everyone and welcome to the Town of Highland Beach Town Commission meeting and I'd like to call the meeting to order. Can we have the roll call, please? >> Commissioner Chilopski, >> present. >> Commissioner Goldberg, >> present. >> Commissioner Peters, >> present. >> Vice Mayor Stern,
>> present. >> Mayor Moore, >> present. >> Town Manager Laby, >> present. And Town Attorney Rubin, >> present. Thank you. We could all rise for the pledge to flag the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One
nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Are there any changes to the agenda? If none if we could have a motion. >> Yes. I move to approve the uh agenda. >> Second. >> Second. >> All in favor say I. I.
>> Motion carries. Moving on to presentations and proclamations. The first one we have is the Palm Beach County Commission on Ethics and we have uh Miss Rhonda Guyger. Thank you. >> Hey, >> Ronda Guyer with the Commission on Ethics. Thank you as always for having
me and getting me on the agenda and putting me first. It's really nice. Um, I've dropped off some goodies. Promise you don't have to fill out a gift form for that. They're just definitely nowhere near $100. Um, but I do just like to remind you guys that we
are here. Remind everybody out there that we are here. I'm not sure what your training schedule is, but I feel like I was here a couple of years ago. So, maybe we're creeping up on more live trainings. I don't know. Let me know. Happy to come out. Um, we just had our 15 year anniversary at the Commission on
Ethics. Uh we have jurisdiction over every town, every city, um many um associations as well as the county and all of its employees. So um we're doing our best to stay busy, but we do want to remind people that we would rather stay busy with questions as opposed to
investigations. Um so if you have anything you need from us, let us know. Um as I said already, we're happy to come out and do live trainings. I feel like those are so much more valuable than the video if anybody's watched it. No, no shame for the video, but the live trainings are definitely we're here to
answer questions as they come up. Um, so we just really just want everybody to know that we're here and remind everybody that this, you know, there's a contract between our elected officials and the people they represent. Um, and hopefully the code of ethics, not that we I wish we didn't need to have a code of ethics, but because we do, just
everybody know that we're here. Um, you know, everybody has this uh these lines that they have to stay on one side of. Um, and we're here to do that. As I said, we hope to do that by by answering questions. We really hope people call us before things go before things go wrong.
Um, we're happy to do advisory opinions. I don't think we've done any for you guys in a while, but I I think there have been some. Um, but that's really we we we don't want to be a gotcha. We want to be the people that you guys are happy to see because of all your great gifts. Um,
>> and also just because the training is so great to have. Um, anyway, I'll answer questions if anybody has anything. Um, >> any questions? >> Uh, no questions, but thank you for coming. We appreciate it. >> Thank you, Lel for getting me in so quickly. >> Yes. >> Thank you.
>> Thank you very much. >> We agree. Uh, next item on the agenda is the National Safe Boating uh, week proclamation. I don't know if there's anyone here to accept it. Um so, um this is we are recognizing National Safe Boating Week.
Um it's observed to bring attention to important life lifesaving tips for recreational boers so that they can have a safer and more fun experience out on the water throughout the year. So, um thank you very much. >> Oh, you're welcome. >> Uh good afternoon, Mayor, Vice Mayor,
and Commission. Uh we're pleased to be here today representing the US Coast Guard Auxiliary and I'm here with our flatillaa commander Kirsten Stanley and uh I am the fatilla staff officer for marine safety. On behalf of the auxiliary and the United States Coast
Guard, we applaud and thank the town of Highland Beach for your continued support recreational boating safety. Uh, by the way, the police department and the marine units are doing a fantastic job and uh we applaud them for that as well, keeping us all safe. Uh,
Florida has over 1 million registered voters and making Florida the the capital of leisure boating in in America. The 2025 statistics are not in yet, but in 2024 there were 685 boating accidents in
Florida. And uh there were 76 fatal accidents resulting in 81 fatalities. Uh it's an almost an 8% increase over 2023.
And uh I know that uh probably most of you are aware that uh we had two fatalities here in Highland Beach in the last three years. So what the police department and the marine units are doing is is uh very very important. And uh the number one
cause of accidents was boer inattention. And in both those cases for those those fatal accidents uh the uh operators lost control of the vessel. Uh distractions, passenger distractions, texting,
looking at equipment and uh alcohol use resulted in uh 81 resulted in 76 of the 81 deaths. and almost it's it was almost an 8% increased over 2023.
24 of the 81 fatalities were attributed to BUI boating under the influence. That's fully 30%. Uh it's that's really alarming and uh that's why we're here today and we appreciate your support. The number one
cause of death was drowning and 76% of the victims weren't wearing life jackets. Uh operator inexperience was another significant factor resulting in 93 accidents and excessive speed was uh responsible for 36 accidents and eight
fatalities. The auxiliary has many missions. Search and rescue, vessel safety checks, patrols, but our number one priority is saving lives. Uh the the uh
we offer safe boating classes every other month at our facility 5 minutes from here. And uh anyone born after January 1st, 1988 must have a boater ID to operate a vessel in Florida.
And what I'd like to leave here with Chief Hartman today is uh a pamphlet on vessel safety checks. We conduct we conducted almost 800 out of our base right here in Bo Raton last year. Uh many boers in Highland Beach by
the way. And uh we have the the boat boating safety classes every other month five minutes from here. Anyone have any questions? >> Thank you. >> Thank you very much for for bringing this to our attention. We really appreciate it. And here's the
proclamation right. Next item on the agenda is resolution number 2020 uh 2026 uh-006 a resolution of the town commission of the town of Highland Beach Florida ratifying the selection appointments and term of office of members of the
financial advisory board and providing for an effective date and we have an applicant uh maize uh Tam Tamsy that if you wouldn't mind coming to the podium and maybe just uh introducing yourself and uh why you're interested in the board.
>> Uh I just retired March 17th. I've been in the financial securities business for over 44 years. I'm hoping that my financial background can help the financial committee. I've lived in
Highland Beach for about 14 years. >> Excellent. Um, so are there any questions from the com commissioners? Commissioner Shnoski, you want to go first? We can go in order. >> I think we Well, I think with your experience, you're going to have tremendous added value uh to what we're
already doing. And I appreciate you being here and being a volunteer. >> Thank you. >> I just wanted to comment. I was taken with the fact that just a couple of moments went by after the retirement that you reached out to us. So, uh, I'm thrilled.
Yeah, >> you certainly the doctorate of law uh and your um your certified uh financial planner. I mean all of your credentials are just perfect for our needs. So um I
thank you for coming forward. >> Most welcome. >> Yeah. I just want to repeat it. you're very wellqualified financial uh planner and I'm glad you volunteered for it and the uh the chair of your committee recommended you. So, congratulations. Thank you.
>> Thank you. >> Great. Really well qualified and got to be careful since the mayor and myself were members of that board, you know. >> But, uh thank you very much. >> My pleasure. >> Yes. Thank you so much for volunteering. It's um we welcome you. uh we appreciate
the time that you're willing to spend and devote to this and uh congratulations on your retirements and uh we welcome all the all the great things that you're going to add to our town. So, sounds like we are all in favor. If we could have a motion. Yes. >> Uh yes. I make a motion to approve
resolution number 2026-006. >> Second, please. >> All in favor say I. I. >> Motion carries. Thank you very much. Very nice to meet you. Yes. Thank you. Uh, next item on the agenda is building
safety month proclamation. Um, so the month of May 2026 is building safety month. Um, and um, each each year in observance of the building safety month, people all over the world are asked to consider the
commitment to improve building safety, resilience, and economic investment at home and in the community. and to acknowledge the essential service provided to us by all local and state building departments, federal building safety and fire prevention departments and protecting lives and property. So,
uh, we thank you for the building department. Carol, are you going to come and accept this proclamation, I guess. >> So, thank you very much for everything you guys do. I appreciate it. Yeah. Everybody's here. >> Thank you. Uh, next item on the agenda
is the National Emergency Medical Services Week Proclamation. So, we are declaring the week of May 17th through 23rd as the National Emergency Medical Services Week. Um, the members of the emergency medical services team, whether career or volunteer, engage in thousands
of hours of specialized training and continuing education to enhance their life-saving skills and we very much appreciate all that you do for us. So, um, is there anyone here to accept the proclamation? Oh, wonderful. And the next item on the agenda is
National Police Week proclamation. So the week of May 11th through the 17th is uh National Police Week. Um, and it's just really important that we recognize the duties, responsibilities, hazards, and sacrifices undertaken by our brave
men and women in law enforcement whose unwavering commitment ensures our residents, visitors, staff, and community may thrive in peace. So, uh, we really appreciate all our police officers and, uh, I don't know, Chief Hartman, are you going to come up to
accept this proclamation? Thank you, Chief, for all you do. >> Thank you, Chief. >> Thank you, Kate. >> Speech. >> And then our last proclamation has to do uh with Memorial Day and this is the
158th anniversary of Memorial Day. Uh the National Monument of Remembrance Act was passed in 2000 and it requests that all Americans pause wherever uh they are at 3:00 this afternoon on Memorial Day for a mo a minute of
silence to remember and honor those who died while in service. So um it's in a little over an hour from now. So I guess we'll have to remember to do that. I don't think anyone's um going to be accepting this proclamation, but um
Okay, so moving on. Item seven, uh public comments. Are there is there anyone who wants to come forward with any public comments? >> No, there is. Okay.
>> No. Oh, okay. No, they just leave. They >> deported. No, >> they were going to speak. >> Well, thanks for coming. >> Okay, seeing that there are no public comments, um there are no ordinances.
Moving on to the consent agenda. There are just uh two meeting minutes. Any changes or discussion on the meeting minutes? If none, if we could have a a motion to approve the consent agenda. Make motion to approve consent agenda as presented. I'll >> second.
>> All in favor say I. >> Motion carries. Unfinished business. Building department reertification program update. >> Helloina the building department. So at this time there have been no
significant changes since last month's report. We have 33 reertified buildings, 17 under restoration permit and one under the extension to apply for the permit which their due date is October 11th to secure it. The program remains
stable and ongoing items and projects continue to move forward on a positive note. >> Excellent. Thank you for the good report. Great news. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> Moving on to new business discussion of chapter 6, article 4, seaw wall and
oceanfront development and coastal construction control line standards. >> Okay, I'll give a little primer to it and I thought Jeff was going to make a presentation on his 12point PowerPoint. Uh 12 page PowerPoint. Jeff, you're going to bring it in. Um, so, uh, Jeff,
Len and I, uh, kind of, uh, became aware of this issue, uh, recently, uh, working through a development and found some provisions that were in the Seaw Wall ordinance that apply to construction that
naturally you would think would be in the planning and zoning uh, elements or in um, some other location than buried in the Seaw wall ordinance, but uh, as it is is written. Um we have a lot of it would be a lot of problems where
basically many I would probably say about twothirds of the oceanfront properties couldn't be built the way they are today with these provisions just can't restrict and saying cannot or shall not build be based on these conditions. So we've identified that as a problem um because all these homes
have been built here. Uh there's a few other nuances that Jeff will go through. Um but I think it's something that um uh we need to address uh relatively quickly because we hadn't haven't been utilizing or enforcing or applying these
provisions to come to find out that we're supposed to be as it's written uh by council. So uh we need to uh move through a process to modify this in some fashion. So Jeff, you want to take it from here? >> Not a problem. Thank you, commission,
mayor, vice mayor. Um, I'll start off just by saying this was like a it was it was inside a section of the building section in chapter 6
specifically for seaw walls. So, if someone was constructing new on the ocean with no seaw wall, we had no reason to look there. Unfortunately, we discovered it and then realized that it probably had not been enforced for a
long, long time. But now that we're aware, we've come to find out that it is problematic. As Marshall has stated, um we're just here to talk about the problem um and how our our we actually
have two sections of the code. We have the zoning code in chapter 30 and we have the building code in chapter 6. And there's a bit of a conflict. And I just think that what happened was there may have been an update in for the zoning code and they didn't really
incorporate this old building section. Although they do they're for two different things but they have very similar language. And when DP moved the poster construction control line further west, it just further
complicated uh the problem. But we'll go over a little bit more. What we're essentially asking for is for the commission to give us direction and say, "Hey, we we want you to get the council and and try to put something together, look at the language, and then take that to the
planning board and come back." That's I'm kind of saying it all in one shot here, but I'm just trying to go through this relatively uh quickly. Um the coastal construction control line, it was established in Florida.
>> Is it working? It was established in Florida to uh protect the dune, protect everything because that dune is there to protect everything that's west of it as best as possible. Um, and it's not a permanent
line because as we're going to see D has moved it uh in the past based on changing conditions, based on flood zone changes, based on hurricanes and so on and so and so forth. This was first established in
1979 in uh by the state and then in 1997 it was updated specifically in in Palm Beach County. Now the problem that we're having here that we have with this section 6-127D
which is the protection of the ocean ridge. Now this isn't the town of Ocean Ridge. >> The Ardun is called the Ocean Ridge. Um there's an absolute prohibition in this section um 6-127D
that very specifically says no part of any structure may be constructed east of the coastal construction control line. And the ordinance uses the phrase in no event meaning that this is absolute with no variance mechanism uh in there. In
addition to that, there's also a 120 foot ridge protection zone that no disturbance within 120 ft of the vegetation line or easterly survey line, whichever is further west. And typically it's the ve eastern vegetation line. um
that lowers the ocean ridge below 18 ft and that's absolutely not what's what has been happening here. Uh even even though D gives approvals and we'll get into that. So when a property owner has to excavate below the 18 ft um they have
to put a seaw wall in and then when you put that seaw wall in it then allows them to go below 18 feet and construct what they want. Well, the problem is um FOT or U FD
will not allow you to put in a seaw wall unless there's an existing structure that's in danger of imminent collapse due to the scouring and and the ocean. And that's essentially the problem. Uh
so when they reestablished this line and moved it westward, it created a problem because we didn't amend that ordinance and it rendered some of those uh properties, a lot of them completely unbuildable. Even
if they have FD approval, they don't have our approval. And that would include condos and beachfront properties as well as the uh whatever the beachfront uh whatever you guys have uh the Coronado what's that called you guys call your beach club the beach clubs
>> those would be in play as well. >> That is correct. And you can see that in this u overhead shot that I have. I showed you some condos and now what this is these are properties that are partially east and this isn't all of them. This is just a select few that are
they're just partially east. So the red line is the coastal construction control line. Everything east of that is essentially unbuildable period because they move that coastal construction control line originally 1979 westward. Okay.
