Heat. Heat. Heat. Hey, Heat. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. N. Hey, hey, hey. Hey, hey, hey. Hey
yeah. Yeah. Down. Heat. Heat. N. Hey, you Let me give you baby. Baby, you Baby,
baby, baby. like baby. Baby. Ah. Oh. Hey. Hey. Oh yeah. Yeah. Heat. Heat.
Heat. Heat. down. Hey Ooh. Heat. Hey, hey, hey. Falling back. behind. Yes,
it get up. Please stand by. We are going on air in 5 4 3 2 1 to the finance and economic resiliency committee meeting which is uh serving as
the budget workshop. We don't usually do the pledge of allegiance in committee meetings but we have the whole body here. We got quite a nice crowd in the uh in the gallery. So Jason and Tama, you're working hard on this budget. Why don't you take it away?
I aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Thank you to all my colleagues for for
being here. Before I turn it over to our chair, Commissioner Magazine, just wanted to um thank Eric, Jason, Tamika, for this process, one of the things that we do, uh there's a series of budget meetings that we have, very transparent, open to the public. Um documents are
available to anybody who has the interest in in reviewing them and and digesting them. But we also do this and the public can go through the items. Um, and as we finalized the budget, um, we we are being very intentional with our spending. As we showed, which we showed
our community in Miami Beach last year, returning surplus funds, lowering our Miami Beach millage rate, and as we know, there could be some uh some cuts coming from the state and the county, certainly with the property tax voter referendum uh looming. Um, so this and
I'm very proud of our commission because we are very focused on the core services that we as uh government need to provide and strengthening public safety uh maintaining a clean city, beautiful public spaces and investing where where residents see real value and we're doing
that well. We're doing that uh for the most part. I hear a lot of positive feedback from our residents and businesses and we need to continue that uh potentially with less. So, we're um as we go through this process, we're looking to leverage the city's assets, um infrastructure, real estate
partnerships, uh private partnerships, revenue opportunities. Um and we're one of the things that I love and through your all of us, but through your stewardship, uh Commissioner Magazine is looking at our government as a business. Government often gets criticized for not
being lean as a business would be. and our government is is is doing that. We are looking ourselves as how we can maximize even though we don't have shareholders, we do have residents that we need to account for. So, I'm I'm
proud that we're doing that and um um we'll continue to to do that. Obviously, if anybody has any questions, we can reach out to us. But I think this these budgets workshop workshops in the public and all of us all seven of us coming to a committee meeting um shows
the level of importance that this takes. Want to commend you commissioner magazine uh for leading this is not an easy committee. None of the committees are easy to lead but um certainly um as we're trying to uh to do more with less it becomes a challenge but we're we're steering the ship in the right
direction. So thank you Commissioner Magazine and take it away. >> Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. It's an honor to serve as the chair of this committee. It's an honor to serve uh as an elected representative of Miami Beach. Truly think it's the best city in the entire world. I appreciate our city staff. I know this is a long and robust
process. Uh but it's also one of our most important processes that we have uh collectively as a city and especially as an elected body here. I don't know if there's a greater responsibility than how to spend taxpayer dollars. Uh I spoke at a uh panel representing our
city in New York City this past week and I said anytime we think about how to spend taxpayer money, we must always ask why can we be more efficient with this dollar than the taxpayer could if they kept that any type of service we
provide. Why can the city do it better than if we actually didn't tax our residents? I think that should be kind of our threshold across the board. anytime we're allocating dollars to programs, to events, to uh services. Why can the government do that better than if we let the residents actually keep
that themselves? Uh I am very proud of this commission. This isn't just me. That this isn't even just our finance committee. Collectively, all seven of us have uh have probably focused more on uh fiscal matters over the past several years than any commission, certainly
since I've lived in Miami Beach. And the results speak for themselves. We've rolled back the millage rate for the first time in over 10 years. We've returned a surplus to our taxpayers for the first time in over 20 years. However, uh that can't be a one-time thing, right? And we've talked a lot
about uh the the way that our taxpayer I'm sorry, the way that our property values were growing was not going to be at a sustainable rate. We were very blessed to see uh property tax growth in the double digits in the high single digits
and we just know it's it's part of any type of economy growth rates aren't going to maintain uh that level. Uh we are fortunate uh I'll let our CFO give the exact numbers where um we are managing a declining growth as opposed
to managing property values that are actually down. Um, and as the mayor pointed to, uh, this budget cycle and perhaps budget cycles going forward in the future is going to be with, uh, some degree of uncertainty about property tax reform in Tallahassee and how that will
have a further impact on our local budget here. I'm glad that we have uh not only foreseen that coming, but even if that hadn't been coming down uh the pike in years past, we have decided to proactively be focused on that. And uh
we'll continue to do so regardless of how that ballot measure actually turns out at the ballot box or not. I'll turn it over to our CFO. Um thank you for the work that you and your team have done. Uh we're going to have some robust discussions here today. And I don't want to say unpleasant, but uh there's going
to be matters that we can't just sweep under the rug. Um I don't mean to steal the thunder here, but uh essentially to maintain a flat budget, our property values came in below that. and we essentially uh you'll word it much
better than I um but where our initial property assessments uh came out at uh we're facing a deficit that we essentially have to manage to and if we essentially manage also to a legislative issue that we all passed um we'll have
to uh deal with an even further uh deficit right now. One of my gripes that I've had with the way our budget process has worked is a lot of the focus has always been through the budget process on what is just called enhancements. And
to the lay person, this took despite all my time sitting in these meetings until I actually was in this position, I didn't appreciate what that meant. Let's say round number-wise, we have a billion dollar budget. every meeting or any
opportunity uh that there is um residents want something. We have initiatives as an elected body and we could pass something that is above and beyond what already exists in our budget. That could be a new park. That could be a new program that we put in
place or even new employees or a headcount. That is called an enhancement to our budget. that is less than generally 1% or.5% of our entire budget. Last year, I think that number came in around $30 million in a uh billion
dollar budget and we had to essentially manage down to spend a couple million dollars of that. However, we're sitting there spending all of our time exhaustively on that 1% of new funding, and we never really take a look back to
see, well, how about in that billion dollar budget? Is that the right size? Is every dollar that is being spent in that being spent effectively, efficiently? Are there areas where we could actually save? Because I'd like to
think all of those programs we put forward were very resident driven. new parks. We had to go out to Sunset Isles, say, "I'm sorry, we can't fund your park." We had to go out and say, "I'm sorry, we can't fund this playground." However, we never took a look back into, you know, what are there cost savings in
that billion dollar budget that we are not looking at? And that's why uh we had a legislative item that gives a lot more granularity this year into our budget, almost a line item by line item, so you could see where every dollar is being spent. And uh for this upcoming meeting
uh I'm actually introducing legislation to have the administration work on an initiative uh to have a publicly accessible portal that will show where every single dollar of taxpayer money is being spent down to printing paper down to cameras that are being purchased down
to um uh money that we spent down to employee travel. This is taxpayer money that we're using and we should be accountable to the taxpayers for every single dollar. So with that, Jason, thank you for the work you and your team have done. I'll let you kick things off.
