. days cash is is I take that year's annual operating expenses, divide it by
365 days, and then divide that by how much cash they have in to get a Okay. How many days can they last >> without having another dollar another dollar, >> right? Meanwhile, they cover all of their expenses. >> Exactly. Just for two years, which is
great. and I want them to be >> um in a good position, but I just think they need to pay their fair share. And if they hadn't been paying >> stuff in the past, you know, I don't know if there's >> and and some of that too is we their transfers to kind of also give us cover
too is it's GFream. >> We're managing a department for GFream at zero cost. So we need to capture our cost. >> Yes. >> From the GFream revenue, >> revenue that comes in, which is almost as much as ours the last couple years. that needs to come back over to us
because we agreed to handle the contract that so maybe that's a separate a separate additional allocation right very viable >> yeah thing if you remember like most of our interlocals except for the one went
really bad for us but um there's us right it in there um there's always an administrative cost associated to handling these things for other towns we do it for the water we do it for sewer we do it for the fire for the police dispatch services. There's an admin cost on top of their actual for
managing and doing it on so uh we're safe in those zones. >> Right. Right. Right. Yeah. Absolutely. Yes. >> Are you comfortable with the plan? We're trending minus 10% between us and Gulfream year to date. Are you comfortable with the uh >> Yeah. >> projection?
>> Yes. Yeah. Absolutely. That's, you know, it's building is one of those things that is hard to uh get a trend line on, right? Uh most other communities really uh most other communities really uh uh it's a challenge for them because
sometimes they're really heavily weighted on their own staff, right? Versus we have a great hybrid method, right? where we have the right amount of staff and then we outsource for a certain amount, right, of of work. And so it's a great so so what it does is it
keeps our overhead low, right, for the for the day-to-day stuff, but yet uh with that model, we are able to provide the contractor cap enough work that they give us dedicated staff. So it it it really is a excellent model for this
area. Would it be advantageous to seek other towns to do the same thing? Good sources. >> It's GFream's a perfect match for us. Uh their commission very similar to you, very smart. They think forward about
things. They're not they're not at each other at all times. There isn't a lot of political energy and negative energy. You you got to you know, they have a good stable manager. Trey is a really good guy. He's he keeps everything in the right place. So, it's a stable community. Those make great partners.
It's the unstable ones and you know that's hard to do. Bokeh and Delray are never going to partner for building. It would be the smaller communities. Uh I know that Ocean Ridge at one time asked us, but they were they're a little I don't want to bring it in our house. So I kind of >> pushed away from that, but if it does,
the opportunities jump up. >> Yeah. >> Um >> we'll take a look at it. >> Right. >> Has to be the right match. You know, be selective a little bit. >> Right. Mhm. So now we're going and again as we said before this fund, the building fund, they've got their own fund. They've got very healthy cash cash
for for for them, you know, as we as we just discussed. Uh now we go on to the water fund. The water fund happens to be our weakest fund. >> Um just because it uh we we have a uh five the overall the budget is going to
go down by by 6.3%. But that's because we're not pulling as much money from reserves. The reason why is is because their cash balances are starting to run a little bit closer than I would like. So we'll but but but we'll look at that. So right now we anticipate
for the for now into the foreseeable future in this area that a 5% is is going to be the status quo. you know, if if chemicals, especially chlorine, uh heavy the heavy equipment, uh uh things
like that, uh if their if their increases is at least minimum of two two%, you know, we're going to go to uh 5%. Here's what a water fund has to do. A water fund has to not only cover its
cost, but it also has to cover its obviously debt service, which is part of the cost, but it has to charge enough to cover its cost, its its uh its capital and its future capital needs without going into more debt. Now, this system's
been great. Because here's why. We haven't ran we haven't gone into more debt. Matter of fact, we've paid more debt off. Uh I'll go back to those. Uh let me go to the debt. You can see our debt for this is our debt service. Debt service in government is defined as
principal and interest. Okay? So you can see look at those interest rates, right? Won't then we got a loan out there for 1.18%. Those were the good old days. Uh right. And so and so anyway, you can see also the dates of maturity. Now our next one, we have to hold on. We came off of
some good years, but our next drop off is going to be in uh 2029. So, we we we hold steady at about $810,000 a year that that fund has to pay out in in in debt service, right? We got to
hold that steady and then it drops in 2029. Mhm. >> Uh but as far as the the usage, this right here, what what you're looking at here is usage, the top right hand side
is gallons. Okay? So what I what do I mean by g? Well, that's how many gallons that we use. Sometimes we like to look at gallons because what it does is it strips out the rate adjustments, right? But I will tell you that what you're
looking at is the peak. We're very seasonal here as you're aware and that the we have six billing cycles. We just went through three of them at that third one. That's our top. Most of it obviously start starts starts to drop
off. And so uh but we are up we're up in the water 10 so far. When you compare year to year, when I compare where we're at the first three billing cycles this year versus the last year, first three
billing cycles, we're up almost 11%. And with irrigation, so you got waters on top there. Irrigation, the same thing. We're looking at gallons, we're just looking at gallons used, uh, we're up about 7%. Okay, when we compare it
year-over-year. So that's good. But when I go through this, when we go through this three more times, as we get closer to September, you're going to start to see those numbers drop off just because of seasonality. >> Can we go back? I'm sorry to go back to slide 18. I just have a question. So
>> it's 18, right? Yeah. >> Um the line that says transfers in. Mhm. >> So, um, starting fiscal 2025, uh, those transfers in are only from the
sewer fund, correct? No more transfers from the That's correct. >> Fund. >> Um, and then you're increasing the transfers in in 2027 um, from the sewer fund. >> Yep.