>> Excuse me. So when you're saying if there's private homes on the ocean now the line could be as could even go to A1A the new line. So if there's an open lot that can't be build on at all. >> Yes. And you're going to see that. >> Okay. >> You're going to see that next.
Absolutely. So our conflict again is FD approves it. FD sets the coastal construction control line. Our our our ordinance references the pre97 coastal construction control line. And
then the owner is caught in the middle here. And then when you look at this particular situation with this new one with this new slide in some cases part of the right of way is even east of the coast of construction control line. So
the entire property is now east of the coast of the CCCL and because we don't we have not amended that ordinance. If someone comes in for a permit to knock down one of these ho houses and build a new one, we have to
deny it. We have to we have no choice but to deny it under the current the current ordinance because according to the ordinance, nothing can be built east of the coastal construction control line. and where there's a conflict that our
section 6-127 it says if there's a conflict between this and something else it said this section applies. >> So even though we have some language that going to see in uh the planning and zoning section in in chapter 30 it's not
even relevant because the more restrictive applies and it explicitly states that in in that building section. Yes. >> Hey Jeff. um a year and a half ago, I think maybe two years when um Ingred and the planning board um took us out on the
co inter coastal and we did our tours as planning board members and we saw the deterioration at that time. Um but many of those homeowners were not willing to step up to the plate and do anything anyways. So I'm just curious how big of a problem is it right now? Because many
of those homeowners, their walls were deteriorating. they were actually putting some walls in front of that wall. Uh, and the problem seemed to go away. Are we saying now that that problem has relived itself? >> Well, this only applies to properties
east >> of the coastal construction control lines. Okay. So, this is only properties east of A1A. And this really has nothing to do with any of the properties west of A1A that are going to inter coast. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Okay. So, right now, um, here's where
the conflict comes in. They apply for an FD permit. They look at it, they get approved. F FD says, "Here you go." They apply for our building permit and then we have to deny it.
Okay. Um, and I did speak directly with FD staff and I'm like, you know, if you'll just allow them to build a seaw wall. And I talked with one of the contractors and he's like, "A lot of my customers," he go they would love to be able to put a seaw wall and the seaw wall would actually be hidden in the dune.
>> It would be west of the westerly uh vegetation line. It would, you know, and it would be buried. It would only come up to 18 feet and it would be buried with about 2 feet of sand. So, no one's going to see it, but it's like a backup in case that dune gets
eroded, then it hits the seaw wall. And then in that case, it makes things a lot easier to go below. But FD said this, they called this is part of their armoring. Uh their armoring rules just simply won't allow it. And they're
redoing some of the they're in the middle of actually towards the end of redoing a lot of their armoring rules, but they're not addressing this. So again, you you just cannot install a seaw wall and say, "Okay, we're good now." Not with because that causes a
problem with the 120 foot rule where they have to be back 120 feet. But this also just the simple fact that if you're east of the coastal construction control line. So it's it's a two-part problem. It's an elevation issue and it's a buildable lot issue.
Uh this this is just going over the same things we've already done. This is just I'm not going to do the same thing again and waste your time on this. Uh, and it's this supersession clause in 6127D that overrides all of the other
code chapters where they conflict. And again, so I'm just being redundant. I very redundant on this. Uh, but section 30-83E, it already contains Differential language that would solve the problem. We problems we can't use it.
Okay. uh the town commission enacted that solution in 2000 and the supersession clause in 127D12 it just nullifies it out there. Um but so both sections we
have to kind of amend six and 30 uh when we do this and obviously we'll be getting with uh Len on this and eventually with your direction you know to the to the planning board. Uh there's a legal exposure to the town. Everyone
knows the Bert Harris situation. I added a couple more in here from South Carolina and Rhode Island. Very similar situations. Uh you're welcome, Len. >> Yeah, I was impressed. >> I I watched I watched a lot of episodes with, you know, of AB. So I think
>> you did hit the major case though. I was impressed. >> Now, but there's another component to this and this is why the Dune. So we have a little bit of a conflict here. I don't have a lot of faith all the time in D. They've moved some people around
because things were getting approved that were not supposed to be approved. We saw the same thing happen with FDOT and they're approving things that sometimes are questionable and when you question them on it, they go, "Oh yeah, that person was moved to another division." So, we kind of have that
issue. But the first line of defense against storm surge is that dune is that ocean ridge. Uh and we've had a lot of discussions with natural resources board has discussed this. We've talked about doing
restoration vegetation. We've had experts come in talk about what kind of vegetation is the right to be you to be uh what is best to be in place. But this directly sustains property values across the entire town, not just because it's
protecting the rest of the town. Now, FD's uh CCCL permitting program incorporates what it says robust dune protection standards, but I publicly I I do question depends upon who does it. um
our zoning code in chapter 30 already contains the that we're basically we're deferring it to D. In other words, if D approves it, we approve it. Um so this is what we have to look at kind
of you know looking at at doing both. Now, what I wanted to show you is that this is more along the lines why we have to look at both sides of of the story here and find some happy median.
This is the natural dune protection. There's A1A, there's the beach, Atlantic Ocean. We have all that vegetation and that dune is nice and high, right? Highland beach. And then when we construct on it, we have pilings and then I can't show you
columns that go that support it. And everybody wants a low driveway so they can fit their car up the driveway. And then they go in and they put these properties uh the garages below base flood elevation. And whenever they put them below base
flood elevation, which they're allowed to do if they meet other criteria, these are FEMA rules on NR uh flood plane ordinance rules, they're required to put in breakaway walls, which means if the dome if the dune don't if the dune gets
eroded and the storm surge pushes, it's specifically designed for those walls to break away so that it doesn't affect the structure, right? We don't want hardened walls around there that are going to get pushed and then collapse a structure. >> Aren't those pilings 30 foot pilings
that the structure is on though? >> Typically, they're anywhere from 20 to 40 feet depending upon the uh geology reports that come back. All right. But they're below grade where you don't ever see them. They're buried.
And then the columns that come up all the way around that garage is what's holding up the home. So essentially all four walls could break away in that garage and that property, that home is still going to be standing.
And that's exactly the way we're building. The problem with the breakaway walls in the absence of a buried seaw wall as a backup, you'll see what happens. is the storm surge comes in, erodess the
dune, blows away the pool, knocks out the break the breakaway walls, goes right through the garage door, and now we have a direct route directly on A1A. So this why this is a little bit more complicated. Yes, we need to be able to
build on the lots, but at the same time, we need some common sense language that's still going to protect the dune because of the problem that it creates. Now, we all know about Senate Bill 180. I guess it's kind of in my is like a bit
of a moratorum until I don't know when the when it comes off, Len. >> Uh the year >> 27 August 2027, I believe. >> Okay. So, August 2027. So, we can't do anything more restrictive. We're actually trying to make things less
restrictive, but we have to see how we can find that, you know, that middle ground on here. Um, no fiscal impact really to us other than us bringing in a marine expert. uh
that's not a marine expert, but um >> coastal management uh engineer who I've already spoken with and I spoken with, you know, about this situation. I spoken with D about or uh yeah, D about this issue. Uh but this could be a
significant cost to the owners if if the lots aren't buildable or they have to in other areas have to build in a certain way that just increase their cost because they can't build what they want and they may end up putting in smaller homes and so there could be a different cost. Marshall
>> so I would say we have two things we have to solve. One is the development issue to allow what is currently been allowed and exists. And then that secondary issue, which we find just as important as that breakaway wall issue, is very concerning because with the current provisions, you
push that structure far enough away so you don't have the breakaway wall issues. Unfortunately, that puts you in the west side of A1A. So you can't do that. So there's that balancing act where we have a FEMA rule and a seaw wall issue that could help, but it
doesn't help with the development issue in the short term. So there's the two pieces that have to be addressed because the ladder is a one 180 issue. We're going to possibly be or suggest more restriction, more restrictive environment to to protect the dune from
the breakaway walls that that is those that build low. Right? If you build above the base flood elevation, there's no problem. But then on a on the very narrow properties, your driveway is too steep for we always jokingly say for the Ferrari or the Maser. It's just too the
driveway is going to go straight up. So that's why they build down is to get that smooth driveway. So we got to figure out if there's a balance somewhere in there to at least minimize or limit that. But we also have to work with the federal rules uh from FEMA on
the flood plane. So that issue is one. The other is we we've got to allow people to move east of that coastal construction line. And I think Jeff hit the operative words. If de if DEB approves it, like we already say, then we're comfortable with continuing our
review because they're the agency with the experts. Whether we sometimes disagree, they are the agency of record that regulates this through the whole state. So, um I think we need to to address both separately because of the 180 issue. I think that one's going to
take time versus allowing for construction east of that coastal construction line in a more short term. We have properties that are queued up to be built. So, they're they're really itchy to do what everybody else has been allowed to. And if Jeff was lazy that day and didn't review this, we probably
wouldn't have been there because this is such a peculiar location to have these what I would say very intense development regulations buried in a seaw wall provision. It's kind of dangerous to do that. So, uh, we need to get that is the short order issue and the
long-term issue is the more of that dune structure u protection over time. >> Hey Jeff, >> I have a question. >> Yes. Uh how have other municipalities uh along the coast uh handled this? >> It's just my understanding the majority
just if FD approves it then they approve it. >> Now they have their own setbacks >> and that's Yeah. >> Yeah. So I and I was just telling Marshall in Juno Beach they never changed the line. So for D changed the line. So you still have to get a D
permit if you were behind the line. But in Juno Beach, they still recognize the old line because they had the same problem that we have here where you had structures either totally east of it or partially east of it. So there's different ways to approach it, but
>> yeah. And sometimes we do get some surveys that will come in and they will show the old line and a new line. Not always, but sometimes they do. So we see the difference like, "Wow, that was pretty far east at one time that really got moved." Uh, but is this going to be a balancing act?
>> Is that an option for us? >> Um, we it's a it's an option because we're just talking about our own standards. So, those are the town standards, but they'd still need a D permit because you still have, you know, D still recognizes the 97 line, >> but the town allows construction east of
the 79. >> So, they wouldn't get caught up in this thing that we got caught up. >> Does that solve our issue if we did something like that? And I don't know how I don't know where the 79 line is in Highland Beach. We'd have to look at it. But >> yeah, every now and then we see it in a
well, state statute also says every I think it's every 20 years or 25. It's a peculiar 27 years. It's a peculiar year where they the surveyors go back and reassess the location of the coastal construction line. So this could be an issue ongoing. Even though 20 years seems like a long time, they are going
to be moving that uh with time. A lot of people uh that do this work will say, you know, the sea level rise issue, the natural change of the coastal line, the coastal shoreline will change. So, we just got to be careful not to pick a line, I think would be a safer bet in
the long term for the community is to pick if until a point in time if they dissolve the D, then I would say we need to take a different position. But so long as they're a state agency charged under statute to regulate it, you kind of default to that because they're the ones that have to change the coastal
construction line. So I don't know if I would pick lines per se. Um unless >> it's an approach. We'll we'll talk about it. >> Yeah. But I mean because this is the only thing that's predicated on it. If we had more provisions in the ordinance predicated on an exact line, then maybe something like this would have to go
into it. Like we'd have to recognize the old line. Uh but here I think we have the ability to change or loosen some provisions or put consistency with what what's in the u the zoning code chapter 30. If we align those two, I think we're in really good safe space uh moving
forward and then we can try to tackle over the long term that bigger issue that Jeff had just shown you which causes a lot of alarm for me should for all of us that we have breakaway walls halfway in a dunes complex. It's not ideal. Um, but that's a longer term
issue. >> Hey, Len, I I've been led to believe that structural integrity was the number one priority. Uh, and this is a secondary issue. Uh, at least I've been led to believe that because water coming on A1A truly
understand and we've had water in A1A for a while. Okay. But I think when we look at the buildings themselves, are we actually um identifying a problem that right now is not a problem? Well, I think the the coastal that it is a
problem right now because you know it's not necessarily the condos, it's a single family and I would even if they wanted to do an addition, it could be an issue because you can't have any structure. So, I think it it is something that we should pretty quickly address because as Jeff and with all his
legal research, um, he's absolutely correct. You know, you can't if you deny a property owner all use of their property, >> that's a taking. It goes beyond Bert Harris. Bert Harris is just if you burden it, but if you're saying, "Oh, sorry, you can't build on this lot." That that is a liability problem that we
have to address relatively quickly. >> Are there uh property owners today that are waiting for funds from >> Yes. Right now, waiting that kind of I think this kind of brought it up because um I know that breakaway issues driving
Jeff just as crazy as me. Um and I think they started talking about a seaw wall on a property and the property owner was like sure we'll put a seaw wall in whatever you want. But their consultant was like DP won't give you one. So it kind of breaks it. Then if you don't have a seaw wall, our setback provisions
for the coastal construction line go in and basically the property in question, they'd have to build their house in the middle of A1A. So we basically took the value of their property away. They cannot rebuild on that property.
I'm not claiming it takings. I'm not saying that. I'm just saying the way it's provided, it's very restrictive. and someone who submitted uh and before they got approval, we made them to comply. That was a little bit of a
deeper lot. Okay. So they were able to just adjust the depth of the garage so that they never put a seaw wall in >> and it was in an area where you know the coastal construction control line would but technically
um it it was still east of the coastal construction control line but it was they were trying to comply with the 120 foot rule. They had to redesign it and now they're not going to build it at all. They chose not to build it all out. So it it's literally putting some some
development in its tracks tracks. >> Yeah. So with all due haste, we have to figure this one out >> before litigation is started. >> Are there any proposals by staff on how to quickly address
this? I have ideas on my end, but mine involves something that would violate uh SP 180 because I'm looking at eliminating breakaway walls. It's just changing the language because I'm concerned about the breakaway walls. I have someone who wants their garage 2
feet above A1A and the NP allowed them to dig out an enormous amount of the doom because well what they wanted and they got it. But in order to do that, we have breakaway
walls on all sides of of the property and it's, you know, pretty pretty deep into the dune. Um, so my thought originally was, well, let's just say you can't have your low level below base flood elevation. Well, that takes them
to maybe 12 feet, which would then put them maybe 8 feet above. But then I got some push back. Well, I can't fit this kind of car in. then it's going to be too steep to get into the garage. And like it's not that with with certain rules, it's not that you can't build, it's maybe you just can't build what you
want. So there's a difference between something being unbuildable and not being the correct size for what you want. And but the the quickest fix is to kind of mirror uh what we have in the zoning code and tighten up language on
both sides with with >> L >> and then just basically say if D approves it, then so do we. >> Of course, stepbacks and all the other things like that. That would be the probably the quickest thing to do, but it's still going to take some legal
ease, you know, to make that work. >> My concern is the protection of the residents. My concern is not having breakaway walls and at least, you know, having a a maximum depth you can go.