>> Uh thank you, chair. Uh so today is the we uh started off this budget process uh with the commission back in May at our our retreat. So today is our first public workshop. Uh the focus of today is our capital budget. So we will start
off with a very short uh update on the operating uh since we got the June 1st uh valuations on there. So just a couple of slides just kind of let you know where we landed with property values from June 1st and then the meat of this discussion will really uh be on the
capital budget. So we can bring up the first presentation. Thank you. So as I said we're going to start off uh with property values. So property values came in at a overall 3.5% increase in the city's taxable values. that is our
preliminary values provided by the tax appraiser. Um on June 1st we will get the final and certified role which which has a lot more detail in it uh on July 1st. So there's just a couple examples there. Uh Nory Shores is one of the C's
uh special taxing districts. It is doing very well up in Norway Shores. Uh but you have city Miami day county doing a little bit better than us. Uh, and then Sunny Isles we put on there just to kind of show another large condo heavy beachfront community. So, we're doing a little bit better than that. But let's
dive a little bit into the three and a half%. So, first just showing the trend and I think as our chair had mentioned as we've predicted um and that that has kind of played out the trend of decreasing increases. So, we're not in a decreasing property value situation. We're just in a decreasing one. So, we
were at 6.9% last year and we're down to 3 and a half%. So again, always being prepared for the future, making sure we make good, reasonable decisions going forward. And some of the detail is our existing values. So existing properties went up by 2.6%, again, kind of that
same decreasing trend. And then the more sporadic is the new construction. So we added about $500 million worth of new construction. Kind of above the overall trend line going back, you know, 20ome years, less than last year, but still it helped bring us up from the 2.6 six to
the 3 and a half%. >> Jason, can I ask your team for the next meeting to have uh an analysis that.5 um uh billion dollars, $500 million of new construction as a percentage of our overall assessible values, how that
compares to both the city of Miami and Miami date county uh that you mentioned there. >> So the new construction into what percent the increase is in our overall taxable value as related to the county and city of Miami? Not the increase the the absolute value. So the >> what their new construction values are.
>> Yes. >> Uh yes. >> Actually I think I might have it here but I'll let Tamika get started on this. >> All right. So this slide basically takes us back to our retreat presentation back in May. And in May we went through some
of the details of what happened with our revenues for the 27 budget and our expenditures. It showed that we had an initial gap of $21.4 $4 million and then we recommended the excess funds for 27 that we have projected right now for resort tax be transferred here. So at
the retreat we said we estimates a preliminary gap of 17.7 million and that's before we got the property values on June 1st. So this slide shows what we would typically share with you right after the June 1st values. We did pick up $10.2
$2.2 million in property tax revenues, assuming we were going to accept those and keep the millage rate flat. Uh if we go with uh the millage rate staying flat, we would have a gap of $7.9 million. And this is an estimate. So we
will come back with real numbers once we have the July 1 values. We've been updating both our revenue projections and our expenditure projections based on our Q2 projections which were done after May. And so the important takeaway on this slide is I know we're going to we
will be delivering as uh requested by the commission a rolled back rate budget uh which to me will get a little bit on the next slide but this is the floor. So when we um go through our budget exercise in July at the very minimum we will be needing to you know be about a
$7.9 million reduction in expenditures again refined. And before Tam gets on to answer your question I have that data here. So we were around $500 million. The city of Miami was about 1.86 billion and the countywide was about 5.1 billion total
taxable uh u new construction. >> Say that again. >> Uh Miami day county had about 5.1 billion and that was the countywide uh increase for new construction and city Miami had 1.86 billion in new construction compared to our about 530
million. Maybe if there's somebody on your team out there listening that could just run that as a percentage of the respective uh accessessible values, >> right? So on a percentage basis. >> Yep. We'll get that. >> I appreciate it. Thank you. >> Yeah. So this slide just takes us back
to the roll back rate. So back in December, the commission did ask us to present a rolled back budget. So we don't have the correct calculation for the roll back budget. We will have that once we have the July 1 values. So we left it as in the revenues stay flat. the property tax revenue stay flat,
which would bring us back to 17.7. We have a little footnote saying that we think based on the new construction values would pick up about $2.4 million in revenues. And so if we applied that, we'd be at a $15.3 million gap. Again,
this is preliminary preliminary. We'll have the real numbers when we get the July 1 values. >> Okay. So then just show you where we are with the the millage rates right now. So the top operating or total general fund is really just showing the existing millages. We won't have the rolled back
what the exact roll back millage is until the we give we're given that by the county and we'll have that for in July. Uh the really takeaway here is just noting uh the voted debt service which is the general obligation debt. There's a slight decrease because we kind of have flattish um uh tax uh debt
service but as the values went up by 3.5% it shows a slight decrease in there. In normal years, per the city's uh comprehensive financial policies and one of the ones endorsed by the budget advisory committee, in any year in which the voted debt service would decrease to
show flat millage, we would show as part of the preliminary budget that being added to the capital renewal and replacement budget to increase dollars being set aside for capital replacement. But as we're presenting a preliminary budget based on the roll back rate, we did not reflect that. So as of So we
move forward on the roll back rate, we will add the waiver of that uh policy going forward. So this one's a um just an update. So on the constitutional amendment and I think the chair and the mayor had touched on this. Uh so on June
2nd, the legislature passed uh a ballot question that we'll all be voting for voting on in uh November. So this is kind of an update. We had an early update kind of back of the cocktail napkin that we distributed. This is a more refined one. So the OM department