>> Instead of 220 to 300. >> Yes. Mhm. >> Um, is there any room to increase that 300? >> Well, let's look at the sewer. Keep in mind, we just got done. Remember what our commitment was with sewer. We were looking at for sewer relining, we were
looking at some crazy contracted numbers, right? So, we held steady. We said, you know what? Let's do it with the excess cash that we have, right? So, we knew that excess cash that we had uh uh segregated or held back, we were going to put that to use. We got uh we
got a great bank for the dollar. We found the right contractor at the right price and obviously we're in that. So when we go to the sewer fund, let me just go to the sewer fund real quick. Oh, this right here's your expenditures. So the sewer fund when we look at the sewer funds days cash, let's just look
at that one there. Yeah, the sewer fund. Yeah, I mean we could probably uh you can see there see my estimate there in 2026. I'm on slide uh what is that? 27. Yeah, I'm on slide 27. So now on slide
27, what you're looking at there is their days cash, right? And so I'm saying that, hey, we have about $3.1 million, right? At the end of our audit for FY25, I'm anticipating that we're going to be
done with that sewer lining project and all the other projects. We're going to be done with that and that value is going to drop down. So, it's going to leave us about a million a million six in there, right? And then we kind of break even because that was kind of the biggest project. We're still at 300 and
something days. Now, the thing we have to be concerned about is this. >> Number one, I didn't assume any additional grant dollars. Remember, we used to get $250 or something like that for >> for uh uh the the lift stations, right? I didn't assume any of that in 2027 just
to be conservative. But the other thing too we have to consider is our agreement is with Delray, right, to process our sewer. So the only thing that our sewer department is is lines under the ground that go to lift stations. All of those
lift stations pump to the next lift station, pump to the next lift station, right? Till we get to the Delray uh interconnect and then that's where it goes to get treated, right? And so we are beholden to Delray, right, for that.
And so although in a sewer environment, your sewer fund is the most corrosive environment, right? It's it's just it it is. Matter of fact, I tell people the only thing better than buying a boat is buy a sewer utility. I mean, you know,
but but but at the end of the day, uh it usually is a lot of repairs and maintenance. The reason why is because when you do have breaks, when you do have a pipe separating, when you do have those horrible things that you have to fix, it gets to be a mess. Uh I think you're in a healthy place right now. And
>> do you want to keep that? >> Yeah, I I would want to keep it at the 300 days cash because I have two outliers that I don't know about. I don't know about the uh the the contract. I know that we come up for renewal, I think. Um but
>> it's a couple years. couple years. So, we'll we'll we'll see what happens with that. So, but anyway, I think I'm comfortable with that right now, you know, but we can we can move some uh some stuff around with the building fund and uh and things like that. So, >> okay, sounds good. >> But, but anyway, so this fund as well,
this fund here as well was, you know, we had assumed a 5% increase. This one here is doing well as well. This is what you're looking at. Here's the uh gallons treated. And again, so far we're up five five almost six%. Uh as compared to our
revenues are up by 8%. Uh well, you know, 5% of that is obviously increases in rates plus uh the other increases in consumption, but uh but it's it's all good stuff. It's all up and trending to the right, which is uh which is good and
what you want to see. Uh, so in as in to to summarize this until we get to the real real good stuff, what you're looking at here on page 28, I'm sorry, slide 28. This is your
overall budget. This is every fund. >> The top line is your sources of revenue. The bottom section are your uses of funds, right? And you can see like for example, let me just give you an example. You know, really only 52%
of your expenditures are labor and related. It's not off. It's not off the chart. You have a nice balance of hey, 30% is operating costs. 52% is our personnel.