And because D will allow people to go all the way down to six feet NAB, which is 4 feet, I'm sorry, about 2 feet above A1A, but as long as they comply with some other things with FE, which is includes breakaway walls and flood mass
themselves. >> And so why is it that you think D allows that? If if you're you're saying that's so dangerous because it compromises the dunes,
why wouldn't D see that concern? >> I'll take that. I think it's a del a delicate act between private property rights and environmental protection. I think it's a very delicate dance >> that the state goes through because of
that's Florida, right? is if everybody outside of that live here, that's what they see is the beach, the coast, the development, and you see it here. Uh you got to be careful to balance. If you start saying no to $30 million oceanfront homes, I think you're going
to find yourself in a tricky spot, I think, politically, uh I I think really comes to play a little bit. So D, I I I wouldn't I don't uh envy the work that they have to do to balance between that. It's it's a very delicate balance from
protecting that dune structure and allowing property owners that spend 10, 20, $30 million on raw land to be able to to build something that justifies that expenditure. It gets real tricky. So, um, but I think that in time there
has to be I think there's probably D staff and this is just my opinion that would do more to protect the doom, but I think they're a little bit constricted um by the the management structure and some of the overall policies and direction coming from the legislature.
It's a it's a little delicate balance. >> Yeah, I I agree with that. And after speaking with one of the guys in charge of the the the whole permitting process for this particular for the armoring, uh he goes, "No," he goes, "We we do hold a line." He goes he goes, "And we
get a lot of push back. We get the phone calls. We get the attorney letters and you know that's when we say you can't build what you want, but you can certainly build on that property just within our guidelines." So there are times they do hold the line, but
sometimes I it really depends on I think who's doing the review with the quality control because that's where I've been told that well you move them to another division. They're no longer doing that and so on and so forth. So but it's their responsibility if they approve it. It they buy the liability and and you
know sort of I guess you could say my opinion non-legal opinion. >> Well I mean I guess that's my opinion is to follow you know D. So, I I think what I think what I heard you say was change
chapter 6 to be in line with chapter 30 and that would address it quickly. And then um the issue with the breakaway wall, make it have it be a longer term project for us. Um because that is not
we're going to we're going to encounter the same issues. Uh right. I mean, if if the state of Florida's h, you know, having that issue, I mean, what Highland Beach going to be, um, so maybe have that be as a more of a
long-term um, type project that we could work on. That's my opinion. >> The Jeff, the breakaway walls, wouldn't that affect my whole foundation? this storm surge coming through the bottom of my building might
affect uh my whole building. >> No, that's the purpose of it is to protect so the walls break away so that the storm surge all that water, all that pressure just passes through and the columns that you have are strong enough that they're not being affected. Okay,
>> there's a whole bunch of things. The when you go below base elevation, >> the slab can't be more than 4 in thick so that it has to be designed to break up and not have to big pieces cuz they don't want big pieces of concrete coming in and knocking out a column and have >> fall over. So, this is just another
reason to keep everything. >> But we we we need to this needs to be fixed more >> quicker before we do tackle >> the elevation potentially tackle the elevation issue. >> I would agree. uh with the mayor on this. Um it seems that we're already
preempted um by state and federal authorities. So to the extent that we can do the workarounds on the the ancillary issues, that's probably the way to go. So we would be seeing a draft come from legal
by our next meeting. >> So So there's two two um if you recall our process, you could do two things. one, we could bring back a draft and you could say, "Looks pretty good," and I'll let the planning board chew on it and review it. Or you could direct us to go right to the planning board with your
guidance, as you just uh as the mayor uh stated, to align the two is kind of the goal, and let the planning board hash it out, then bring back a draft that you guys could say yes or no. Um or you can do it all yourself. I mean, the process
is flexible. for this commission. Your tradition has been to to move it to the planning board at some point. Whether you want to look at it first, then send it to the planning board so they they stay a little more focused on the task or you give it to them and they could potentially go slightly different
direction. >> What's the time frame? >> Uh yeah. >> Um I I think long as we're making time is of the essence, like we're making progress month over month to get this done. Again, I've got we have a developer waiting. So, um, we can, they
want to submit now, but I got to break his heart and say if you submit, we're going to deny cuz that's what the ordinance structure says. Um, so, uh, they they have some flexibility in their timeline. So long as we're metriculating, I think we'll be okay. So, we can get something maybe late
summer, early fall to have some first, second read type action, I think we're safe. So, we have the summer to to digest uh most of this and work it out at and >> so I would I uh to put out there um let's send it to the planning board
right away. I don't think we need to see it first. Um but I would like to have the planning board be a part of it. I think their input is uh pretty critical. So, let's direct I I would recommend we direct staff to send it straight to the planning board as quickly as possible.
let them review it and then um and then the next part of that and let them review it and approve it, have their recommendation and then bring it to us >> with the focus of aligning chapter 30 and chapter six. >> Correct. Right. Uh >> motion >> with all due diligence.
>> Sounds like a motion. >> Yes. >> Um is everyone in agreement? Okay. Yes. A motion uh motion to uh move this to planning board uh with a response with all due diligence >> with alignment of chapter 30.
>> I'll second that. >> And a roll call, I guess. Or >> roll call >> or Y. Go ahead. >> Commissioner Goldberg, >> yes. >> Vice Mayor Stern, >> yes. >> Commissioner uh Commissioner Chinowski, >> yes. >> Commissioner Peters, >> yes.
>> And Mayor Moore, >> yes. Motion carries. >> Thank you. >> Thank you very much for bringing this to our attention. >> Oh, we have a we have a question. >> Yeah, we have a question. Does that affect Jeff anything with the cipilation agreement that we have like in process
now? Like >> no affect that. Okay. >> Because it would go back it regresses back to time of settlement conditions and ordinances. I I think I believe I know where you're Yes. which project you're talking about. Yeah, it would
revert back to that initiation date and ordinances. So, we would probably roll before this was put in place. Okay. >> Now, does this affect any uh current uh building on the east side on the Milani property by the county? >> Well, that's a fair question. No. So, that everything that's currently in
place is is considered a lawful non-conforming currently. Um, but if anybody was to come in during this period for a new structure or addition, this would be read and they would probably be told no and to hold tight until we um and I think everybody will
be comfortable. You guys seem to be supportive of taking a deep dive on this and trying to address the issue. So, I think most residents will know that it that there's some relief coming uh or at least a proper addressing of this issue. Yep. >> Thank you. Okay. >> Thank you. >> Thank you very much.
>> Thank you, Jeff. Next item, discussion of potential automated external defibrillator regulations within multiple family developments. >> So this is coming back at your uh direction. At their last meeting, there was some conversation.
Uh we were passing a proclamation of AED CPR month and uh it was mentioned that Delray had been doing some uh ordinance where every other floor on a condo has an AD yada yada yada. Um and the
commission said, "Yeah, let's bring it back and start the discussion to see if there's something we want to do, not do, that kind of thing." So, um it's an open discussion. There's no supporting agenda. just do we want to advance the conversation? >> So,
uh, the good news is that we've built a beautiful fire station. The good news is that the community really appreciates the station being there. The good news is if you have a problem physically at your unit in either in a
home or a condo, all you have to do is push the button 911 and within 3 to four minutes you will be serviced by our EMTs and our fire department and lives will be saved. Now, the bad news.
if there's more than one or two calls and if there should be a hurricane or there should be bad weather and the EMTs couldn't get there within that time period and if the people in the units were not educated enough to do CPR or
know how to use an AED you're going to have a death and that's where Delray jumped on the problem they simply said in a high-rise specifically over five floors okay if there was a problem. Just having an AED,
okay, in the lobby and having someone come down from the 13th of from the 14th or 15th floor will not give you enough time and you could lose that individual. And that's where Del Rey and obviously I'm a proponent of it because I think and the chiefs have said it very very
well both chiefs preventative is our safety rules to actually prevent deaths to have the best of safety. So, I am definitely a proponent of uh looking at AEDs uh for high-rise units. Uh Del Rey actually passed on every other unit to
put an AED because having them located either in the gym or located in the lobby area and having a senior citizen take action get down those floors at the same time waiting for 911. It just doesn't work properly.
uh more experienced people like the chiefs uh can speak in that topic obviously better than I can but that's been my personal observations. >> So what are you uh what are you uh recommending? Is it one on each floor? >> No, I think what Del Rey did was
appropriate having them on every other floor after a certain floor. I think it was after the fourth or fifth floor and having an AED access there. And we've and we've actually experimented with this. God forbid there's a situation uh first of all you're alone uh with your
spouse or significant other there's a problem there okay you're trying to actually take action you're calling 911 you might get a reaction the timing of that three or four minute period of time is very important especially if oxygen uh is not getting to the brain so I know
David and his wife took the course I know the mayor took the course recently getting there and actually doing CPR and trying to respond fast enough and hoping that someone's going to get there. At the same time, having access to it, an AED can really save a life. And they
always say, you know, save one life and save the world. I'm a believer in that and many of my associates are believers in that. So that's why we're actually supportive of what Del Rey has done. So the idea was to put them on every other floor after a certain height, depending on the height of the building. Uh the
investment is somewhere between $13 to $1,900 an AED. Okay. And from what we've seen in our training program, the foundation obviously sponsored training, we had to shut it off because now with people leaving, there's five more
sessions. We were doing 20 at a time. Okay. We were doing them at the condo association buildings which was just filled. And then if someone did not have 20 people, three or four, then they could use the fire station. And I think we had two sessions uh where the mayor
and vice mayor attended those. Uh the outpouring has been outstanding. People want to understand and these were not and the age group variance was remarkable. Anywhere between 53 uh to 90 years of age. So it was varied. And now with pickle ball and more exercise and
people believing they're 17 years of age again, um which is the Florida mentality, um we believe it's a very important issue. >> I I've got a comment. While I very very much support the program, I think we can't have a broad brush. You've got
different kind of condos. Some condos have five units on the floor, others have much more on the floor. Uh then there's the issue uh and and some have almost no hurricane season is very few in residence to begin with. The second issue is do security people in the
building have to be trained and should they know because they're they're there all the time and most of them probably are not at this point. uh I think that that all there's a lot of factors on implementation and what's necessary and what we should have that we have really
have to look into before we put a structure. Uh I I think you're 100% correct and obviously this is a new issue being brought up for our discussion and I think the uh the test cases is when the foundation uh is now running these courses to see what the
outpouring would be. I am pleasantly surprised when you have a couple of hundred people uh already going through a course in the latter part of the season and more signing up for next year. Uh demand and supply is something that we've lived in our society and I
think that the the demand is there. I'm not sure if the supply is, but I do agree with you, David, that educational and the management companies who many of us are working with in the condos need to really be brought up to speed because they're a little bit behind behind.
>> The other question I have is there a liability? Is there a liability? Somebody uses the equipment on someone else, is there a personal liability of the person doing it if they do the wrong thing? Uh, according to everything that
I'm being advised by attorneys, uh, and Len could, um, saving one's life, there's very, very little liability, but Len, you can answer that. >> Yeah. No, there are good Samaritan statues like if you're >> Yeah, but I haven't looked at it, but
I'd be happy to look at it for you. >> Yeah, that does um bring up a Villanova. How would you do that? Right. Because there's only two units per floor. >> Yeah, we two units per floor. Matter of fact, we're thinking about getting but we're going to put them in the lobby coming in then in the exercise room
maybe in the pool too because I I mean I've been every athletic every tennis court should have one. I ball fields for kids especially you know and I've seen them save lives and I've seen if we had them we could have saved a life. >> But to put it on every other floor and you only have two units per floor and
there's not really too much of a common >> um area five people that live there full time. So, right, 24 units, right? Kind of, >> right? Is this a um maybe a situation where it would be a recommended um
instead of like a mandatory thing or um just because there are some examples where like I don't even see I don't know how the Villanova would even work because you have private elevators into the units. So
um there is like a back way but um >> I I think that would be more of a drafting issue you know limiting to categories of uh the size of the building. For instance uh Seagate has
four buildings >> right >> 10 uh stories. Um, so even if um even if there were three per building or buildings, you're talking about, you know, a little under $25,000. So in the scheme of thing, I
mean, it's a lot of money. However, in the scheme of things, it's not 20 another $24 million. >> Right. Right. >> Um, and the safety is is our primary issue issue and focus, I think, here. And we don't want it to be unduly
burdensome. I'd like it to move forward and have um invite the public put it on the agenda. >> Yeah, I have a have a real good discussion >> about this because there's all sorts of variables, >> right? >> There's going to be probably 50% of our
population are going to be less interested because they're not spending as much time here, >> right? >> Um so, but that has to do with the population and the and the community itself to handle what they'll do. Um, but I think some I wouldn't want to
ignore it because it's difficult to take the dive. I really want to go into this. >> I agree to move it forward. >> I tend to turn to uh Chief Jones. I mean, that's, you know, the professional, you know, listen, again,
um, most of my counsel and most of my direction when it comes to safety and health is coming from both chiefs. And uh I think the experience that and the chief can add some value to this whether he's pro or con but he can I think he can give some insight into it. So I'd like to ask the chief's opinion
>> and and also I'd just like to interject when uh I saw the recent report of of uh responses for the last month. I mean it was apparent that uh the the majority is heart attacks, resuscitation,
things that would really benefit by having this. Can you comment on that? >> Well, Joseph, fire chief. Um, well, let's start with a little jump. >> Yeah. >> 90% of our calls are medical. Uh, so and then we we ran a fair amount of chest pain, cardiac calls.