looked at the whole 54,000 taxable properties uh and kind of did an in-depth about as properties would um kind of value out as they went to 150 and 250. And so our estimate is now this constitutional amendment if it gets passed in November would not affect the
budget that we're really talking about now, which is the FY27. It would affect FY28 and FY29. So, uh, our projection is it would cost the city's, uh, city's tax, um, property tax about $5.5 million in FY28, which is the
the 27 values, and another 4.3 million in 28, which would be FY29. So, we we're looking at a total impact of around $10 million if this uh goes into effect from our homestead property uh tax perspective. So that's something to keep
in mind going forward is that uh even through this budget which we're obviously going to be looking at reductions we would have ones into the future. Uh and the second bullet wanted to point out which is one that's important because I haven't seen it talked a lot about out there is what the potential impact is of moving all the
nonhomesteaded from 10 to 5% caps because we know we're homesteaded we're all at 3% and it kind of limits it's it limits the growth of government. Now moving from 10 to five in a year in which we're not homesteaded properties are going over 5%. And we've seen that
and you looked at those past cycles that it happens every couple years where we get over double digits. The city could stand to lose up to $15 million a year in potential growth. This would not be an impact in lowering our taxes. It's really limiting our growth. So it would really just show it would hedge us in a
little bit. So we wanted to make sure that just to highlight that um for going forward. And Jason, can we talk in plain English what that essentially means? Let's put uh other fees and revenues aside, right? But the because the bulk of our uh budget comes from
>> property taxes, right? So even accounting for nonhomesteaded properties. >> Essentially, the maximum our budget could ever grow on an annual basis is 5%. because it's legally mandated that we balance our budget and
if homesteaded properties are exempt and non-h homesteaded uh the maximum increase is 5% per year besides maybe if properties trade hands and things like that that's around the edges
catching you off guard but back of the envelope we've pretty much seen budgets in our city grow more than 5% per year. Correct. >> The I think we had done a projection showing that. Yeah. >> Well, last year we grew by 6%. That
included enhancements that were added um and some reductions and this year as our CSL we're at 5.4%. So we're around about five um the maximum wouldn't technically be five because then the homesteaded properties are capped at 3%. So you'd have to do an average, >> right? But but as you had mentioned, you
know, you obviously have the effect of new construction, uh, which is limited, let's be honest, in the city. But, uh, the effects of new construction and then, as you said, which is probably one of the major ways that numbers would drive is when you have, um, you know, the transitionary situation of of our
population as you have sales. So, you have a sale and it's $200,000 property and it's really a million. So, it loses that tax basis. So, so you'll have that step up there. So, but I would agree with you that that again, as I was saying, this would if this constitutional amendment passes, this would hedge in and limit the growth of
the city's general fund. >> And we have various employment contracts within our city that essentially show 8% year-over-year growth, right? Uh the current uh I think you're speaking probably about the current CBA with our
police and fire unions, which have five or 4% staff with a 3% cost of living. Obviously, those get renegotiated and I think there's one more year left on both of those contracts. Um, so obviously cost of living at the very least would be something that would be very closely looked at. Yes. >> But not only cost of living, right? Like
if we just continue with the status quo, we have major employee contracts that are growing at 8% per year. And if this passes, the maximum we can ever grow our budget, even if property values max out
is 5%. That is a very serious delta there. Um because that money has to come from somewhere, right? So that will be further reductions to other services or amenities that we are offering our
residents. Um point being back to the point I made at our last meeting, we cannot address this without having examining some of our salaries, employee headcount and things like that. Um, and I know we're going to get into the
capital budget, but I'd really like if we have time to come back and start having preliminary conversations. I know you're not fully prepared for, so I'm not asking for it to be etched in stone, but just for all of us to prepare for the conversations and decisions that are
going to need to be made that can't be made just at one operating budget meeting. We can't walk away from here saying, you know what, we actually have to manage to a $17.9 million deficit. We'll talk about that later. We have to start getting on the same page about how
we're going to essentially move in that direction. So, after the capital portion of this, I know you don't even have a presentation prepared. We we don't need to uh rely on you. I'm catching you off guard, but we need to start as legislators start having those conversations about where we are
effectively going to manage an $18 million deficit. >> Okay. So, the preliminary resort tax, just a very quick update on the the resort tax. So, as I think as many know, uh over the past couple of years, we've kind of been in a plateau kind of situation.
Year-over-year hasn't really been much growth, maybe a slight decrease, slight increase. Uh but we've started to see that change this fiscal year. Uh where a number of the months have been record years, I'm sorry, record months. So, we are projecting that trend to uh continue
a bit. And taking that into account, um, we are projecting to have a surplus of $3.7 million in the resort tax, of which, you know, the recommendation is to move all of that over to the general fund, which is permitted. And that is already taken into account with the earlier projections we were giving you
with the $17.7 million. So, okay. So, next we're going to get into the meat of today's matter, which is on our capital budget. >> Yeah. I just wanted to go back for Miami. The percentage of the new construction of total value is 1.7. Uh
for Miami Beach it's8% and the first Miami and the last one is Miami Day County it's.9%. So we're close to Miami and >> close to Miami my day county. >> This is what percentage new construction
growth is of overall accessessible valuations. So when we talk about how we grow and if there's overdevelopment and things like that, we are growing through new construction significantly less than
the city of Miami and Miami date county, right? And that goes a long way into revenues that we're raising or lack thereof that are funding some of the amenities that we would love to offer our residents.