Only 6% this year is for our capital. Debt service obviously is fixed. Transfers out of six and appropriation to reserves is about 2%. And so when you look at by fund how we're going to use those funds and what they're going to be
committed to, um it seems uh very very realistic. >> So with all that happy news, um I'm going to take a just a moment to start our communications on the property tax constitutional amendment. >> But I think we could still summarize
this even like a like we're in good shape. There's no reason to change the I don't see any reason to change the millillage. Um we are still um moving stuff. There's still like uh amounts
that are moving to the general fund balance. You're >> I think now your latest estimate is what half a million dollars you're budgeted half a million dollars to go to the general fund. um this year
um I forget what was budgeted but 2026 almost 2 million is actually going to uh the general fund but some of that is because of delayed capital expenditures >> some of that and some of the funds that were appropriate to reserve those
dollars have been all used >> so David I think is uh not conservative for the first time and He's being a little wishful and thinking that 2 million is going to drop out of the current operating budget this year. >> Right. Yeah. It it should Right. My 26 >> current it's not going to be 2 million.
>> It's just it's just an >> Right. I I've got I've got I'm just looking at estimates. I'm looking at what contracts we have what what have you. But that that might not be my right then. That is that's under the 26 estimate. Right. So you're saying
>> cuz there was an amount budgeted to appropriate appropriation to reserve uh was around a million2 that's been utilized for equipment purchases, capital projects. >> Yeah. >> So that's been whittleled down. We'll still come out ahead. Yeah. But I I think 2 million is a little strong
because some of the initial anticipated dropouts have been utilized. >> Right. I think it's right. I think it's slide number 11. So slide number 11, you know, it's like uh 1. >> Okay. Yeah. So 11. Yes. Yes. Yeah. >> So okay. Oh, I'm sorry. What?
>> And that's just an estimate of what we think. Now that depends on all right. What between now and by the time October comes around, what did we actually uh encumber encumber ourselves? >> Okay. So the one point so um 2024
1.2 went to um >> corporation to reserves. Um this year >> 25.9 Y >> um almost 2 million went to reserves. >> Um this year you put in this chart your
estimate was 1.4 but it's really going to be less. >> It's going to be less about half that. >> Okay. So 700. >> I mean still I think just our natural conservative nature of spending and you can't be a perfect at budgeting. I know. I know. But we had a fund amount where we did a budget and we said there's
going to be about 2 million >> or it was almost actually 1.4 like that drop out. But when we went through some of the project, some of the engineering, all that stuff, >> it whittleled down. >> It whittleled down. So, um it's not as
>> as high as we initially anticipated. >> Sure. >> We'd always have I don't want to say always, but I guess since I've been here, always had money drop out. >> No. Uh just different amounts. I think this year is just a little bit more close to budget numbers. Um
>> and then next the 2027 projected is half a million. >> Yeah. >> So I don't know. I look at that a lot. >> Yeah. I don't I got I just don't like >> put a big number in >> you know what you know our our millillage. So looking at that we've still been putting money away. >> Yes.
>> Um you are projecting as much as everything that we know. Um so to me that says that our mil our cons our um millage rate is is yeah appropriate. >> Yes. >> So okay now sorry I just wanted to
summarize. >> No no no sorry I and I should have summarized it. >> No that is what was meaningful. That's what I needed to say. >> Yeah. Everything is fine. You know everything is everything is fine. We're on status quo. Matter of fact we're you're exception without a doubt. you know, the only thing that we're
questioning and Marshall will take it from here. But, you know, but overall, you know, your budget right now to run the town is about $30 million, you know, uh, a a year. Uh, not, you know, this year coming up. That's that's that's that's what it takes. Now, whether or
not certain capital projects drop off or we push them off, right, that's what or my other estimates and how much we're going to get from sales tax dollars or franchise fees, how how much that's going to be or if we're going to get any grant dollars or anything, you know, that that'll that'll sway the numbers,
but overall, you know, about about in total about $30 million. So, >> all right. >> Thank you very much. So um and again these uh so the the constitutional amendments so you see that it's a it's a graduated implementation over a 2-year
period. The 150 uh starts in uh the calendar year of 27 for the uh property appraiser goes to 250 and 28. Uh we had information provided to us from the property appraisers. I took a little bit a slightly more conservative approach because their numbers are guess I don't
want to say guesses but estimates and there'll be some changes. So I like a more conservative number. A million dollars the first year, million7 the second it'll probably be according to their numbers slightly less but not wildly less um maybe on the the 2000 on
the 2028 29. So those are the two in and of themselves the increase exemption to 250 and I think we had the conversation at this meeting that if they did that we could we could manage. >> We could manage. >> Yeah. >> Not so fast. >> Well, I want to clarify too. I mean your
first line that it's a million dollar. It's not really a million, right? It's because $300,000 the current reduction is 300,000. >> Correct. >> So it's >> it's clarified on the next page. We on that chart, but this was
>> a million dollar all exemptions. >> All exemptions, which currently it's $300,000 is what the revenue reduction is. So it's not an additional million. >> It's an 580 $600,000 difference. So between the two,
>> right? >> Um. >> Right. >> But for points of conversation for the public to know, it's a million dollars less. You could say it's was 300 was already coming out, but we don't know all of uh the homestead properties when that starts to happen and goes into place and moving of properties. But for
the point of conversation, we got a two-step process 250. We'll make it through that number management. But what we have to recognize too is structural. It doesn't bounce back. It stays there because they've cap growth. Now, does growth continue on? Yes. Um, but as
you'll see up there, the the growth cap is 5% instead of 10. And since 60% of our properties for for simple math is driven by a 10% growth rate, that's now capped at five. So, it's going to slow. Homestead will still grow, but it's at 3% or CPI, whatever is lower.