>> When we measure our response, we measure our response from the firehouse to the address at the building front door. What we have, what we don't usually consider is the travel time vertically. American Heart Association says for every four or five floors or above ground
level your survivability goes down by about 1% every minute. >> So there is some deal with traveling vertically elevators waiting for the elevator getting up to the elevator getting to the right apartment. So that delays the response. Our recommendation always is that everybody should learn
CPR and everybody should have an ad available to them. Um, some people don't want to learn CPR because they don't want to deal with mortality. They don't want to deal with infirmity. They'd rather live in an area where everybody's happy sunshine state running down the street as an 18-year-old. And they look
like they're 18. I mean, they take good care of themselves. So, that's a good thing. Uh we always would recommend uh training and being a bill because 90% of the time if you're going to be using an AD on in a situation as an emergency,
statistics show it's going to be somebody you know or somebody you live with. So you're not protecting your neighbor as much as you're protecting your spouse or the person that you live with. So I am not about mandating. See what happened with the COVID and the masks and mandating and
all that stuff. But I'd certainly strongly recommend that the boards and the people living in those buildings realize that there is a risk. I mean, we're right down the street. We're there within average turnout time we get the call to is less than a minute. It's like
less than a minute to get from our average response, as you saw, is about 3 and a half minutes from leaving the fire station to the knocking on your front door. Some people are still on the phone with the dispatcher when we're we're, you know, we're down the street. So the response times is amazing thanks to the
people the the vigilance of the firefighters and their professionalism and all that. But it's always good to be teach a guy to fish kind of thing, you know, because we don't know when an emergency is going to happen. It's the grandkids, it's going to be you, it's going to be your grandparents. Um, I
certainly would strongly strongly advise anybody that has the capacity to or the facility to or the resource to do it is to have an ad available close by. How close is a choice that the resident and the condominium and the HOA have to
make. Uh, but we'll certainly train anybody who wants to be trained. Um I mean I could even write grants to get the ads if that's a problem but uh you know we certainly from a public safety community risk reduction point of view
would strongly encourage the highest success rate in in the world is in in the Netherlands. Why? Because there's an 80 on every corner and everybody does CPR. You go down there's 10 people working. So the success and survival rate
uh and I when I say survival I mean survival without deficit where you have a brain that's intact and you're able to go back to work whatever is is the highest in the world because they train everybody and have ads everywhere. So that's a choice that we have to make as a community as a resident as a neighbor
is that uh what part do I want to play in having the best outcome for my spouse relative neighbor etc. and so on. >> Is there any maintenance in these like a fire extinguisher, but you have to get them certified? >> Okay. So, what we do is we have an
inspection annually. It's a visual inspection. You could do it yourself or you could have a company like uh um do it for you. Um the batteries are usually good for about 5 years, so you don't there's not much of a batteries. The pads themselves expire every 3 to four
or five years. If you keep them in in the case and they're enclosed and not messed with, they're good indefinitely. And the only time you may have to change the AEDs if the American Heart Association changed the protocols, which they do like every 10 years, 5 to 10
years, they may change how often you shock or what and then you'll have to replace the 80s because they'll be out of they would not be programmed correctly. The most uh latest protocols, but that's it. >> Yeah. But I agree with you uh who was saying about the gym. There should be an
80 at every gym. There should be 80 in the common areas, you know, whether or not you want to put it every other floor. Again, that's there's a cost associated with that. I live in Delray, so we're looking at $20,000 for our building to put 80s in every floor. Now,
uh is is that of value to me as a respondent? Absolutely. >> I want to say one thing about that. I've sat in board meetings now for six years. We are spending thousands of dollars to charge six cars uh with EV charges and and the things that we're spending money
on. Uh and uh when someone says to me, "My goodness, this might be an expensive investment. It's $1,900 or $1,500." I say, "We just spent $30,000 for two charges for six residents that are here." I mean, our priorities, you know,
as a group, we have to really really start saying, I had another resident say to me, what are you trying to change this facility into an old age home? A number of the people that have had heart problems in our facility have been in their early 60s and late 50s. So, I think that the course that we're on in
saving a life is more important and I think we have to get through some of the rhetoric. >> And as a resident of that community, I think you have every right to believe the way you do. As a fire department, I will recommend strongly that we do all those things, but um we have to make
decisions ourselves and choose our path in life in my opinion. >> Question. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> So, let's say we move the discussion forward, right? We continue to get public um
>> uh input on it. And and as an attorney, I'm always interested in the liability aspect. >> So that would be for adult counsel to delve into. >> Yeah, I I looked at it real quick. Florida does have a good Samaritan statute. So as long as as long as you
don't act with gross negligence, as long as you're trying to help, generally you're immune from liability. Well, the boards may be concerned, the local boards, that um if they pass that measure and if the the particular person charged with with helping out,
>> um they may say, "I I don't I don't want that lawsuit." You know, I may win that lawsuit, but I don't want that lawsuit. I want to be, you know, um convinced and and >> we all know it doesn't stop people from suing. >> Yes. >> Right. >> That's right. >> Definitely. Definitely. I'd be
concerned, Judy, if he took the AED and put it in the wrong part of the body that >> the individual could the individual could suffer. >> So many people live alone. However, all of these things would come out of healing >> and so we should be able to do that.
That's great. >> Very good discussion moving forward. >> Thank you very much. Excellent discussion. >> Uh new business new business item C. approve the award of the bid and authorize the mayor to execute a contract with CMM roofing for roof
replacement in the amount of $626,000 in accordance with invitation to bid number 26-001 library roof replacement. This item aligns with the fisc year 2026 strategic priorities plan capital improvement plan
number 27-002. Good afternoon there, town manager's office. Uh so back in March, we put out a request for proposals to replace the library roof with an option to also replace the building department roof. Uh depending on the pricing that we
received, we received 14 proposals which we shortlisted down to four and sent to a selection committee to rank. Uh we ranked CMM roofing first which is who we are recommending for award today and we are also recommending replacing both
roofs at the same time. >> So the bid document was a library bid document with an add for the water plant. >> Correct. Correct. Yes. >> And the reason you want to do um the building department roof is because it's
probably close to the time to replace that and probably have a better deal if we do both. Yes. So, the building department was actually the one they were planning on replacing first. Uh, then the library started springing a bunch of leaks, so they had to push that one ahead of it, but we think we'll save
a lot of money with one mobilization and buying more materials. >> Makes sense. >> Question in looking at the packet, >> I didn't see it may have been there. I didn't see a breakdown of the costs that add up to the total.
And I'm most interested in one thing and that's how much within the budget is contingency with some of the items as I saw limits the amount that they find when they open up you know how much they can repair. How much do we have in
reserve the project for contingency things that are not known now that are found >> that I don't know off the top of my head. I do know we just did lump sums for each building. Um, but I can find out how much we have in contingency for each.
>> Again, I'm sure you do, but it would be would be nice to see in each of the projects what the estimates are, you know, the final estimates and how much of that is contingency and hopefully it'll fall within >> with the bid replacement. Did do we
contemplate within their proposal a certain percentage or a portion of underllayment that will have to be replaced or any of that nature or do we just say assume that it's solid and move or >> No, I believe some of that's in there. I just don't know what the percentage
would be off the top of my head. >> Okay. >> Yeah, it definitely addressed the underllayment in the specs. >> Okay. >> There is an agreement that the roof has to be replaced, right, Majel? >> What's that? There is an agreement that the roof has to be replaced. >> Yeah. >> Okay.
>> They they do the these were on the the regular schedule. The library just is just not holding up. >> That's not the issue. So the only issue right now is what the three bid the bid process and what it's going to cost. >> Yeah. And then to award the contract. >> Yep. >> Okay.
>> I'm in favor of awarding the contract. I mean I the underllayment I mean it's um usually they you know they put some amount in and then if there's a little bit more then you know they usually the contractor has to go back to you and say
is that okay >> and we put out very detailed specs so they should know they should have built in there you know whatever they >> some amount probably and then it might be over or under most likely over >> skin what was it three bids >> uh we received 14 we shortlisted it down
into four that we thought were pretty solid. >> I'm I'm more curious on the 626. Why were they selected? Was it the price or was it they were I'm just curious how they were selected. >> So price was 30%. Uh if you look in your packet, there's a sheet that looks like
this. >> This is the score sheets for all three of our selection committee members. So they there's a formula to determine the points you get for the price. And then each of them read through the packets and kind of scored them, you know, based on the the presentation they gave. And
>> that's how you derived it, the 626. >> So the 626 is just the pricing they submitted and then they give they kind of give us like a whole presentation in a booklet that we have to go through and score them on as well. And the 6 the 626,000 was the price they submitted. >> Okay. Yeah. So in the RFP process, you
have a little more um leeway based on the qualifications of the firm. So if you just do an ITB, an invitation to bid, generally you have to take the lowest responsive bidder. In an RFP, you have more flexibility. That's really the bottom line to it.
>> Yeah. And the lowest price isn't always the best. >> No, we've so um >> I'm in favor of moving forward with the CMM who has been recommended by staff. >> I would agree. I don't know. I agree.
Now, are we looking at now? This is resolution 001. Um, is there another one? >> Has to be another one for the library. >> Yeah, there's a complement to that for the budget amendment because the library was not budgeted
uh last fall when we approved the budget. So, um, we had funds, uh, left in the appropriation to reserve that were available, but because of the size and David and I's commitment to you guys when we make these big purchases or
changes, you guys would approve that budget change because of the size. Technically, we probably didn't need to because it was in the general fund, but this seems, you know, kind of the belts and suspenders approach the keeping you guys on uh the movement of those dollars, especially sizable amounts. I'm
I'm a little confused. Why are we not moving moving forward with the information that they've actually given us? And why >> there's two there's two resolutions. You're proving to award the contract. The second is authorizing >> Susie to move the money from accounts.
>> Yeah. Within the budget, moving the money around >> to complete the library. >> So, yeah, we need two motions. One's as Marshall said. >> Are we ready for a motion? >> I think so. make a motion uh to uh uh approve uh
resolution number uh 26 that >> we'll do the 26. >> No, I would do the cont the first the first motion would be to award the contract to CNM. >> Okay. >> And then to the second motion would be to approve the resolution. >> Okay. motion to award uh the contract
and uh do you want it specified in the motion to CMM roofing? >> That's fine. Motion >> to approve. >> Nope. >> Oh, you want to? >> Yes, ma'am. Thank you. >> Second it. >> No. Motion to approve. We need
>> Yeah. So, we're gonna we're gonna >> Yeah, we're going to vote on the first one. So, the first motion is to award the bid and authorize the mayor to execute the contract with CM M Roofing, Inc. >> Okay. Commissioner Goldberg, >> yes. >> Commissioner Peters,
>> yes. >> Commissioner Chinowski, >> yes. >> Vice Mayor Stern, >> yes. >> Mayor Moore, >> yes. >> Okay. Motion carries. Good. Now, on to the resolution. >> Motion to approve uh resolution 2026-007.
I second it. >> Commissioner Goldberg, >> yes. >> Commissioner Peters, >> yes. >> Commissioner Chinowski, >> yes. >> Vice Mayor Stern, >> yes. >> And Mayor Moore, >> yes. >> Motion carries. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Sander. >> Usually and uh Sergio or Pat kind of
oversee that kind of like >> that. And then we'll have building permits. So, our inspectors will be and it's their building, so they're really close. Every morning they'll be there. When they come back, they're staring at it. So, uh, we'll keep a close eye on those. And again, just to in case you
didn't catch it, I'm sure you did. Uh, we are moving to the metal roofs. So, these are the metal roofs, >> not the the the barrel tiles that we currently have. So, we're making officially per your direction that change over to the metal roofs. >> Excellent. >> So, it'll look really cool. Last a little longer, too, when we're 50 years.