>> Can I'm sorry. Can you say the numbers again please? >> So, so Miami Beach is8%. Miami date county is.9% and city of Miami is 1.7%. Okay. >> So that Okay. So that is the percentage
of what new construction is of their of their revenues taxable. >> Taxable value >> of their total taxable values. >> Okay. All right. And I would just put it put it into that context. You know it's obviously very different jurisdictions. You know Miami Beach is only seven
square miles of land. Miami Day County is 1,900 square miles of land. without historic districts. You know, city of Miami, I think city of Miami is like 30 something square miles of land. So, we have much unlike some of these other
jurisdictions, we have much more limited area of growth, which is why I think it's always so important whenever we talk about areas where we want to preserve, we always need to talk about areas where we want to encourage the growth because they rely on each other. preservation cannot exist without
identifying the right areas for for for the growth. But I think but that's important context with those numbers. Um because obviously we need that new construction value, but we're also very unique in that we have historic districts that we have to protect unlike
many of these other areas of the county. >> So we'll get into the preliminary capital budget. >> All right. So the capital budget is uh you know official policy document. It's actually uh two large books uh with over 800 projects. Uh it is a five-year plan.
So it starts in FY27 moving on to FY31. The numbers that we're going to talk about today are our recommendations just for FY27's budget. So our process started in December. So in December all the departments worked with their teams to submit their capital
budget and their op operating budget requests. We've had a series of meetings between OM and the departments, between the city manager and the departments, and then we did do a brief update at the May retreat, and then today we're going into the details of the overall capital
budget. So that's June and July. We'll have a second meeting in July on the 17th. And if there are any updates on the capital budget between this meeting and then we'll present those. And then in August, what we do is prepare the actual proposed budget. you will see every line item detail of the capital
budget in those two uh large books. And then in September, we're going to have two public hearings to adopt both the operating and the capital budgets. So the table that you'll see next is a summary of all the funds and all the total dollars requested, what we're
recommending, and what's left unfunded. So a total of $256 million of uh funding was requested amongst all the funds here. uh we recommended just under half of those projects to be funded and the remainder is a little over half. Uh the
biggest uh group that we funded was utilities. That's where the biggest needs are. We did as much as we could with the water and sewer and storm water. We using the dollars that we do have. There are a lot of projects that are pending to be funded based on future discussion on the water and sewer rate
increases. So we just wanted to give some insight onto how we made recommendations. Uh what we did when we prioritized the projects that you'll see now. Uh what we try to do is focus on the renewal and replacement of our existing capital assets using our CRR. And then we also
use our PIO dollars to fund existing projects as well, projects that have gaps. Uh we try to allocate funds to projects that have uh are eligible for grants. We want to put aside the match dollars in the event that we do receive the grants. Uh we do have some older bond dollars, not just in the in the you
know parks and uh police uh funds, but we also have um parking bonds. So what we try to do is scrape all those dollars. Those usually come about when projects get closed and there's some leftover dollars or interest income. And so we try to use all those dollars before we use our city's uh CR or PGO
dollars. And then we have a lot of special revenues and enterprise funds. And so we try to allocate as many of those dollars to those projects as possible. >> Let me just speak about a couple of the uh capital funding strategies. So the first one is the ongoing commission's uh
uh policy about um the golf courses. So, as the golf courses have finally moved into the black over the past couple of years, any surpluses that the golf courses have generated have been transferred back into their capital program to fund uh their capital projects, including the very major uh
Miami Beach golf course renovation as we've been able to fund that in pieces through the years. And we project that with this uh FY27 allocation and probably what we're projecting extra surplus in the 26, we should be able to get that project finally across the finish line. And then the second one is
a very important one. Uh this is a one that's we've followed for the past 2 years and is now part of the city's uh comprehensive financial policies which was kind of the examination we we took at FK where we uh made a determination to try to move away from volatile revenue sources. So, which is interest
income uh to take that away from the operating side and move that to the capital. So, as we've increased it, we're now at 35% for the 2027 general fund to move that interest income. So, that's an extra $3.4 million. We've taken away from operating expenses and moved it over to our capital. This year,
we we put those towards uh the PGO. And we will go through some of the detail uh on that. But first, >> so this is a list we've been tracking throughout the year. any item that commission approved by resolution on this list to be considered for funding
in the FY27 budget process. So between this slide and the next next slide that has the items that are still in committee, it's over $30 million of requests that we were asked to try to prioritize this year and we funded about 22 million of these projects here. So
the items that have a check mark, you will see them as we go through the forcoming slides. If it has a check mark, we are recommending funding those projects. The only one we aren't recommending fully funding is the second item. Uh we funded all we could on the storm water side. There were some
shortfalls on the water and sewer funding side. >> If if I may on this item, Mr. Chair, on on that slide, I need >> um Thank you. Um, as it relates to we're
we're going to be investing dollars uh capital dollars into the Flamingo Park uh football stadium returfing. It is my understanding though that we're going to be returfing the stadium. However, that's not going to address the flooding that that occurs uh in the park. I think
my understanding and I think with speaking with CIP that traditionally when you do some of that work there would be some drainage issues perhaps dealt with on the field but if there are drainage issues or flooding issues ancillary on the side that would be a separate uh issue. I just want to make sure before we move forward in investing
1.4 million in capital dollars into into uh returfing this area if there is a need to address underground infrastructure as it relates to flooding. Uh, and I have heard over the
years um of ongoing flooding situations when it rains on on on that football field that we just don't spend $1.4 million to later have to rip that out and do underground infrastructure. So, I'd want us to be mindful of that.