So, our growth rates, as David indicated, is probably going to be more to 2 to 3%. Which always helps us in the long term. But what we can't guess is how many properties are moved back and forth. I think that'll be somewhat limited based on the 5-year waiting period. I think it's not going to be as
exotic uh here on the barrier island as it might be interior in North Florida. Um that movement is bigger. The ones that I I concerned on are the general law provisions that the legislature takes out of the constitution and puts
in their hands. And because they're been strong on preeemptions cuz they're agitated with a few municipalities that we all pay the price, they're going to say that they're going to come up with a uniform procedure for you all to do a full exemption. And some
communities will, some communities might not, but they're going to create a procedure for you to do that under general law. So you don't have to go to the constitution again to do it additional homestead. They're going to allow it to be done at the local level. good, bad, or indifferent. But that's
taking it out of the Constitution and putting it to an elected body. And I don't know if there'll be an undoing. So, if a a political body is charged to undo it, can they not do that and go back and forth? Because once you go, my guess is they're going to put a procedure once you go full exemption, your community is a full exempt
community. Um, the other one is a spending threshold. You hear a lot of them talk about core services. Police, fire, infrastructure, environment, those things are core services. But it does include under the constitution that you charged as uh uh
elected municipalities can you know spend dollars on services necessary to maintain local government. They want to put it in their hands to say no we're going to by general law tell you what you can and can't spend your money on. Good, bad or indifferent. It takes it out of the local control and out of the
constitution and puts it in the legislature who has this bent against that home rule concept. So those two things are very concerning. As much as the money, I think we'll get through it because we're we're planned and we're in financially a strong position. Those
general law provisions will no longer be in our hands and it doesn't go to the voters even. It's just the legislature can make changes moving forward and they've kind of tipped their hat as to what they believe money should be spent on, not what we think money should be spent on. you know, their goal is to
take it away from 5013C's out of the general fund for some of these municipalities they're mad at, but it could fall over to these unintended consequences that they're not that specific and say it's only police and fire, it's only this, it's only that, or up they could up to X, you know, so they
can do those things. So, those are things to be careful of moving forward, but the the financial stuff we can manage. The other one is SB4. >> Financial stuff we can man. I'm going to do a plaque for that. >> Yeah. Well, I mean, if the general law
stuff goes through, yeah, it Yeah. The numbers in and of themselves are challenging, but you all are smart and we've planned for this. You guys have a good head on your should. We know where we're going. The community is behind it. We're We planned well, but with the general law, when we no longer know what it is from year to year, the 60-day
session drives what you can do, makes me very uncomfortable for y'all. Uh, just because I won't be able to predict. David won't be able to project it. It just we'll have to wait till it comes out of the legislative session in a in a spin cycle. Um the SP for the millage
rate. So um you can go up no more than 110% with 2/3 vote. So basically four of you would have to approve um up to the 110% of roll back. If you're over the 11 to0% roll back, it
requires a unanimous vote. And that's where you're going to be in this situation. Based on the summary the mayor provided to keep our millage rate, our roll back is 3.1889, which exceeds 110% to go to the 3.5875. So, you will all have to approve the
millage rate for it to move forward. You have since I've been here, but if one decides not to, we cannot go to that mill rate. >> So, we'll all have to be on the same page. go to the current military. >> Correct. Yes. >> Which is interesting. >> So we'd be we'd probably be at like 3.49
if only four if we only had four people. So that new threshold it used to be you could go up to it with just a simple majority. Now you need 2/3 and they contemplated 2/3 based on a seven or nine person commission on a five person. Twothirds math doesn't work. So four out
of five has to be approving up to anything over the roll back rate. So to go beyond the roll back rate, four of you have to agree. To go beyond 110%, you all have to to agree. >> Right? >> So this is the other governor as we were talking about ebikes, not the governor
elect or elected, but the governor is placed in there on how you could change militaries. >> What What is the roll back rate? I'm sorry. Could you say that? >> 3.1889. >> So to go to the 3.5, we'll be at like 112% if I'm right. 10575. So, we'd have
to have unanimous. >> So, but if we get a unanimous vote, so when I say >> to to carry out your plan that you've been working on all these years, >> what you I'm hoping you're all unanimous. >> We are, but it's just interesting just to keep it. >> I usually find increasing millage rates
makes everybody tense up and takes it harder. But to do that, even you all have to agree. Yeah. >> All of you. Or a referendum. So the voters could vote on it and overturn your vote. If a majority of the referendum to increase the millage rate, then they could trump the commission to
do it. >> I feel very comfortable because I feel we're more like a speedboat than a huge yacht. We can turn very quickly. >> Well, you know, it's by reducing the nonhomestead from 10 to five. >> It's going to slow it down a bit.
>> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> I can't project out exactly. So don't but I'm just saying if we have >> but that's a and that's a >> 2.5 billion used to grow potentially at 10% in good market conditions. That's our non-h homestead value as of today.
The 25 numbers or the 20 the numbers we're going into. You know take that 10 to 5% it it slows that rate like it's it's designed to it's that's done for a reason. It just slows it down. So you to get to those 13% I don't think will ever
happen again with once it passes it'll come down. >> What is the timeline as far as us knowing when everything will go? >> It's fine. It's the year after budget that we'll have to worry about. It's the calendar the assessor's calendar year. She goes January 1 through December 31st
of 27. So starting in January 1 of 27, we would be looking at a $150,000 homestead reduction. That we can live with pretty pretty handily. Our plans are in good shape. >> 250, we got to think about things a little
bit more. Maybe scale back some stuff, maybe some austerity measures. We have to change a few things, but that's assuming there's no growth. So even at 2% growth gives us a little bit more breathing room and makes that number balance. So um >> what about our how are we with
investments? Did the market going >> oh the market's going great investment in but again we can only invest in like >> yeah I can't >> I can't invest in uh SpaceX >> but I did so there's a guy going to arrest me here in about a half hour but you guys are fine for the next 20 years.
So, but uh so but right I got to do Treasury bill Florida legislation restricts it. >> So this this is on on the uh uh >> yep >> the election August. >> Uh no it's going to be a November election. It's being there's a lawsuit filed that makes some pretty tangible
points. So I'm thinking the language will be uh the uns sensationalized a little bit because it's kind of like some very uh opinionated statements in there. So, they're going to probably prevail in some fashion and the attorney general
will have to rewrite. It'll be on there, though. But I think the lawsuit will prevail for them to be a little more honest and clearcut on one the ballot description and uh the language of supporting it. So, it the bill support language. Now,
what we have to remember too is they pass these things and they understand there's things that they don't know. So, they do an implementing bill within 60 days. So the legislature will reconvene if it passes and then clarify what they meant. >> So that's so that's that doesn't seem right.
>> That doesn't seem right. But once we say general law, they can do a lot. And that's and I don't want to say that I'm a you know I have a problem with legislators. I'm just saying their their history tends to show what their intent will be. And it's no longer us as the voters of the state of Florida saying,
you know, amend the constitution to do these things. We're saying amend it now and the legislature can um so people have described it one as a tax shift. You're taking it from homestead to non-h homestead. Some people believe that. It looks like it, but it's also a power
shift from local and constitution to the legislator. So there's a kind of >> which that has to be emphasized. Um so so I guess one question I have so I know >> I know the law um on the ballot will be
uh the real estate tax thing but the thing about the roll back the limit already approved that's approved that's not something that we vote on that's a done deal so next year we we abide by all that right we have to be
>> right now to vote Yep. So when we vote on our budget this year, we the SP this year. This year this year, >> you're gonna need a unanimous vote. Yeah. >> Okay. That's interesting. Okay. I didn't realize the time either. >> So this year you
>> Yeah. We have you guys in the right spaces to make good decisions. We're not like fighting. >> Yeah. If we ever have to make a change, I mean that's going to be okay. So okay, that is enlightening. I did not know that. Good. Good to know. >> Hey Mash, I have a question. What if we've uh it doesn't pass?