So, I mean, that's good. >> Yeah. >> And insurance companies love them. We should get a better deal on the insurance. >> Well, we'll call the call Kyle when we get out of here. lowered my insurance. >> I'm buying a firehouse now, the new firehouse. >> Uh that's basically a flat roof and I
think over time as we progress the little parapits and stuff will move over to the the the metal roof as well. This will be the last building cuz we did this was that in 21 we did this building. Uh so this will be the last one to change over. >> Okay. >> Um unless a hurricane takes them but um
hopefully not really. It's kind of weird. So, um, this will be the last building. Now, pom pom. Look at this bearded fella that decided to thank you at all. >> So, again, it's our favorite time of
year, budget season, at least for three of us in the room. We love this. Um, uh, so again, this will be the, um, initial presentation of the five-year forecast. Again, this is the first draft. it'll be modified uh pending this conversation
getting a little more feedback from some of the departments and Dave Susie and I's conversation on what we're seeing um with with the budget itself. Um but it's a very exciting um opportunity and uh it's kind of our practice run for some of the new legislation where you'll
start seeing this 10% exercise for reduction. We don't have to do it until next year's budget but we're going to start practicing now. uh this way one, next year you'll get it just the way you want it. Um and then we're also looking in here at the elimination of property
tax. Uh so uh kudos to uh Dino over at the property appraisers office. He's great. I hope he never retires. Uh but he was able to supply to us our taxable value by homestead non-h homestead, which fed David's model. So we know how
much and which properties and the amount of taxable value that's going to be lost. So thanks again to Dino out there uh for providing that to us in like 10 minutes. It was quick. So um I'm really excited about this starting this 5-year forecast to kind of look at how how we
move forward. Also don't forget we have the sixmonth report for this year from Susie. So you can see how we've progressed through the first six months of the year on spending. Um again the biggest things the Belledo bridge and that roof is what got to what we would
had anticipated for holding aside for capital and then moving over. Um so that's why you see the appropriation to reserve was reduced over that six-month period. We had about 900,000 in capital. With that being said,
David, bring it home. >> Thank you. Yes. Yes. It's good to be back. Thank you for your time. You know, this has been a a tradition that we've tried to carry on and and this has been a tradition of this board to not not look so narrow-minded, but to look
long-term. Where are we headed? Where are we going? And it's it's very quite refreshing. You know, we have uh we so we do this for the four funds, the general fund, the building fund, water, and sewer. Um you know, it does provide us a road map uh to look at uh how
things are growing. And uh what's revenues and expenditures look like and then then again how do we develop that? Uh you know we we utilize uh some compounding annual growth rates which is a which is a calculation a
little bit more fancier than than just an average. It it it takes into consideration uh time as well as it takes into consideration it it smooths out highs and lows. So we're just looking at the big picture because that's that's the goal, right? I'm not 5
years out. I'm not going to hit any of these numbers. Okay? But at least it gives us this is where we're this is where we're on track of. And so, you know, we took some uh the the chart you see there on the left, that's uh you know, uh inflation for this area. You
know, if you recall, you know, uh inflation was very very high uh just a few years ago, right? Back in 2022 is when we saw the the peaks of it at at at over 10%. Right now it's moderated down to about three and a half% based on on
the latest data from uh the Bureau of Labor and Statistics. And and then so what we do is is a lot of those main categories of expenditures, you know, health insurance, general insurance, RNR, labor, we we kind of look at, okay, what do we think that's going to be over
time? And so we what we do is so so we look back three years and then what we do is we take where we think we are at in FY26 and I try to estimate where we think we're going to land in FY26
and then what we do is uh we we uh we we take a lot of this data and we look at it long term. Um other thing too is you know how our cash position is doing right you can see our cash position is it continues to be strong you can see
that the general fund on the bottom there grew about 5%. Let me explain to you what you're seeing. What you're seeing is something that we call pulled cash, right? Each one of these funds doesn't have a separate bank account, right? instead
uh sophisticated accounting systems know that when we have a bill for the uh for the uh building department that that bill should come out of the cash specific to the equity in the general fund and that shouldn't come out of the
water fund. So you'll see for example 20 over $20 million of cash as of 9:30 2025 and there is all the different uh funds that we have the general fund the water fund sewer fund building fund. We still
have a little bit of discretionary sales tax dollars in there. But that's how that $20 million uh it would be like for example uh equity in a partnership agreement, right? It would be like, hey, how much of my partnership equity is included in that cash? And so that's
what that does. That's what pulled cash does. But it does show you that uh we are we are continue to flush with cash. Uh let's just look at some big pictures. Big pictures. You know, 74 over almost 75% of your revenue comes from property
taxes. And uh back, you know, not not too long ago, right? 2025, you know, uh the change in value is about 9%. Right? We get the data from the county. They give us the the property appraiser is independent from us. And so they go
through and they look at the sales, right? They do this dance. We get involved in the dance in June when we start the budget season. The Florida Department of Revenue gets into the dance. when we start the budget process of picking dates and statutoily everyone
has a part in this process. Well, what we've seen is in in in 2025, right, uh property values changed increased by 9%. And uh so that so that was nice. Uh now what we did is we said okay uh you
know we're looking and we're saying okay well in 2026 that was now 2026 was now 6.9%. So, you start to see it come down a little bit, right? 2027, we're estimating at this point, right? We won't know this until June 1st sometime
uh that hey, what are that's why we're all anticipating really what's what's the property appraiser coming back at? Sometimes you can get them on the phone a couple days early and just get a sneak peek. Hey, what? Give me the number. But all municipalities throughout the state of Florida are all doing the exact same
thing. what is that next 2027 year? What was the change in my property values for the the the coming up property? Right? And so what our budget forecast assumed is our budget forecast assumed that 2027 it'll be about 5% and then probably
settle somewhere around the 4 percentile range. Okay. So what we what you're look Let me go back up. Sorry. So, what you're looking at here is this is the data that we looked at. So, I'm on slide number six. Uh, if you have the the handout, it's
just it's uh number six. So, what we're looking at here is we're just kind of looking at actuals, right? I've got three years of actual data and I've got uh what I think uh my crystal ball is telling me where we're going to end at
the end of this fiscal year, right? And so, and so that's kind of what what we did there. Uh so you have your revenue on the on the top line and you have your expenditures obviously in the bottom line. Your expenditures are grouped up into this normal concence of what are
operating expenses. Uh personnel services that's your labor dollars but that also includes your health insurance, your uh uh payroll taxes, your pensions, your workers compensation. If it has to do something
with an employee of the town, it's going to reside there in your personal services. Then you have capital, right? What's how much are we spending on capital? We just approved something that was for $600 and something thousands, right? That's our capital dollars. And
uh then what you have is you have debt service and then you have transfers. These are transfers. When you see the word transfers, that means transfers in and out of the different funds for the purpose of allocating costs appropriately, right?
The water fund, the sewer fund, the building fund, they've got to pay their proportionate share of running the town. And so that's what we look at every year, especially with our auditors. We look at that, we come up with the dollar
value of what because the reason why is um there's there's a lot of embedded costs here in basic running the town which basic running the town falls under the general fund, right? But the general fund will also take time to set rates,
sewer fund, same thing. Uh you'll hear from Jeff's people. They'll come in and they'll start to talk to you about planning and ordinances and all that other jazz. Well, that takes up a lot of your time. And so therefore we look at that annually and we say what is the reasonable amount that we should be
transferring from their departments back into our departments to make us whole again. So we've done this all the time. So when we look at when we look at the data and we look at the fact that okay let's look at what we think the five-year forecast
is going to be. Okay remember the top line there is your property taxes right? We think that it's going to grow at at at 5% and then the ensuing years it's going to go down to about 4%, there is fractional fractional changes there, but
overall the compounded annual growth rate of that line item property taxes will yield or should yield approximately 3% from 20 from FY2027 to FY2031. one.
That's our best forecast for the data that we have right now. >> Okay. And so what we did is we looked at each line. We looked at each line of your revenue, right? And so uh then what we do is we go down below the line. I'll
get to the highlighted shaded areas. We went down below the line. Here's your operating expenses, personnel, capital, debt, service, transfers. We looked at all of those costs as well. And we said, "Okay, you know what? Your operating expenses, they're going to run about 4%
annually across the time frame. Uh personnel expenses, I think that's up there around 5%. Uh capital outlay, you see how it starts out at over $2 million, and we'll get to that and what and what the what the $2 million is, but
it's going to but you know what, it's going to subside down to what we would call normal capital. normal capital of those things that we spend about $900,000 a year on normal stuff around here. The $600,000 that you saw for the
roof, that's not an annual thing, right? Those are those outliers. Uh redoing a police department or whatever, those are outliers. But when we look at, hey, what's the normal expenditures just to maintain an asset, right? just to
maintain it in good working order. It's about for the general fund, it's about $900,000 a year just to maintain everything that you own. Okay? Just to maintain it. So, we've included that in there. And then what we look at is we
look at where does that fall? Because see, both of the numbers, both the the the top group of numbers that are summed and the bottom group, the numbers that are summed, they have to equal out, right? because I've got to make sure that in 2027 if I have budgeted
expenditures of $20.2 million, I got to know where am I getting that money from. Well, above that, you'll see the 20 $20 20.2 million of revenue as well. And so, always we're trying to always match always match how much are we spending,
how much is our revenue every year. any surplus. You'll see at the bottom there, we send that, that's why it says appropriation to reserves. We're sending it out. It's almost like uh for business owners out there, retained earnings, right? So, we're sending that money back
into our reserves for future um events. Now, if we have to pull money, remember, I have to balance the budget. If I have to pull money in to balance a budget, then you'll see on the revenue side, you'll see we call it appropriation from
reserves, >> right? So that's that's where we get to kind of balance what we're doing in the long term. And so when we look at the general fund, the general fund is very stable as always. We're assuming that property values are going to grow uh
five to four uh compounded annual growth rate will be about a 3%. Most other uh revenues whether it be franchise fees or utility tax. Oh, you'll see charges for service. You know, people go, "What's charges for service?" Well, that's your
uh solid waste, you know, for for for trash, right? Uh or uh investment earnings. So, we try to take all of those pieces of revenue and uh so we that's how we that's how we match it. But when we look at it holistically over five years, this is where we think we're
going to land. >> Yeah. >> So, um there's probably a couple of I I guess I was like I looked at the property tax 3%. Um I I thought to myself that's probably underestimated. Yeah. >> Um
>> and there's probably probably a few places where you're which you um have shown in the past to do and I'm I I am personally okay with it. The level of conservatism that you build in you underestimate
>> um where you know what revenues we'll get in the future. Um I guess one area and I I guess I I just asked this question the capital outlay of a million
you know the 997 >> um has it ever I mean I understand where you're what you're saying that is like the bottom you know just to keep things running but have we ever had a year that low? Well, well, well, look at the
history, right? And and this is why the the fire department kind of skews things, right? >> Public safety gets expensive, >> right? >> But but yeah, you'll see you'll see where capital outlay, right, in in the past, you know, three years, right? We
had but all of that there is tra you can see it and it was coming down, right? You can see that we were at 4 million, 6 million, 1 million, 1 million there. I'm on slide number six under capital outlay in the historical in the historical data.
>> Yeah. >> So again, what I'm just trying to say is is that as a town, we maintain our assets very well and outside of those outliers. Oop, sorry. I'm sorry. I was going to say right outside of those outliers,
we've had a lot of outliers over the last 5 years. We've done a lot of heavy lifting on the capital side. police, fire, this building, library, roofs, sidewalk, like we've done a lot of heavy lifting over the last planning horizon
of five years. And if we call recall last year, I said it's starting to let off a bit because we always been pitching the hold our millage rate level. And I said, "There's going to come a time, and I think David's starting to to show you that time, where
we're over the hump of the decades of not maintaining things, where we've accomplished all of our capital on this horizon, and it's going to slow. It's naturally going to slow down because we've picked off a lot of that
lowhanging, expensive fruit. And now we're being smart. We're starting to put away money for the next fire engine that those are really capital projects. Uh we pushed police into vehicles. Now those will be on a regular turnout. So those
initial pushes of cost will come down and we'll be able to start flatlining capital a bit instead of those higher numbers. Yeah. So >> yeah, >> I think we're starting to get there. Yeah. >> Now when we get to the last page of this presentation, this is when I pass out and you pick me back up, right? But
it's, you know, uh we're we're over the hump and barring massive legislative changes, uh you know, our plan is working perfectly. >> Yes, >> it really is. I mean, the amount of time we spend in this planning, it's really
working. Now, if legislation upends that, then we we got to veer a different direction. But we're coming to that there isn't a ton of capital moving back on those the latter side of the the back side of this model. I think it's it's going to calm down.
>> So Marshall, if I might um just to reiterate, so this has certainly taken into consideration what our priorities >> are forecasted for the ensuing year, coming year. >> Yeah. So, uh, we do that every year with the 5-year again. And again, like I started here, some of this numbers will
change a little bit, not drastically, but it'll tweak a little bit when I meet with all the department heads and we go over their budget and stuff. But we've been planning capital, the capital list is >> is shrinking and that's why it's getting more manageable because some of the big
push stuff we've gotten over the hump on. Um, and I I think we're in a good good position where that that that does calm down. But you'll see it when we attach um even if and it's hard to recall but if you look at our capital program four years ago and you saw the
5year you're like oh we're ever going to get to the bottom of this list. Now you're starting to see we're we've we are starting to get to the bottom. It's a little more manageable because we're proactively managing the process. We're staying on it. We're strategically planning where we want to go. We're
looking at what capital projects are necessary. Uh God love Peggy. We were getting appropriation dollars to take the sting out of some of these projects. Uh the Biden I mean the ARPA dollars um helped a ton. We got a lot of capital
done on those federal dollars. So that really you know that you'll see that you'll see our cash balance when we when we predicted forward. Yeah. I mean here's the real the beauty is whatever you want to do when you want to do it. I'm just trying to plan it out five years.
>> Yeah. Yes. Um truly totally understand Dave. I really understand it. Technology-wise, where do you see um a community this size moving forward in the next five years as far as technology? Because technology is changing. >> Yeah, >> I know in my own organization is
changing dramatically and we're looking some big uh big investments. How do you see the >> I you know uh it I I honestly think that's the beautiful part about Highland Beach, right? is the uh is the uh just
the ambiance of of a of a beautiful relaxing beach community. I I don't know where the technology will will ride, but but you know uh you're always going to need police, fire, and you're going to need staff to carry out um what what
needs to be done. I AI will will be a big game changer. Um and uh but I'm not you know what I'm I'm not sure of how disruptive yet >> it won't be disruptive. >> Yeah. Right. >> And it's not going to be in a quick
application for AI here. Your your technology changes will be in the public safety side. EMS response. It gets better every year with equipment. We get to see things quicker, faster on the spot. Think of the the blood work. I always forget what it's called, but
epoch. You know, five years ago, people would have looked at you crossey. If you think that that was possible to do a blood test right on the spot, we can do that. Drones, cameras, like that stuff is evolving quickly, where I can see AI even help make decisions, getting us in
contact with hospitals quicker. Now, the AI stuff that you see on more the administrative side, I think it's going to be slower. Um, I saw a great session with a a big AI person. and they said, "Go into the conference room or to the
the the the expo hall after." And I did. And I talked to all these AIs and they, "Man, they'll sell you anything as fast as you want to buy it." But I they're like, "Well, what are you going to use it for?" And I'm like, "Well, I want to do this." No, we don't do that. Okay. How about this? And they go over like,
"What would Fort Lauderdale need or Bokeh?" Well, they're going to have a different customer base volume of transactions where that those chat bots and some of those things come into play, but I'll or you need a community calendaring system. No, not really. I can put a little
spreadsheet on there and the six or seven events we got going. So, that AI stuff isn't going to be a heavy lift on the administrative side. I think in public safety where you want to see that technology change for that life safety uh protection, it's going to fast. It's going to move real quick on us. Um, and
have to keep an eye on that with personal private rights protections. And >> you know, Marshall, I'm working with a group of doctors right now. They they tell me their lives have become miserable because of AI because before a patient comes to their office right now, >> they've got all the solutions.
>> They they they have all the answers and something that would be a 15minute visit or a 20-minute visit. Now, it continues and continues and they're all falling behind. So, it has changed their life. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, AI, it it is phenomenal. Don't don't get me wrong.
I'm I'm a big proponent of it. I mean, for example, you you think about uh some work that Lenelda does as far as summarizing minutes. My goodness, you can take this whole video, give it to probably Chat GPT, and have
it summarize it to you in in a document how many pages you want and it'll be pretty accurate. But but it so so in certain areas it will allow No, I'm just saying it will allow you to >> it will allow you to >> Lela always say to David stay in your lane.