>> Yes. Um, commissioners um the mayor, this is a reurfing project only. It's like a carpet replacement. And how long it what is the uh the what is it called the useful life the >> of of that turfing >> the we have such high use our warranty
lasts about six or seven years >> okay and with and over the course of those six or seven years are we going to be going back and doing any infrastructure projects I just don't want us to to spend money on something that we're going to rip out in the future >> so if if I may um John please correct me
if I'm wrong but this is really just laying down turf. It's like rolling up carpet and then rolling down new carpet and tacking it into place. >> It's carpet replacement. >> If if we needed to do any underground work out there, we could roll this back
up, >> do whatever work, and then roll it back out. >> Yes, sir. >> Thanks, John. Thanks, uh, city manager. So the Flamingo Park track is a safety hazard as it stands right now because there's actual divots in the track for folks that use it whether they play
soccer or football. It's really a risk that they could injure themselves by spraining an ankle. So unfortunately to your point, Commissioner Fernandez, it's absolutely we need to do the underground drainage, but we can't wait on this too much longer
because someone's going to get injured on that field and it's really a safety risk. So, you know, I don't know how much longer it will take us, if we'll have to wait another 10 years to to recarpet if we do the the underground uh drainage work, too. But it's right now as it is,
it's a safety risk. And there are hundreds and thousands of people that play on that field, whether it's soccer or um football. Um we have kids that play there every single day and and it's at this point it's a safety risk. So, it I would like to urge my colleagues to
get that funded. >> I have a question, Jeff. That's okay. >> Guys, it's stop. I'm not approving every time somebody needs to speak to speak. >> Listen, it's been two and a half years of training. It's gotten beaten into us. All right. Gloves are off. No, I'm
kidding. Um, >> okay, that's dumb. So, here's a dumb question, and I know we don't have money for this, but how big of a project is the infrastructure underlying because when we're talking about moving the fire station, which eventually I'll get over,
but it's not today. Um, when we were talking about moving the fire station, one of the issues was that that that corner, I forget, uh, the souththeast corner flooded all the time and it was a known thing. Like, is it something that can be addressed by installing a
portable pump? Is it something and that would address most of the underlying issues? Is it something where we need to rip up the entirety of the field? How big of an infrastructure undertaking is this? Is it possible that we prioritize this as well? Knowing full well that we're talking about not spending money,
but if we have hundreds of thousands of people using this facility every year, running and throwing and kicking balls, it seems like it is becoming a bigger liability than we would like it to be. So, I'll take a first stab at that and I
welcome John to to weigh in above and beyond what I'm going to offer. But, um, I do know that typically when we're designing park facilities, we'll design some green space areas to accept the
runoff from other areas of the park where it might be more critical to keep dry for the patrons. And so that northeast area or southeast area, sorry, southeast corner of the track um is
probably designed to be the water retention area during a heavy rainfall event. Um and I don't know of instances where that water sits for more than, you know, 6 or 8 hours before it's it's
dissipating into the soil. I mean, six or eight hours, it's a pretty long time if you were going to. >> I mean, to if it's during a rain event, I'm not worried about it if it's during a rain event, right? Like it's if it drains a little bit more slowly than the rest of the park, that's one thing. If it's the next day and the track is
usable, but for that area, that's an issue because people shouldn't necessarily be out doing laps in a major thunderstorm. It's not safe anyhow. So I I think for purposes of the conversation, we need to get a better understanding of is this how it was
intended to work. Is it not working the way it was intended to or is this actually just a failure of the infrastructure because it's outlived its useful life? And that's not a trick question. That's not me like being, you know, getting my claws out. I'm just saying what's what's the scope of the
issue? Is it that that is actually working the way it's supposed to and people just don't realize it because they want to be able to use the track immediately which is one conversation versus it something broke and we haven't dealt with it yet and that's another conversation. There could be 12 points
along the continuum. So um to get a better understanding of that to better understand what makes sense um you know we've got FIFA here. I would have loved to have FIFA have had FIFA pay for the whole thing which I know they couldn't
do whatever but down the road this is the only place where our kids play soccer and football right so um we're trying to encourage more families moving to Miami Beach because we have great facilities and if one of the pre-minent facilities in our city is underwater
more than it's designed to be that's something we should probably look at going forward >> and those are legitimate questions and those are things that we can very easily look at by going back and looking at data that we have and and see if there's anything that's an anomaly or something
that needs to be checked out. We have we have a lot of capabilities that we could um implement there and and see if there's something that needs to be addressed long term and bring that back to you at the next workshop. >> Yeah, that would be great. And also maybe it's a short-term thing like we've got a plan for 5 years down the road.
We're going to do a whole revamp of it. And in the meantime, we have a portable pump that will address the issue, you know, right away and it won't take up a big footprint. And, you know, we can we can put the turf down now because we can roll it up when we do the big repairs in 5 years and then everybody walks away happy. So, it would be great to just get
more information. >> Eric, is there is there an actual project to address the drainage in Flamingo Park? So there is a geobond project that addresses the PAL building um that is uh in Flamingo Park and it's
very close by to this would probably end up having to look at what drainage is in the area as part of that project. Um, but right now there's no standalone drainage project for Flamingo Park.
>> There's for for the for the track and field, >> right? >> There should be one. >> It's obviously an issue. >> Well, so if I may, >> we're getting we're now getting the information. We'll figure out what the issue is. If it's just expectations don't match reality or if reality is no
longer suitable and we'll figure it out and let's just get more information so we can proceed accordingly. Please, >> can you make sure that before you purchase you can actually roll up turf and then put it back and that's that's the manufacturer is designed for that.