>> Our five-year plan carries forward. >> Good to go. >> Well, yeah. So, I guess >> we I know when we have something on the ballot, we as Highland Beach cannot promote it or whatever. You know, there's rules,
right? So, with this real estate change that the Florida legislature is putting on the ballot, can Highland Beach help educate people about it >> here. >> Only here. You can't send anything out um that advocates one position or
another. You can have um workshops here. You can post stuff on your website that's factual. You can have like a forum to explain the impacts that this is going to have. >> I will explain it in very You can't advocate against it or for it
>> and you can't send out anything or use public funds to send out anything. And look, all of you can speak with your constituents. I think that's really important that you explain to people that it's, you know, it's there's a lot more. Yeah. I mean, you look at it, you're like, who wants to pay property
tax? That's great. I know, >> but money must come from somewhere. >> And I I think what what and what Marshall is alluding to also. So section nine of this law which is at the end
it's page 17 and 18 out of 20 which is where they prescribe what adorum taxes can be used for and they say public safety um uh infrastructure
natural resource projects and for operations but no money like they don't mention parks They don't mention food truck events. They don't mention library. Um, so basic
like people need to know. Yeah. I mean, this is exciting, right? I mean, if you have a property valued at 250 or less or whatever and it's your homestead, you potentially could pay. >> It's not a topic of conversation. And I mean, I'm involved with a lot of presidents. I listen, this is definitely
not a topic of conversation. And the reason is most of them don't understand how to describe the numbers. So they keep away from areas that they cannot articulate. So it's not even and it's whether it's uh foundations, they're just not discussing it right now. Um
it's a discussion amongst us. But if you were to walk and talk to other presidents here in Highland Beach, it is not a topic of conversation. >> What isn't the whole bill? The whole thing that's going to be on the ballot >> topic of property tax. It is not a discussion topic. >> It is for me. I'm hearing it all over
the place and and I think people are in favor of it because they're just thinking of the shortterm benefit of a reduction in taxes. But this will severely limit what municipalities can
pay for like no more parks, no no more like we have >> everything would have to be fee based or everything would be fee based >> to pay to go much more than what you do now. We have a line item in our budget. I think it's 500,000 for the library. We can't do we would not be able to do
once, you know, I I forget what the timing is for this, but we we would not be able to pay for that. Am I understanding that correctly? >> Right now, we can, right? But they're giving themselves the general law authority to change that because it's under what article 8 of the constitution
stipulates how the municipalities you get to decide as lawfully elected officials of the lawfully organized municipality. You get to choose and they can't do it unless they change the constitution. So now they're going to say maybe amended by the legislature
under general law. So then they're going to start saying we don't want you to spend here. We don't want you to spend here. We don't want you to spend here. Now, you could think think of your cultural red meat issues that you see flashing on the news screens,
whatever you like it or don't like it. Those, I believe, are what the legislature is targeting, right? >> But we've given them cart blanch, trust them into the future. Is it just that or is it the other things that some developer, you know, gets gets
railroaded by a municipality as they think and, you know, goes over to the legislature and says, "I want this." I mean, >> but there but they list out things that they think that municipalities can pay for and it does not include
>> from your So, they're saying that that yours could only be used whatever you collect. But then are isn't there a severe limits on what you can do non-advalorum? >> Well, those are fee based. >> But what can you can or can't do based on fees? You know, you can do a fire
assessment fee. You can There's a few other fees you can do. We can't do >> Can you do library fee? Can you like some of these things >> library card fee? So, you want to go to the library, it's $1,000. >> Yeah. Like that's what's going to happen. >> But right now, our library, but our
library is part of our general fund. Exactly. And and it's saying that we're not going to be allowed to Right. >> because it says what's what's allowed under the Constitution, but the only thing that's scary is is that they would then have next session they would go in
and clean this up and now they have general law ability and they can say what we really meant is just police and fire or just police, fire, and infrastructure and environment. >> Town clerk, town say that in section 9. Well, the main argument they had was
constitutional officers, right? So, you have your property appraiser, you have your debt tax collector, you have the comp control of clerk of records. They use adalorum dollars to survive as well. They do a lot of fees, but they have a lot of adorum dollars, the sheriff and stuff like that, which will be protected
under public safety provisions. In order to get the bill passed at the legislature, they had, you know, all of these constitutional officers saying, "Wait a minute, we're not included in any of this." because they wanted to just say police fire and they wanted to provide a protection for them too. They
said next your roll back year one year back is what their base is and you can't cut any f further. And that's conversations I know a couple of us had at the Florida League of Cities lunchon was like >> if if I have to maintain all of police and fire and then take a full exemption
at the time when we talked it was full exemption like we're >> it doesn't work. >> We're totally wiped out. >> It's it's almost 70% of your of your budget expenditures. Yeah. Mhm. >> So, I mean, it wouldn't be it, you know, it would be we'd be three $4 million