>> I'm sorry. She's right. She's right. But no, it will allow her to go continue to do other great things. But I'm just saying minutes, you know, it's like but anyway, so uh thank you. So yeah. So no, you're absolutely right. Um, we we looked at it and we we estimate, you
know, how much we think in the forecast year and you're absolutely right, uh, Madam Chair. Uh, yeah, I'm I want to be I want to be correct. I want to be correct and I want want to be wrong in the right direction, right? I I want to come back and I want to say, man, property values just went through the
roof, right? And, oh, wow, by the way, our expend our expenses uh really re really came in in under budget. And so uh but but yeah, I mean you know uh it is a it's a planning tool really to look at what we're doing and when we might
have to pull from reserves and then so now we'll look at the the the cash. But anyway, so these right here were kind of those outlier projects that we had priority projects that we had and and you know like and and oh by the way this just looks at the general fund, right?
We'll get to the water, the building, and the sewer. But, you know, it looks like the police dock, you know, we'll we'll push that into 2027. Uh the police build out, you know, uh the the fire uh annex, you know, the the building over here. When do we want to do that? And
what we tried to do is we tried to say, okay, if we think today it's going to be $1.2 $2 million. Well, if we wait three years, it could uh it could go up, you know, to about almost 1.3 million, you know, just just with normal rates of inflation. And so, we've we've included
those numbers in in in here as well. >> And so, when you look at it, and this right here is what we would call our fund balance. And so what we did is we took our FY24 actuals audited and we
added we added the appropriation to reserves. We took away the appropriation from reserves and we moved that forward to kind of estimate where we think our balances are going to be. And so that's
where we put the unassigned line. So since our our cash is restricted, right, we we restrict when you saw that uh that that that as of 2025 the general fund had about $10 million, right? Well, you
can see there in in 2025 un audited about $10 million. Well, part of the governmental governmental accounting is to restrict that, right? So we restrict certain amounts for budget stabilization, for disaster recovery,
for fire, for other and then we have an item in there that's called unrestricted. So that unrestricted value really is for those unforeseen things that you want to do in the future. And so that's that's kind of the the goal of
it. And uh but but we have access to all of the cash. We just the board board has made it a policy to restrict it and say, "Hey, listen. You can't budget more than this amount. But if you do, just come to
us at a board meeting and ask for a budget amendment and tell us where you're going to be pulling it from." >> Again, these those numbers are a little strong in the unassigned because we did, you know, the roof, the Balo Bridge, those >> Yeah. >> So, that number is going to come down a little bit
>> in the future. I said these are just all projections at point in time. I mean I yeah they look a little you know like it's getting a little high but um I I think >> it's we're projecting too far ahead to really >> and I think some of we've underestimated
a couple of those outlier capital projects. I think fire annex we the number we initially started with I think we're going to find ourselves uh much more. So like that unassigned won't be as heavy, right? >> I know we've had that conversation. You're like, "Well, we're not here to
tax and save, you know." So, um, we want to make sure we keep that as a manageable protection, not as we're building a bank account. So, I think it's going to come down when you actually >> bid a couple of these projects out. I think that unassigned number is going to calm from what David has shown there.
>> And we don't know what's happening with property taxes, >> right? That's another huge question mark. >> Oh, that's 75% of your revenue. >> Exactly. >> I mean, yeah. No, no, absolutely. Yeah, that's that's a big Right. Yeah. No, absolutely. >> Um, now we go into the building fund.
Again, same same idea, historical perspective. The building fund obviously has been doing extremely well, especially with its uh interlocal agreement with the other municipality to to to help. Uh, but it's been doing very very well. uh we've we've looked at our
cost and and uh when we look at the five-year perspective, if you if you you go back one, right, they're their charges for services are growing at about 4%. You know, every year and I'm hoping, not
hoping, I'm I'm I'm estimating that, you know, that that may slow down to about 2%, right? I'm gonna I'm gonna take down some of that heavy industrial growth, but every time I do that, >> you know, Jeff Jeff comes back with Oh, here we got another we got another
building. >> And that's because the rates stay the same. It's just that the cost for the renovation >> keeps going up. So, >> and then the amount of renovation, right? You know, >> the degree. >> That's a good point to now that we're making a public record here. That's a
good point that our rates are down and our expenses only grow at a very controlled rate which you guys control the expense side of it. >> But home construction >> is increased and we're a percentage of home construction, right? >> Yes. >> That is a good point to make. >> Yes. Yeah. Yeah. But
>> and we dropped the the we did 12% reduction. >> So So this and >> well Jeff wants to make sure because he's not here. He wants to just make sure he doesn't think it's going to be as strong as David is projecting because last year he had a huge number from the
Milani property development. So yeah, >> uh he doesn't, you know, but soon as he says that we always get these out all of a sudden somebody like >> right >> that's a $20 million kitchen remodel and you're like what the where is this? Oh it's in GFream in some weird spot, you know. So um as much as we predicted it
always something pops every now and again. When was the effective date of the reduction in the >> of >> this year? >> So fiscal year 2020. >> Yeah, we changed it with the uh fee schedule. >> So the 2.5 to the 27.
>> Yeah. So includes a 12% reduction. >> So that so we we had a a regular increase in charges for services even though the rates went down 12. That's those are things that we uh he's about to show you the reserves which can't
continue. So, we're going to have to look at having those conversations. I don't know if this budget cycle, but the next one we're going to have to it's we may need to do a more aggressive reduction. He's glad he's not here because he'll start shaking more aggressive reduction of the
fee schedule. >> Yeah. Production and building. >> Right. And the reason why is because I'm trying to grow. Look at I'm growing operating expenses by 5%. I'm growing personnel expenses by by 4%. I'm keeping capital about the same. I've increased
the transfers. All right. So I increased the transfers from $700,000. Uh yeah, let's see right here. So from $700,000 to another 900 to there's limits. We have like always think about
25% of revenue is kind of your golden number to not draw right an audit flag. My audit >> experts here will tell me the CPAs in the room tell me but usually it's around like 25% is kind of that >> yeah what are the transfers? What is >> that's what the building department pays
for basically think rent and management. >> Oh okay. So it's what they transfer over the general fund, your time, your guidance, lights, telephones, computers, the IT consultant, David, Susie, me, they pay for that. >> So why
explain explain the uh significant increase >> from 25 to 26? 200,000 on the transfers. >> Yep. Yep. Yep. 200,000 on the >> due to >> due to the building funds growing at a phenomenal rate and it can't
They can't. They can't. >> Well, because another >> No, it can't because you can't have too much money in the building fund that he's saying like, >> right? And so right now So right now, you know, this is what I'm anticipating
will be when you look at what their what their uh fund balance will be in cash. >> So how do you what's the 25% of when you say it's limited >> of the revenues >> of the revenues. So it can't be more. So that top line charges for revenue for services. It can't be
>> Yeah. >> forfeiture. >> Yeah. Fines forfeite. >> Oh, so the b that bottom line the >> 25%. >> But >> it shouldn't be. You could justify it if there's >> Oh, yeah. We can justify >> small event or >> or for a small town. Does it make sense
for a small town to have a bigger? >> So what we also do uh if you do recall uh I think is a great thing we did when we started the fire department. We don't charge for annual inspections this and that. So the building department pays for the fire marsh pays the salary and
personnel expenses of the fire. >> Oh right now that's >> does right now and that comes in that transfer. So >> in that building transfer it's also a personnel that >> that's part of the 900. >> Yes. >> Yeah. >> So that comes out of there plus rent and normal things. So that helps us instead of charging the residents then the
building department through the building structure. >> Yeah. I mean, I don't want to say it's a shell game, but at the same time, it makes you you justify that expenditure that the fire marshall has to do all of that. Yeah. And he's not getting charged. So, the building department covers that cost. Yeah. Because it does
structural and vents and building the building official and fire marshall work very closely on a lot of issues. So, >> yeah. And public works there's no additional transfer because the public >> public works generally does a pretty uh
we have like usually one staff person. >> Yeah. >> Uh whether that's Tyrone or maybe it's Eric or it's uh right >> the new guy like we have usually have one >> uh utility maintenance mechanic that's covered by the general fund for general
maintenance on town facilities. Rest is in the water and sewer infrastructure maintenance for lift stations. Yep. >> And things of that nature, the water plant, doing all the maintenance there. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> I guess my thought is if there's any other way to justify more of a transfer
from the building department, I would >> trust me, I tell you, you guys are very conservative here. We're not aggressive. I can I won't point out towns because there are friends of mine all across the state wildly more aggressive. Right. >> Right. >> On transfers. Wildly more aggressive. >> Right.
>> And do they get audited? I just >> Yeah. Well, they get audited every year, but they can substantiate. >> So, I mean, >> um I I try to take that more conservative approach. I don't want to draw the eye of the OIG's office or >> uh the CFO of the state. I don't want
them to come down here, hold signs that we did something a little we pushed the envelope too much. So, we keep it within the boundaries that the legislature tends to state. So, if you look at like um extr territorial service charges for utilities, they say you can't add more than 25%. You see it common in a lot of
contracts. 25% for administrator. We try to keep that benchmark, but there are sometimes it's not perfectly clear. It's just a safe. So, we could push that a little bit. >> Yeah. >> I I know places that do it uh way more aggressively. I'm not comfortable with that, but if we need to, we can, you
know, work those angles of >> Hey Dave Dave, >> we get into budget process. >> I question I understand what Marshall is saying and I agree with him. But I have one question. the for uh as far as the building fund 5-year summary forecast, the forecast assumes a slowing down of
the revenue historically 5% to an annual growth rate of 2%. >> Yep. That's really being conservative. >> Yeah. Well, uh yeah, I mean, >> I'm not saying we shouldn't, but that's really a conservative statement. >> Yeah. you know, in in talking with Jeff,
you know, he's already he's already freaking out about this half of the year, but but you gota you got to keep in mind, um, we have not only Highland Beach, he's seeing a decrease in Highland Beach, yet another town that we do, Ocean Ridge is Oh, I'm so so sorry.
Thank you. Uh, Gulfream, uh, is incre is increasing. Um and and the other thing too is is that I think that 202 uh five data includes the Milani uh Milani uh >> their apartment condo
>> condo thing where they paid all of their fees and everything, you know, in advance and and we we we got that revenue now, >> right? >> And so we're not anticipating that going forward, right? But I am you're absolutely right. I'm trying to be conservative on the revenue growth. I'm
trying to be reasonable yet conservative >> uh to say, okay, uh what's it what's it going to look like? Um uh because because here's what I can do. I have more I have more uh uh uh I I have more
uh reality in the expense side, right? I I I've got years of expenses, right? I've got I I know what our operating costs are. I know how much we tend to spend. I know payroll and all that jazz, right? >> Controlled. >> Yeah, it's controlled, right? >> It's controlled,
>> right? And so I tried to I try to do that first to kind of see where we're at and I look at revenue. Uh see, I don't want to overpredict revenue that forces you to make a make a bad decision. Okay? Right? And so I would rather sit there
and go, "Hey guys, I think conservatively it's going to grow here. If we see it halfway through the year, then then we'll know that that's obviously not true. >> Thank you. >> And that assumably it appears that that covers
um what our expenses will be. >> Yeah. >> Oh yeah. >> Oh yeah. >> Oh yeah. >> Oh yeah. >> Yeah. That's a very comfortable position to >> buy our healthiest fund. >> Yes. That's good. >> Yeah. Right. And so, you know, there you can see that, you know, man, if if even
if I start putting, you know, 400 $500,000 away every year, you know, this, you know, this right here just keeps, you know, this right here just keeps growing. And uh and and and we have to look at that at uh and and we've tried
that, but but we uh we we'll look at a different transfer uh idea. Uh we'll we'll also look at capital because remember, you know, I'm I'm being I'm being conservative with their capital, you know, $325,000
uh per year. U but you know what, we'll uh we'll we'll we'll look at that. >> So if if you did notice um records have indicated here, the building department has never really paid for anything. So when we just approved that roof, the
building department, that fund is going to pay their share of working in the water plant. When we replace all the windows in that aged facility, >> the building department's going to pay for that. When we get our parking lot paved because they have the most customers, that in the library, they're going to pay for the repaving of the
parking lot. So they're going to pay their equitable share of some of these higher cost capital projects because they never did prior to that. So uh those are justified expenditures and I think that fund will soften a bit but still it's pretty healthy even
>> and you recuperate prior costs from prior years that they hadn't paid. >> Uh it'd be you it's a little bit harder so I would just more rationalize moving forward. Yeah. >> Um I think is a safer spot and uh >> yeah go from there.
>> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Uh next we'll we'll go on to the the water fund. you see historically uh you know we we've had we've had the annual increases of 5%. Plus about 1% in consumption. Uh and so
you know uh but what's what's really done well with this fund here is as you see that we've what we've been doing is we've been paying down debt, right? And you'll see on the next slides that man 2030
>> we're like Dave Ramseyville but hey it's just you know I know it's just you know it's it's uh you know it's it's just like now unfortunately when you're dealing with water and sewer right uh you're always going to have another big project but we're taking on those projects. You as a town you're taking on
those projects pay as you go cash. You know what we'll store up the cash with our five-year planning. We'll we'll we'll relook at transfers. We'll make sure this fund has enough cash for when it needs to have one of those major expenditures. We'll squirrel away money
when in good times when we need to replace an $800 million fire truck. You know, >> not 800 800,000. >> No, but but but but here you can see this right here. You're just looking at at the historical, right? We went from
$1.5 million of our debt service to, you know, right now we're down to $110,000 a year. And oh, by the way, you know, that drops down in 2029 to $632,000. And then in 2031 that drops down to $263,000.