>> Yes, sir. I will confirm. >> Huh? >> I will confirm >> if I may. Um, one last comment because this was my item and I'm actually very passionate about this. I invited the Beach High football coach here to the meeting. So, I'd like to ask that he come up real quick to talk about um, Beach High football and the conversation
that he and I had. um six, nine months ago about this field. Um and it's so important to me because it's not it's not just the Tai football. Uh it's not just those kids, it's every child and
adult that comes to this field to play. And coach Wilkey, thanks for being here. If you would like to speak a little bit about the conditions on the field and what you had said to me that day that I did the walkthrough on the on the field and some of your concerns. >> Right. Absolutely. Uh, first of all, I want to thank everyone for giving me the opportunity to speak today. And I
apologize my attire. I literally just came from practice uh with the kids. So, my name is Woki Perez. I'm the Miami Beach head football coach. I'm also the founder of Miami Beach Flack Football that we've had over 40 participants, little boys and girls within only a year
span. Um, the and and I agree, uh, we live in in the greatest city of the world, and I love saying that. Uh, I've been a resident for over 20 years here in Miami Beach and for for we have beautiful beaches, night life, and
everything. But for me personally, the best part of this city is our community. And my son went to South Point Elementary, Nautilus. Now he's going to go to Miami Beach Senior High. And I see kids playing there all the time. I've been training in that field for over 20
years. We actually trained the Heisman, first round draft pick, everything on that field. So, there's a lot of great things that have happened in that field and our kids play there all the time. For me personally, and I reached out uh to and and she had and she went and
walked the field with me and we saw these holes right before a football game and I told her and I said, "Look, I don't have the heart to see these kids play here and get an injury. If anyone here has an injury of like a knee, your ankle, anything that you've had an
injury prior to sports, I just don't have the heart to see a kid have an injury because we didn't do our part. So that's why I wanted to speak up as a as a coach, as a citizen, and and my mission is to have Miami Beach one of the greatest we're in the greatest city.
Why not be in the greatest sports city where when you think of Miami Beach, you think of great football team, you know, great flag football team and other teams as well. And that's our community. That's what we do for our community. So, I just I want thank you so much for allowing me to come and speak on on our
community behalf, but I I agree. I think it's something that's extremely important. I understand in terms of the flooding, I experienced that ourselves. We canceled three games this year because of the flooding because we got there and the flooding was there. So I I I obviously I'm just a coach. I'm not an
expert in the budgeting part and I trust you guys that you you'll make the right decision. But kids getting hurt matter of course. >> That's all I'm going to say. It it does matter for me and that's as far as I go because that's as much as I know. But I
I just I I I think we should protect our kid, our community, and have those kids have fun and and I hope we can we can make this happen. >> Thank you, coach. Thank you for all you do for the community. Hopefully, what's been conveyed here, you see that we are committed to fully funding the
resurfacing of the Flamingo Park uh field. None of us are experts here. We initiated the conversation. Eric, if you and your team can come back and say the steps in which we do it, if it should be part of a broader uh resiliency upgrade
or if we can do this in kind of a stepped process as planned. Um, you know, and we can uh discuss that in time. >> Happy, Mr. Magazine. And and and by the way, like uh man, you guys have done an amazing job in the city. I'm really proud of living here and it's safe for
our kids and uh I thank you all for for doing that as well. So, thank you. >> And and I just want you coach and and I just want to explain, you know, my comment was never to question the need of this, but what we don't want is for you to have to continue cancing games because of flooding. You know,
>> obviously we all support the returfing of of the field, but then what good is a returfing if you're having to then cancel the games because we haven't provided the proper infrastructure to avoid the flooding. >> Absolutely. But I want to add to that though, but we also I I'm worried and I don't I'm not saying that anybody's
suggesting this, but I just don't want this to now get stalled because we're now going to roll out of larger infrastructure. We can do both. We can returf and then look at the infrastructure and do that because this the the turf only has a how long? Because of our high traffic, it only in
about 6 year, we're going to have to redo it anyway. And if we can indeed roll it up, we can redo it. I just want to make sure that that turf um gets redone ideally after football season this year. >> Yeah, I I'll just jump in that I I'm with you Monica. I think that's
absolutely what needs to happen. And in the interim, like I said again, Eric, not to step on your engineering toes, but portable pumps work wonders and maybe that is the interim step between now and figuring out how deep the infrastructure issue is and what the timing is and all that so that you don't
have to cancel games. It's not just you guys at at the high school. It's the travel soccer team. It's the juniors the, you know, the senior soccer team. It's it's all of it. So, um I think this is a great conversation to illuminate all of the issues. I think we're not to speak for anybody else, but I think
we're all committed to um reurfing ASAP pending the confirmation of what you believe to be accurate that we can actually just roll it up and put it back down as we need to. Um and I don't think anybody has the appetite to delay anything to ensure that nobody gets hurt. I mean, you're already playing
sports. You might twist an ankle or break a leg anyhow, which is part of the game, but we don't want to do it because it's something that we didn't do. >> Nothing. >> Appreciate it. Thank you so much. Thank you. >> And uh this is just the slide that shows the projects that are still in
committee. Um we did recommend the Muscle Beach in North Beach. That was a priority for commission last year. It was on our CIP and so we recommended funding that one. Tika, can you just I'm sorry. Can you just go back one slide? Sure. >> To the previous one,
>> please. >> Oh, sorry. Prior. >> Oh, Jason, sorry. Um, >> does a bus really cost $35,000? >> So, we checked with the parks. That's an initial estimate and they're going to rework those numbers, but that's the submission. So, thank you for asking
that because I was under the impression maybe I'm thinking of a different bust. I thought we owned the bust and this was just for the pedestal. >> I think it was donated. It was supposed to be donated to the city. >> Yes, the the bust was donated, but we walked with the donor and you know, this
is a to be respected and the and the pedestal that they're we're going to build is quite large. It's wrapped in keystone. and it should be viewed at a certain height. Um, with the engineering and whatnot, it's it's been estimated not to exceed 35,000. So, that's the price that we we're going with for now.