number. We'd be in trouble. Um, but that we're not but there have a uniform procedure. So, you're going to have a lot of municipalities that'll get excited and and smaller boards like this. You could have three run on a ticket and say we're removing homestead exemption probably prevail in some
municipalities and homestead exemptions gone. So, that stuff happens, you know. >> Yeah. Right. So, they're going to create a procedure by which a local municipality can exempt themselves. >> It's pretty >> I think there's a lot of unintended consequences that are in this bill that
people aren't going to realize. >> I mean, ideally, they should have just picked the number and said >> Exactly. And that's it. And that's it. Exactly. And not put in all this additional >> because you would naturally have put that right >> control in place, >> right? >> But they're trying to pull a lot of
different things. And to the electorate, it's going to be hard for them to comprehend. It is. >> It's great because it's so many little things. 5 years here, but not here. 150 to 250 general law to do this. You can't >> and it's not in any of the communications that I've seen like all the little in cute infographics. None of
that is >> that's why the lawsuit was filed because you really can't you don't get any of that detail. None. >> It's excessive property tax. >> It says uh protect small businesses. There's no mention of small businesses. It just changes the cap. So, you know,
like you can only go up 5%. Uh yeah, it's very the it's very misleading as to how it's presented as well. >> It really is. It really is. >> So, I mean, those are again, uh it's the general law provisions that really worry me because it's it's future unknown, but
they're going to be lawfully allowed to do it. And they have a history, they was it 254 preeemption bills were filed this year against local governments. They don't have a tendency of slowing down, right? So once they have that general lawability, you're going to see local
government change in shape. I think we exist. We survive. Might look a lot different and it's you have almost no way to plan for it until the legislature takes action and usually like a July one start date, right? So you got to have
to, you know, pivot quickly. >> What is our timing with regard to educating uh the community? >> We're doing it right now with all the viewers watching. The communities have not hit >> about it here or personally. >> Good. >> I think we got the Scender Madison. They
got it. Evelyn's on board. See her shaking. She's following. >> I talked the chief about it a bunch of times. Good. >> The real challenge The real challenge is that the community is not here. And by the time the community of owners, a high percentage aren't here. By the time they come back, the game is over because they
just don't have an impact over the next four, five, six months. So really the the s the small cadray of voices uh is not enough and so >> there'll be some movement >> for voters >> you'll see some movement once the budget's signed >> once the governor signs the budget some
groups that are sitting on the sideline I think will become a little more involved maybe the chamber of commerce uh slightly you know police and fire unions will probably start to chirp a little bit more um once the budget sign where they you know have all these bills
like the Palm Beach fire bill got approved. Outrageous. So, um once those get signed, I think then some of the fire and police unions will get involved. Chamber of Commerce will come out. Um I mean the the county fire is
extraordinarily in a bad shape where they're going to lose $143 million out of a $700 million budget. I haven't the faintest of how they patch that hole because that's an MSTU. It's a slightly different type of tax, but that's exempt. So,
>> see, not everyone loves a fire. See that, >> right? I mean, it's they'll figure something out, but um >> I had to put that in there. >> But, yeah. So, it's you'll see more movement, more education. Um the incoming speaker of the house
isn't really all that excited about it because he used to be a municipal attorney. Garrison used to be up in Klay County. Um he's not really wild at what it does to rural and smaller communities. Uh basically they're gone. Even counties are gone. And there wasn't
a trust fund mechanism put in place to backs stop these rural places. >> Well, I mean right now you're almost I think you're third the third lowest millillage. Right. My prediction is because of how well you've planned things you will be the number one
>> lowest millage. You don't malipan. >> Well, I don't Well, I don't know is like it's no effect. >> Yeah, it's not going to have an effect, right? But he detains our military. >> Let me caveat a full service community. You know what I mean? Your own police, your own fire, your own library. Maybe
Monalan does have all that, but I don't know. >> They do, but they're Eric's got control of it. They just their their tax value is so high. >> Yeah. >> I mean, you just it's not even >> Maybe there'll be more of a distance between >> surprised Palm Beach spoke a little bit. Kurt and his team there spoke a little
bit more. They're they're going to get clipped a little and I was surprised that they're they're talking out a little bit against it a little bit more than I would expected. You know, >> hey Marshall, I have a general question. What's the who is responsible for giving Dave all the numbers? Where does that information come from? >> Our BSNA software Susie does the ones
and twos on all of the accounting and she puts it all into our system and then we we >> do a great job, you know, like everything else. You you guys someone who works with numbers every day. I mean, this is I mean, really, this is a a lot of information coming in, and they do a great job. They really do.
>> Oh, Marshall runs a tight ship. >> Don't look at me like that. >> Maybe we could summarize. So, year one, year two, if this passes, >> I thought >> I think we're okay. But then
>> I think after that we just have to either it's it's it's it's hope we we hold on to that the legislature doesn't become overly punitive. Maybe they'll feel hey we got this in place. Let's take a break for a little bit or they could continue on.