>> And so what that does, right, it's just like in our private lives, right? the the less debt you have, >> the more you can build your personal reserves with. And so, but but again, you know, water, it's water and sewer
are your enterprise funds. We treat that like a business, right? We we charge a fee >> and that fund is is the the idea is is that that fund is supposed to be able to be self-sufficient, stand on its own. And you want to know something? You did that. That was one of the things that
you did uh back in 2023. We made this to where the general fund is no longer sending money to the bill uh to the water or sewer funds, right? We made those self- sustaining through normal
consistent rate increases of 5%. Uh and oh, we we already showed you here that that that the debt the debt balance look at these interest rates. Remember the good old days? you remember the Yeah, I mean the you know interest rates when you can borrow interest rates at at
at 2%. But uh but yeah, that's when the debt starts to uh starts to come off. Now remember this is the water fund. Uh >> yeah. >> Yep. Yep. And so yeah, so that that that starts to come off. And so as we look down now I'm on page
16. As we look forward to what does that mean with our cash, right? You can see it fluctuates a little bit more. So here you can see what I estimated our days cash uh will be at the end of 2026. Our days cash will be about 83 days cash on
hand. Our lowest point could be 2028 with about 57 days cash on hand, but we climb back to about 150 days cash on hand by uh by the end of the forecast. >> Did that shift? Was it I thought the
lowest point was um before 2028 like was that always the lowest point? >> No, I don't I don't know if it was I can I can I can find that out. I don't know. >> I was hoping to be beyond that, you know, or be hitting that lowest point.
>> But you know, but what affects it what affects it is our ability to pay down debt and then it frees up dollars for more capital. Okay. capital program and as well as putting funds back into
reserves. So yeah. >> Okay. >> And our our charge for water is that uh commensurate with our region >> with our local. >> Absolutely. Yes. Yes. Uh I think Rafelis maybe it used to be RAF. No, Rafelis
Rafelis does a bianual or an annual water rate water study. I'll make sure you guys get that. uh they do it by every region in the state of Florida. How much is base fees? How much is sewer fees? What is that? What does that consist? >> And we're right on with that. >> I'll I'll double check it, but yes. Yes.
>> And um this just assumes a 5% annual increase in >> Yes. Yes. >> And uh and then we have the sewer fund. Here you can see uh the the sewer fund and and again, you know, we're we're doing the the sewer lining project,
right? Uh that's this was always our plan. If you recall, we were looking at, oh, do we borrow money from the state at low interest rates? Do we take out a loan to do this? Finally, the commission, rightfully so, said, "You
know what? Let's just push this off a little bit longer. Let's accumulate enough cash, and you know what? we'll be able to we'll be able to do this. Let let inflation rates kind of settle down a little bit and we'll be able to do this. And so and so that's what that's what we're seeing here. We're seeing a
historically this fund as well 5% uh the the transfers to the water fund. Remember the sewer fund has to transfer money over to the water fund uh to cover its commensary share of its costs. Uh
and uh and so you know that's what we did and and so any major projects that we have in there uh we try to uh we we try to do when we have enough cash. And so when we look at the five-year five-year forecast we're we're going to
assume that that remember inflation is about 3 and a half%. Right? And so I here's what here's what a utility system has to do. A utility system has to cover the cost to operate.
It has to cover the debt service. It has to cover any maintenance and then it has to reestablish its reserves. Otherwise, it's always going back to borrow money. Back to borrow money. And so, um, this
is what we're doing with this fund. We're we're we're so we're it's called pay as you go capital. when we accumulate enough funds, then we go ahead and do the project. And that's what we're doing with the sewer lining and also future projects for now. >> Would there ever be a reason to increase
the transfer from the sewer fund to the water fund? Would would I mean have you um has there been any >> We could we can look at that. I know I know historically, you know, uh >> yeah, when you're doing a lot of these
5-year forecasts, you try to have as many constants as possible so people can compare apples to app because there's so many moving parts. But yeah, we can we can look at the the the old >> We should because >> it's been flat for forever. >> Oh yeah, forever. >> Yeah, it's been the same number for
forever. >> And uh >> what are you referring to? So the um fund balance in the sewer fund is pretty healthy. >> Yeah. >> Um and the sewer fund needs to pay into
the water fund um to cover its costs. Um and the water fund, the fund balance gets, you know, a little skinny. Um, and so I wonder if maybe the sewer fund is not
paying its fair share and maybe we should revisit the transfer instead of having the sewer fund keep growing and growing in the its savings account. >> Yes. that it should pay more of the
water fund, you know, transfer more into the water fund, >> right? >> It's going to balance out. >> Yeah. And that makes sense, right? The water fund has labor costs. The water has debt service costs, right? Right. >> Uh the the the sewer fund, you know, has no labor costs in it. The sewer fund has
no debt service. The sewer fund only has one contract, you know, dely. Now, I will tell you this. Typically, when you're dealing with sewer problems, it's a mess, right? Uh and >> and it usually costs quite a bit more.
>> So, right. And so, that's why that one there, you want, you know, uh you want to have a little bit more healthier balance. But you're absolutely right, Madam Chair. We we haven't we haven't touched that since I since I've been here and and we we we can look at that. Uh okay. Absolutely. Yes, >> that would be great. Thank you.
>> And so, uh we have the sewer fund. Uh, and you have their their net position as as the mayor uh wrought out. You know, right now I think they got about 200 over 200 days two almost 300 days of cash on hand and um and growing to 400.
And you know what? Yeah, we can we can relook at that. >> Okay. >> As compared to 82 or 87. >> Yeah. >> Right. Exactly. And it you know it's doesn't you know Yep. Yep. It would be fine. >> Absolutely. It makes complete sense. So now we get to the part of the program
that is called the whatifs. So we have two whatifs. What if u I guess there's a 10% reduction. I guess you would call it a mandate. I don't know. >> It's an exercise. We don't have to do anything but it's an exercise of what would that number look like? And then
it's supposed to spur our conversations of >> you know where would you get that money? >> Yeah. Right. >> Dave, the only thing as you go through this cut >> as you go through this question that I would normally ask is why
>> because legislation is looking at uh >> looking at everybody, right? They're they're trying to slow down the pace of growth and whoa, let's not be like some other states with a seed. >> They they legislate to outliers. They
really do. And I've even gotten legislators to tell me that in >> backroom conversations. There's a handful of really bad players. Dave and I even talked about one earlier before and that they they hear about it and say, "Well, we have to stop this."
Instead of addressing the problem, they address the whole thing. >> Uh and that gets us into these these situations, right? It really does. So >> So let's look at the first major assumption, right? So let's look at what is 10%. All right, let's look at first of all,
let's define, right, what 10% is, right? Because because here's why. I can't cut 10% of my debt service. >> I I'm obligated to that, right? I I can't cut uh 10% of uh transfers. I I
can lower them down, things like that. But so what we did here is we said, "Okay, what you're looking at is what you're looking at on the on the very very first screen there, the general fund 10%." How could we manage to do that, right? Well, well, first let's
define it that, okay, it looks like it's going to be about $2 million. Okay, it's going to be about $2 million. So, let's just put some numbers into our head. 70 75% of your revenue comes from Adorum. And by the way, 71% of your
expenditures in the general fund are just public safety, police and fire. Okay? But I've got to I've got to sit there and say, "Okay, where can we cut?" If you kept police and fire and the
commission to run the town, you might get to the $2 million. >> Say that again. If here I get so if you kept the police and fire
>> and your salaries, >> we were going to self-manage, >> right? Yeah. You're going to self-manage. >> We're going to selfage. >> You're going to self, right? >> If we were to do that, >> you might Right. You might be able to cut. Meanwhile, everyone else is gone, >> right? it it you you you might come up
with the the with the $2 million, but at the end of the day, we looked at it and we said, you know what, we can manage it through uh reducing our transfers, right? We can probably manage it by by utilizing
uh some of our excess cash reserves. You know, you saw where the the general fund will grow from 2 million to 4 million to 6 million to $8 million. we we we might be able to manage it that way, right? Uh the other thing too is we might be able
to slow down the uh cost of replacing assets or not slow down the cost but slow down uh the uh when we replace assets, right? Give assets a little bit longer life. Uh
because what we do, we're very proactive. We're like, "Hey, look it, something's happening over here. Well, let's go ahead and let's replace it. Whereas we might seek other alternatives to reduce it down. But the idea is is that if you you know where could we pull
this? The general fund's your biggest fund. Obviously, it has most of the costs and in order to reduce it by $2 million. Uh >> tough. >> Yeah. Tough. Tough >> because there's not a lot of there's not a lot of smoke and mirrors in our budget
because we go through this year in year out to control expenses. So now to artificially then go in and lower them again you you it's a lot of strain. Um what I tell uh folks is when you get to about 10% you're talking people. At 10%
or above it's people because that's what our business is. We're a people business. We have to do people. You can do if it's a cute 10% you don't need to do people. You just cut expenses. Just slash expenses and hold tight >> to weather the storm. But if the
exercise is every year moving forward you're going to be cutting 10% then you have to that's a whole that's a structural change >> right >> you can't deliver the services under your current model you have to come up with a new one >> at 10%. >> Right?
>> 5% you could just shave a lot of things you're okay gets tight maybe not as effective but you can do it. 10% you're you're you're really on the line of changing your business model. >> Yes sir. Have you considered uh increasing um income?
>> Well, that's the thing. I don't think that's part of the exercise that the legislature wants. They don't want you to increase the revenue by modifying taxes, doing that stuff. They just want to see the cut. They want to see re They want to see the tax rate go down and shrinking government. So, they're going to cut that revenue and say live with it
at 10%. This is just an exercise. And I think it's just a it's a good healthy exercise to make sure you know David and I and Susie are out to lunch and your department heads are just baking up ideas. That's a good exercise. >> But we've we've spent so much time doing
this together >> that I I don't know where where you find all this excess, you know? >> Right. What I meant was I understand, you know, if we have to if we're called upon to cut 2 million, >> you know, that's that's the edict, but
that doesn't or does it uh keep us from looking for and any other revenue produces? >> There's fair. You could do a fire fee per household. That's never popular. We used to be able to do business tax receipts. That's that door closed.
um some of the other creative revenue side on the business districts, we don't have it. So, we can't >> the building department >> building department can't pay for general fund operations. It can only cover itself and an applied uh application. So, they you could tweak the the transfers and move that around
and that David kind of alluded to that like you could do those types of squeezes, you know. >> Um but again, when 10% for us, it's a big number. uh you know two million >> to like a Del Rey or a Boon it's a
rounding error here two million that's a big number we gota that we're digging right you know >> as you keep reminding me this is not the private sector this is the public sector right >> and it's a and I by the and I appreciate it all the time when you tell me that but we've been using 2% 3% and 5% >> y
>> very conservative numbers >> yes >> then all of a sudden we jump to a 10% reduction >> I mean that obviously self-management and suicide are the same You're you're absolutely right. And but but what you'll see spot on, right? You got to change the model. We're going to grow at
37%. >> I come up two million bucks. >> It sounds humorous, >> but but but I'll show you. We run efficiently as it is. We don't have those areas that we can outsource. We outsource those areas. We don't have any
any That's why in our model, you want to cut 10%. Okay. Well, uh, what capital don't you want to do? Because our fluff, per se, is is accumulating cash to pay
for those capital projects that we need to do so we don't have to go out and get a loan at 6 and 8%. >> Correct. But you've laid out a beautiful program of two, three, 5%. Those are the numbers we're using. Yeah. Why would anyone even come back and even think that we would think about cutting 10%
when when we're using such conservative numbers? >> And not only that though, but we have one of the lowest millage rates. I I know that as residents, you also pay the county millage rates and and and I get that, but but for a coastal community, full service, police, fire, water,
sewer, uh uh building department, library, we have the lowest. >> I agree. And and you'll see that in the next slides. >> So So when you look at the general fund, yeah, guys, it's about $2 million. Uh when you look at the building fund,
yeah, the building fund, their theirs is about uh what what is that number? 178, you know, $200,000, right? They could, you know, they could manage that through a reduction in transfers. Okay. uh water, you know, uh
the the the water fund, it's about $300,000 and uh it could manage it through some uh reduction in capital as well as a reduction in transfers as well if if they wanted to do that. But I don't
think that they're asking and and maybe uh Len can can can provide. I don't know if they're looking at this exercise. Are they looking at it or or Marshall? >> I think it's one year. They ask for horizons. It's just one year after year. >> But it doesn't apply to water, right? I mean, it's really it's really just the
general fund. >> It doesn't differentiate. >> Well, suspenders. Let's just do it all. We see it. >> Water is a whole different It's an enterprise. It's not a >> Right. That's what I mean. That's what I mean. >> Assumption. >> And we'll see that when we talk about the advalorum tax going away that your
enterprise funds are fine >> are untouched. Yeah. >> Yeah. They're fine. department's fine. >> Right. Right. And so when you look at it, you know, this is the fund with labor and with debt service. Debt service does does tend to come down, but my 10% is not including uh debt service or transfers or or or reserves. It's
just looking at operating expenses. And so and then you have obviously the the the sewer fund. Same thing. It could probably manage it through a reduction in some type of transfers uh over to the the general fund. uh but but at the end
of the day uh not a lot of excess to want to do that. If it if it was mandated then for the short period of time we can go into uh any cash reserves that we've built up as well as delay capital spending if if we needed to to
to do the exercise. Now this one's interesting. >> See you guys later. This one is fascinating, right? So, let's think about it. No tax on
homestead properties. Sounds great, right? No, I'm joking. Uh, but at the but but here's what we did. First of all, there's about there's over $4 billion of taxable value in Highland
Beach. Okay? And what we know is we know that approximately almost 1.6 1.7 billion or 41% are currently homestead exempted
currently. Okay. Um the way they're looking at the legislation, they said that hey, you can't touch or you can't reduce public safety, police and fire,
>> but what you can do is you can freeze them at the previous year's levels. So that's what we did in the model and that's why I highlighted it there. You'll see that when you compare and you contrast them, uh, that what it did is
is I took what they were going to, uh, increase to and I brought it back to the 2007 levels. But yes, madam, >> are you taking into consideration the the union contracts?
>> We would have to go into impact bargaining. There's just no way you would if this model would be totally skewed if you had to honor those agreements. You just you couldn't >> Yeah. >> Now I will tell you that doesn't take into consideration FRS, right? Because I
can freeze someone's salary. Not not freeze, I can freeze the growth rate of their salary, right? But but still there's health insurance, there's pension costs, right? Uh there's workers compensation. Uh there's all these other costs that are going to
continue to grow. Okay. Now, I can I can freeze someone's pay that they take home for a certain amount of time, right? But there are other costs. So, so that's what we did in the model. So, if it was labor related related to the police, fire, that's what we did in our model.