So, we don't have to come back for a budget amendment next year, but we're going to we'll competitively shop it out to get the best price we can. >> So, when we accept a donation, I don't know if this is a legal question or an ERIC question. when we accept a donation
that isn't for the full cost of an installation, right? The the bus was donated but not the pedestal and the installation. What are the can we put restrictions on how much we're going to spend for the
rest of it? because, you know, I don't know, hypothetically speaking, the bus cost $10,000, but we're spending three times the amount of the bus to um install it in a certain manner with a certain pedestal. Can we can we define those terms before we
>> So, those are all policy decisions. If you want to tell us that you're only willing to spend $10,000 to mount the bust, we'll carry out those orders. Well, I mean, I don't think any one of us know how much it costs to mount a bus. Where did this $35,000
come from? >> I mean, just I mean, I'm just just wondering, is there is there a way to I mean, I'm not I don't I'm not even completely sure. I think I remember General Jose San Martin. Is he the Peruvian
general? >> You're asking the wrong commissioner. >> Who was the sponsor of the idol? I believe it came from a committee from Hispanic Affairs Committee, right? >> Okay. Um I mean, is there a way to get that cost down? I mean, why why is it
$35,000? How >> where will it be displayed? >> Um like the nor the Normandy area by the fountain >> is it I mean I'm looking at on Google Maps of the Collins Park. >> This is the one going up to I know. I
know. Yeah. Just looking at the >> Oh, sorry. pedestal >> and it looks like it's wrapped in tile >> and it has, you know, simple concrete foundation. This doesn't look like $35,000. >> Understood. And it, you know, to to
answer the other questions, this is certainly something I think could be value engineered. This estimate was based on, you know, a walk through, a vision, a concept that was then given for an initial estimate. But if the budget is $10,000, we will come up with a pedestal that represents $10,000.
>> Yeah. I I think I I don't want to short change anybody's vision of um and if I remember correctly, this is an Argentinian because of the there's a connection to Argentina up there. I I could be making this up, but I vaguely recall this
conversation. Um the Normandy Fountain area is already congested, so I think having a larger bus, a pedestal is probably complicated because we don't want to encourage people to get close to the traffic. I I think we need to and I I totally, if I'm remembering the correct conversation, I totally
understand where the passion behind this is coming from and we're not trying to minimize any of that. I think we just need to be a little bit more mindful about the space that it's going into and the the look, we're all going to be making cuts. I know that other committees have talked about donating
art and fundraising to um support the entire cost of the of the project. So, um, you know, maybe that's something that can be explored as well, but I I think $35,000 for a a pedestal seems like a
lot. >> Okay. Um, are we getting direction to This is a split funded project. It'll be fun, it's funded, I believe, through North Beach quality of life resort taxes about 1/2 and one half is from a miscellaneous fund that's a little bit more
open-ended, but >> Okay. I'm sorry. The funding source for the funding source for the pedestal of this bust is North Beach Quality of Life funds. >> The resort tax. Yeah. So, it would be in resort tax eligible areas. So, an area that we're gonna have um
>> Okay. And quality. Okay. The quality of life funds from our resort tax fund. What are other ways in which we can use those quality of life funds? >> There capital projects that are in resort tax eligible areas. So, usually it's a beach area, 41st Street, you know, a hightraic area with um
restaurants, hotels, things along those lines. So, I think this was in the Normandy uh fountain area, which we found that we thought that was an important. I know this was a recommendation and a request from the Hispanic Affairs Committee and you know I'm very very much inclined
to make sure that there is proper and diverse representation in our public spaces of our of our community and the diversity of my community. But what what what I have difficulties agreeing to is using quality of life
funds in an area like North Beach that has so many requests and so many needs. I mean, just today we were talking about $200,000 of of of needs for crosswalks, something to prevent collisions and fatalities. And so I just I don't know.
I I have I have concerns, you know, in the order of prioritizing. I just want to make sure that we don't have other quality of life issues when we get so many complaints from North Beach that there might not be, you know, other needs in North Beach where we might need
to prioritize these dollars is I'm sure, you know, there can always be a benefactor and I'm sure we can always find a benefactor or a sponsor for for for the pedestal for the bust so we can fund some of our other critical needs
that the community has with their quality of life in North Beach. >> Well, if I may, if if the interest is to have a lower budget and not use those funds, the split funding, 16,336 was out of a miscellaneous um old CDT fund that so the budget could be maybe dropped to
the 16,336 there and the 18,000 and change in the North Beach quality of life can be transferred over to the one major project that we weren't able to fully fund, which was the security ballards on the beachwalks. You see the security ballers on the beachwalk is that is something that we hear about in North Beach and and throughout our
community. So, you know, we can value engineer, reduce the budget, and then free up North Beach quality of life fund dollars so that we can address issues that our residents are raising to us, then I think it's a win-win. >> So, we can reflect that when we get to those individual funds, I'll I'll make a
note of that to, you know, make sure we get consensus on that. But, that's that sounds like a good idea. Okay. So, we'll put it back up. Um, and >> yeah, and then we were getting started on >> your funding sources. >> Can you go back to the Muscle Beach slide?
>> Sure. >> Last time we discussed this, there was a discussion of maybe getting a sponsorship for the equipment. Where did Where is that, John?
>> That was that item is still at uh FK to be heard. I've spoken with the with the sponsor of that item. Uh this is another one that would be a North Beach quality of life element because as it's a beachfront uh kind of project and the idea would be they could still he wanted to still continue having that discussion
at FK with the parks department uh and if there was an availability to find sponsorship either two ways is either you could build a bigger project or you could supplement funds out and just not utilize all the $300,000 and that was the plan. I just don't see how
that is going to cost $300,000. I mean, it's just a container with with weights that, you know, we just purchased actually. Um I mean, is this more of like the art component of Muscle Beach or is it the actual equipment?
>> Yes. This this project's been around a while. that goes back to a 2025 um committee and we were we were proposing more than just the container to somewhat replicate what we have in South Beach up in North Beach. Yes, sir.