I mean you you see some folks running on this issue pretty hard. So I don't know that it disappears. I mean with the CF the state CFO was in Bokeh and made the claim that the county is you know misspent $1.2 billion
dollars. I don't think the energy comes out of the balloon or this movement right away. So when they get that general law authority there's going to be some of the power brokers in Tallahassee um are probably going to want to finish what they started.
>> And how is it tracking right now? like it's still pretty close whether or not >> about 60 62% proof just a little over looks like it's going to but again it's early and you'll start seeing if you if you watch any of the news you'll start seeing news articles more commonly run out of it
>> um our lobbyist said this so I won't take credit case you know uh but you know that this is kind of like the governor's kind of legacy he's leaving he's sitting on $60 million in pack funds that he can use so this movement could potentially become wealth well
funded. Um the governor tends to be well respected throughout the state rightfully so. He's a good seems like he's good at but this issue seems a little bit a myth especially for us here in local towns and it's going to be tough you know and you know
>> it's it's I think more players will get involved once the budget's signed and everybody gets their earmarks and appropriations and budgets are settled and I think people have time to start processing what does this mean moving forward
but I I think it's it'll be popular the way it's written. It looks popular when excess property tax you're >> right >> you know 250,000 of your value I think a lot of Floridaidians will that that vote would like it you know just the numbers they're not going to I don't know how
well they'll grasp the how much control you're losing in your local communities but I don't know if it plays well you know >> so well I mean we'll continue to look you know uh the way we calculate is we look at your uh operating expenses and
then what we do is We we take your revenue but then we minus the other revenue right so we take we we take your expenses right and we divide that by your taxable property values times a thousand to get your millage rate but we
also take away from there other you remember the slide that I had on there that said your mil your property taxes pay for 74% >> of your budget right so we take away those other uh other types of revenues that that come in just looking at the millillage And so uh you know we'll
we'll look at that but this year will be fine this time next year right could we'll will be interesting you know we'll see >> our conversations will be a little bit more >> yeah right focused on that >> but then then you might see the shift madame mayor and council from okay this
is when we in order to uh bridge the gap the way to balance the budget oh I might have to pull from reserves you know I might have to pull from reserves a half a million dollars 600,000 what whatever whatever that is we'll you know we'll we'll look at that
>> madam mayor >> 585725 I think is the number was came up with right >> yeah and nothing to read >> well thank you very any discussion about the budget thank you very much that was excellent presentation very thorough thank you
>> um moving on to commissioner comments >> should not >> I think it was a full meeting mayor madame mayor if uh I think a lot was achieved and um I think the uh community it was impressive to see the community coming out and responding um like almost
100%. And that was very impressive. And again, Evelyn, thank you as always, Judy. >> Well, it was a long day. 5:00. Um, uh, it's of concern. It's, uh, more
optimistic as, as we look at the numbers today, but, um, there's no way of escaping it. I mean there's uh if if uh we get the full paniply of what's contemplated up there
is going to be very very difficult. Um so it'll be a challenge but it'll be a challenge that we'll work hard. I'm sure we'll be able to uh uh to reach decisions that are for our benefit as much as as much as possible. Yeah.
>> Yeah. Just it was nice seeing everybody coming out today and express their opinion and uh that's about it. Everybody have a good weekend I guess and have a good Fourth of July because we won't be there. Thank you. >> Thank you. Very good meeting. Thank you.
>> Yeah. Great. Great meeting. Um and uh town attorney. >> No ma'am. >> Town manager. >> Uh just about 20 minutes. So um no just a a quick recap. the signal at Linton and A1A. It's on FD dot in the city of
Delray Beach, managed by the county for signalization. So, um, sargasm again, that's it happens. It's seasonal. It moves every year. You got to rake it. >> There's nothing we could do. I don't know how you trap it out at sea. Uh, it's tracked by South Florida,
>> South Florida, uh, >> South Florida University. They have like a whole program. They're tracking it. It grows. It changes from year to year. Um, it's just something we're going to have to live with. But, you know, raking it does mitigate some of the uh some of the impacts. Um, that's it.
>> That's it. Okay. Now, >> before we close, Marshall, I I just wanted tell you um we so appreciate >> all your work, all your hard work. >> Yes, sir. >> I love it here. We just got we got our work cut out for us moving forward. It's >> Yeah, it's
>> going to be tricky. It's going to be tricky, but we'll do it. We'll do it. >> Yeah. >> Thank you, Evidence. >> Announcements. board vacancies. We have a vacancy for a three-year term on the code enforcement board and the financial advisory board um and the natural
resources preservation advisory board. Um upcoming uh meeting and events uh June 19th closed in observance of Junth day, July 3rd closed in observance of Independence Day. July 9th is our next planning board
uh regular meeting at 9:30 in the morning and July 14th is our next town commission meeting. There are no board action reports and with that we can adjourn. Thank you very much everybody. You