We said, "Okay, we're going back to the 2027 and we're going to freeze only those departments. Let's move forward." >> Yeah. But, you know, another thing you have to do is there's a huge incentive to homestead your property. So, you know, you're basing this on who's
actually homesteaded right now. >> Yes. >> How about the financial incentive to actually homestead properties that are not homesteaded and so you're going to you're going to have less >> Yeah. This best year 2028, you'll see that's the that's that's the best. It
only gets worse, right? >> Yeah. Yeah. Because more people are going to home they're going to figure out a way to homestead their property. >> Yes. Yes. You asked the exact question. >> Sorry, I didn't mean to jump in. You homestead all of them, your building revenue is going to go through the roof because people will have money to do all these remodels, renovations,
>> right? Exactly. >> But it can't cover general fun, >> you know. But >> we'll have to figure out how to do transfers. >> Right. So, let's talk about how much how much is that? How much money are we talking about? Well, we're talking about almost uh well, we're talking about over $5 million.
>> Okay. So, we're talking about $5 million. M >> and so when you look at five $5 million well this is where and I appreciate your patience uh uh Madam Goldberg.
This is where here let me just show you what all the departments cost. So the top line there when it says all operating personnel capital outlay that's for all your general fund departments. Okay.
Now, let's just look at police and fire. Police and fire. This is their operating their personnel, their capital outlay just for police and fire. When I look at all other departments
excluding the commission, that's the third line. Even if I got rid of everybody, >> that $5 million, I would only cut $2.8 million or I'm sorry, 2 point I'm sorry,
$2.0 million. I would only cut I it would be the police, the fire, and you >> and you're still 3 million short to raise revenue. >> And you're still three million short. Okay, you're still three million short.
And no one else in the general fund is here for you. No. And so and so that's why when we look at this model here, the only the only way the current model
survives is you have to you have to increase the millillage. You you you have to you you there there is nothing to you couldn't cut enough to even make a dent in it. Okay. So I got to come up
with $5 million. All right, get rid of everybody and uh you guys run the town along, but you'll have police and fire, but they're going to be frozen salaries and but so so that that's kind of what it looks like. And so at the at the end of the day, it looks like it's go but here's the good news. The good news is
you've got a relatively low millage rate, right? And so it looks like it only it would add about two additional mills to your current 3.5875. >> Assuming nobody trans no one goes more homestead claims. You got to stop the homestead claims.
>> That's true. >> Yeah. >> Right. Right. >> There's the tricky balance of if you raise the taxes too much you accelerate potentially pushing more people to the homestead. So, it's a tricky and if you look at who's homesteaded now, we have $35 million home that's homesteaded
here, right? You know, God bless. But I'm just like, you start getting all of those to come off the roll. You're >> Yeah. No, you're right. Look, the ship sinks, you know, >> right? And and that's why I was saying that 75% of your revenue comes from property taxes. 71% of your expenses are
police and fire. >> And so, uh, I'm not allowed to cut them. I can freeze them, right? But I'm not allowed to cut them. You you just don't have you you don't have enough uh labor to uh to to cut anywhere. And so that's
when and deny that though, but it would be foolish to do it one year and then exhaust all your reserves, right? Uh and so at that point there, we would have to look at okay, we have to increase the milit. I'm certain that you would still be one of the lowest cost providers. Uh
it would just be horrible to those that are non-none. >> So in order to meet the state's edict, everyone's going to pay more property taxes. It's just not going to the municipalities. >> Well, those that aren't >> Well, I think the business community will get upset because they're they're
>> not cap, you know, cap. >> Yeah. 10% in value escalation. Yeah. And we have a 10 mil cap total. Yes. So if everyone starts flipping, you can only get to 10. So think of a lot of these other communities that are eight, eight and a half, 8.6. six and they have to go through the same exercise, you're going
to have municipal default. Yeah. >> Um and I I don't know. >> Yeah. So it so the the the the purpose of this was Yes. Does it sound like a great uh idea? I I'm not sure. Uh but at
the end of the day uh our solution to it uh would would would be that would be that no uh we have to increase our millage rate by by a little bit over over two mills would be in the five ms >> 5.5 >> Yep. 5.5 mills. And you're right, Madam
Chair, uh it probably only gets worse going forward because everyone's going to be jumping on, you know, board on it. And so it it it just escalates from very possible over the next five years we could beat our numbers
>> uh out outside of that outside of that >> no I mean our model predicts that you'll you'll maintain your millillage at the 3.5875 >> no outside of police and fire I'm talking about the funds outside of our estimates and our positive attitude yes
>> it's very very possible over the next five years that our funds could do better than what we're estimating >> yet Yes. Yes. >> And since I would just be in the crowd or sending you email advice cuz I'd be fired. >> Um, police and fire. >> He's gone. He's here. >> Police police police and fire aren't
going to work at frozen rates forever, >> sir. >> So eventually that's where it gets they'll at some way be back to a trajectory that's, you know, on point with at least inflation. So that still screams away from you um on those numbers. So, it's
and I don't know what municipality can handle it. Have to be a very commercialbased town. You know, maybe Bokeh could take the hits, but they're going to take a hit, too. I mean, there's just >> Yeah. >> Um I it's I I And I think that's why you're seeing that special session slow
rolled by the governor. Now they're talking about a six-year rollout window and they have to run models cuz I would have to believe if they have competent CPAs running their models, they're seeing the same thing we're seeing like how how and again even with some folks
in that that room and having the conversation are very cavalier like who cares about local government? I think enough people do care like whoa wait that this, you know, it's not just hardship counties, you know, think like Hardy or Glades County that that are
going to take it. It's going to be a lot of these municipal defaults. They have debt and loans predicated on advorum tax dollars. You have millage cap rates that are written in the constitution that won't be there's so many things moving. I just don't know.
>> Yeah. And so that's that that's why when we looked at it when when Marshia and I talked, >> I was going through how to present it. How do I present this? How do how do I show, you know, what it is? And and at first, we just had to get to the number. All right. Well, how much of the number? And you're right, the the best data we have is the current and we get that from
the from the the county uh Dino. Hey, give give me the list of values that are currently homesteaded and those that are not. And so he he gave us that list and said, "All right." you know, um and then um and then we we adjusted the the the revenue side of the budget. We adjusted
the expenses and we said, "Man, we're we're $5 million short." Well, where do you get that? Well, we only have 2 million in in salaries and labor, you know, for for everyone who's nonpublic safety.
So, you know, Yeah. And so and so that and then that's what I told Marshall. said this isn't an exercise of cutting one or two positions. It's not it's not obtainable. You you have to raise the millage. And so that that would be what what the outcome would be.
>> But that's what the legislature falls asleep. Thank goodness. But again, you still you got to get three fifths of the legislature to approve it. You still need 60% of the electorate, >> right? I think more of this will come out and the later they roll it out, I think they're hoping that there's a
lesser time to educate the public. Um, but I think there's enough affected folks >> um that we'll kind of hopefully if not then it's a whole new world here in Florida. It's just the way the game the cookie crumbles and we'll all have to to to deal with it.
>> Yeah. >> Um, yeah. So, thank you, Matt. >> Well, thank you for your presentation. Excellent presentation as always. Thank you very much. There you go. >> Thank you. >> Yeah, we should sell maybe the sighted chief. >> You could be with the uniform. >> Sure. Give me a hat.
>> Moving on to item E. Consideration to approve and authorize the town manager to purchase two 2026 Ford Explorers in an amount not to exceed $86,319.50 for the fire rescue department. >> Yeah. So that's just for uh the the
assistant two assistant chiefs traditionally had been on car allowance that is not uh holding up. So we're just do the administrative vehicles and get them in place. Move the dollars around. Everything's good. But just a change of uh operations.
>> Any discussion? >> Well, we better do it now. >> Yeah, let's do it. >> That's it. >> We'll have something to sell. Well, you know, I've had that conversation in just to be honest, like, you know, start accumulating assets. So,
if we got to sell them all, if we sell the pieces, make sure that water plants really good. Then we can start selling capacity because these other towns that have two, three, $400 million of debt to build a new water plant, might come knocking on our door to supply him water. You know, who knows? >> Interesting. Yeah. Interesting. So, if
we're in favor, could we have a motion? >> Yes. >> Or do you need a motion? I move uh that we're talking about the >> approve. I move to authorize the purchase of the two vehicles for the fire rescue department. >> I second it. >> All in favor say I. >> I.
>> I. Motion carries. Moving on to town commission comments. Commissioner Shipnatski. >> My comment. It is great to have someone like Dave that can speak the language of of an accountant and still speak layman's language because most people I deal with cannot follow the numbers Dave
and you make it very very easy. >> No, you guys are great and you guys Susie is excellent. Can I can I can I tell you she keeps up. The only reason why I can do this because I know the numbers are accurate and correct and they're in the right bucket and so you know cleaning data is not is not a
problem when you're you're when you're that good. So, I really couldn't have done it without Susie. So, thank you. Thank you. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> I'm up. Well, I I have um in preparing today, you know, looking at the proclamations, it just highlights the
commitment that uh Highland Beach has uh to exceptional work um which which uh we give every single day and I applaud all of our departments. um we provide not only beauty and
security but a community porn nut and I hope it continues despite any budgetary uh uh problems. Um secondly, I'd like to make an announcement that I'll be joining the board of directors of the Palm Beach League of Cities
>> and the oath will be administered at their installation banquet on May 27th. >> Wonderful. And I hope that other persons of the of on that commission, the mayor, etc. that will be able to attend. Um I look forward to this because the and and
particularly now because we have to uh promote and advance the collective interests of all the municipalities. Palm Beach County contains 39 cities and towns. >> So I look forward to the work that I can do on that board as well. >> Yeah.
>> Excellent. That's wonderful. Thank you for doing that. >> I know we did a proclamation, but I just want to remind everybody on May 25th, it's Memorial Day. We honor all those people didn't come back and return. And uh don't forget, turn your lights off.
Turtle time. So, keep them low. Thank you, >> Vice Mayor. >> I I just like to remind um town manager that the vehicles with electric bikes and all those kind they're more and more in the news. is becoming more of an issue and I
think we ought to really prioritize getting that rolling >> and we will at June 2nd meeting Lens cooking up some good stuff here so uh he got some preliminary work done. He's going to tie that all up and then bring forward a couple strong options. Um
it'll be good. >> Excellent. Uh nothing from me. Moving on to town attorney. >> Uh no ma'am. Thank you. >> Okay. Town manager. Um, again, uh, we're changing payroll systems. Uh, Madison and Dedra are changing that. Uh, saves us a few bucks.
Uh, a little more robust, effective means to, uh, manage our payroll systems. Um, uh, the internal work group, we're going to start, uh, engaging with local 5504 to start the negotiations. We had to do a little bit of cleanup work on our end. What, we
wanted to a starting point and then we'll move forward with that. Over the summer, I will be reaching out, setting up one-on-one meetings to start having uh a little more direct conversations on that topic. Um, and uh we'll bring David
and Susie in too to start value uh some of those things. But that that process will start. We're looking for a target to be done by October. So over the summer, we will uh be starting this process uh moving forward. I'm sure they're all looking forward to working
with me on that. Um, no. Okay. I'm really fun during negotiations. Um, uh, June 2nd, I'll join you guys by Zoom. Uh, so, uh, we'll have a good meeting, but I'll just be on the screen off to the side. But, uh, all else,
everything's good. >> Great. Moving on to announcements. Board vacancies. We have one vacancy for a three-year term for the code enforcement board. Uh, we still have one more vacancy for a three-year term ending April 2027 for the Financial Advisory
Board. And we have one vacancy for an unexpired term ending April 2027 for the Natural Resources Preservation Advisory Board. Um, upcoming meetings and events, May 12th at 1:00, uh, uh, we actually it's canceled, the special magistrate
hearing. Um May 14th at 9:30 in the morning we have the planning board regular meeting. May 25th the town hall is closed in observance of Memorial Day. And uh June 6th um is our next
>> what's the next commission meeting? It's not the sixth. >> June second is the sixth. >> Got a little mix up here. >> The captain of meetings. Actually I have it for the 16th not >> that's what I have 16
>> okay >> I have second 16th >> and what is the 16th >> two meetings in June >> meetings >> because the 16th is >> budget >> budget >> budget do the official first kick out for budget start talking maximum military >> okay so the 16th
>> second you just announced the sixth that's why I was like okay >> that's a Saturday no worries okay so the next meeting is >> June. No, do we have June 2nd? June 16th. >> 16.
>> So I won't be here for the second. So hopefully you will. Vice Mayor, you can run the meeting. >> I won't. >> Yeah, I will not be here for the 2nd of June. >> I'll be here soon. >> Got it. >> 27.
>> Okay. >> Okay. So, we've got it. >> June 2nd. I am not available June 2nd. I will not I'm totally out and Marshall's only part is partially in with being on Zoom. >> I'm partially on remote.
>> Awesome. So, you're in but on remote. >> Okay. >> Is there a reason we shouldn't be being out? You should change the week >> if you want. I mean if if everybody >> you guys would have to take because it's the first meeting of the month. You would have to take the action to change
that date >> and we definitely need the June 2nd meeting. >> June 16th we definitely >> but do we need the June 2nd? >> No, June 2nd we were give Len a little more time to deal with the electric bikes and stuff. He's got some drafts and
>> that's the only item we can read through the >> There's probably something else but nothing I I look at public safety. We don't have any. Oh, your axon thing. They'll wait for you. They'll wait for you to test. >> So, so can we move? Can we move?
>> Just cancel the second up on the 16th. >> Okay. >> If you want to do a If you want to cancel, we'll do by motion. No second. >> It anyway. >> We just need a motion to cancel >> to cancel this. >> Yes. I make a motion to cancel uh the town commission meeting on June 2nd,
2026. A second it. We still have the >> the 16th >> is already scheduled. Yeah. >> All in favor say I. >> I. Motion carries. The June 2nd meeting is cancelled. >> Okay. Excellent. Well, thank you everybody.
Very productive meeting and the meeting is adjourned. Thank you very much. >> Thank you.