We could do just a container for less than 300,000. And to answer your question about where are we with the um sponsorship, there was just a meeting Monday with a potential sponsor. Um they are going to run through all of the options and come back to us to see what they could bring to the table. I don't
have a number to present to you today. So, we'd like to keep this in in the funding. But if we can get a sponsor in the meantime, great. >> And if you'd like to reduce the scope, if the commission would like to reduce the scope to a container, we could reduce the scope. >> But my question is, was the three was
the majority of the 300,000 the art component or was it the actual >> It was function. >> Huh. >> Functional equip functional fitness equipment. Yes. >> But on on So, the one in South Beach is this beautiful Italian design. Um, I remember when it was installed, I remember Commissioner Areola, I think,
really pushed hard to get it. So, are we talking about basically doing another one of those up North Beach, aside from the functional container, but also having something that is a beautiful installation? >> Yes. So, if we go back to the original proposal, which I'd have to see what we
value engineered out of that, it did in include something similar to that and then all these different functional components um including a container >> because I will say that given the amount of development going on in North Beach and the level of um activity going on
there and how crowded that community is becoming with people who are demanding more, um I don't think we should be less the north than South Beach. And so, does it have to be exactly the same thing as what was in South Beach? Not necessarily. But to just throw up a box
full of weights isn't quite the right thing either. And and I'm sure I mean, we have Hierrox here, we have Adidas here, we have um all kinds of different Watalooa here. I would imagine between the three or one of them, I mean, they we should be able to find a couple
hundred,000 from one of those companies to defay the costs, if not pay for the entire thing. >> We there was a promising meeting held this Monday, but again, I'm not going to come until the money the money's committed. I don't want to >> I totally understand that. So, um I I would be okay with holding this as a
placeholder and working towards collectively working towards finding a a better source of of revenue to cover this >> and there will be that item is at fk. So that that detailed discussion uh when parks is ready can come and whether it's again supplemental and add to it to have
a bigger project or a substitutive and just reduce the city's portion will be something that we can be discussed at first plan. >> Okay. Thank you. All right. So, we're going to get back and talk here about the funding sources. >> Right. So, this is just explaining uh the attachment that's in your package.
It actually has all the details of the five-year plan. Um items that were funded previously as well as items that were recommending for FY27 and for the next four years. So, as I said earlier, we're only talking about the items that we are recommending, but you have the list that you could go through between
now and the next meeting if there are any other projects that you think we should be uh considering for recommendation. And then we're going to start going through some of the individual uh major funds. So our first and one of our most important, the city's capital renewal and replacement fund. Uh it was
established as a standalone back in 2005 and it's used exclusively to provide dedicated funding to renew and replace meaning to fix the the items that we already have, keep our facilities and our structures uh you know in good usable function. Um so though the
preliminary values increased by 3.5% we did not increase the revenues coming in here because as we do the roll back we're using the same revenue structure uh as the prior year and then just um you know our you know we look through how we prioritize and
you're looking at life safety criticality of continuing operations projects that have budget caps you know is it something beyond its useful life. So, we're recommending $4.7 million uh worth of projects uh unfunded at around 10 million. So, we were able to identify
about onethird of the needed dollars. So, here's a list uh of a few of the projects that this slide and the next one has it. So, you're going to see it heavy on really nuts and bolts of fixing up stuff. You're going to have reertifications, uh the Unidad Northshore, North Beach Oceanfront
building, uh structural work, um window ceilings, elevators. Can I can I stop you and this isn't a question for you. Do we do anything to raise revenue for or that is revenue raising for events at that Unidad building? I mean,
we're talking like a beachfront building with ocean views. That is beautiful. >> So, I just asked about this um in terms of when their contract renewal is up because I know I've been approached by private organizations that want to do events there. Not even like fancy
events, just community meetings. >> Bar mitzvah. >> No, I'm talking about just community meetings. And if it's not a a community, if it's not a city requested event, there's a minimal rental fee of $3,000. And that will that's crazy. Um and we
don't have the our budget um our contract with them is out until Tamika, you got that information, right? >> No, I don't. >> No, you didn't get somebody. I can't remember who got that information for me, but it the the Oh, I think maybe Aussie facilities got it, but the the
the um the contract is locked in for like as all of our natural lives basically. And so I don't know why it's not being used for for rental events like that because it's such a great space for weddings and
parties and events. And I don't know, Rick, I guess this is a you question, if we have the an opportunity to amend a contract um in between when it is scheduled for renewal. I think it's got four automatic renewals.
>> Is it right now just used for a lunch hole? >> I'm not sure what the operation So I I'd say that over the years I know that Unadod does rent out the facility uh to to people who use it at night and in weekends. Uh and I believe they also
have you know staff that's available to make the facility um open. I believe that they use uh those dollars as part to fund, you know, operations, certain amounts of maintenance and the services that they offer at the at the at the
senior center there. Uh so I do know it's being rented. Okay. >> Uh and I do know that that that I believe they reinvest that money into the operations of the facility. So who from the city oversees the unidad facilities that
>> facilities? So >> that's you guys. >> Yeah. Basically that arrangement is overseen by our um parks facilities fleet and beaches team. Um
but the long-term contract is overseen by our asset management. We have a uh it's I believe it's a management agreement with them. Um but it is a city-owned facility obviously on city land.
>> So I obviously I'm not in front of Unidad every single evening but I go past there an awful lot and I I don't remember ever seeing Uniad activated at night in the last few years. Doesn't mean that it hasn't been.
It's just that it's not a regular occurrence. And so I don't know if there's an opportunity to have our business development or our parks and recck folks work with them to try to help elevate their game and and do event management stuff. I mean there's a whole industry all kinds of publications that
list spaces to be used and maybe they're I mean their primary function is a senior center. So why would they possibly know about event management or you know because that's not their that's not their primary function. So maybe we can help them almost as if they're a new young business. um to get them connected
with people who will start using that as a a venue site and and bring in revenue for them and you know elevate everybody >> and commissioner perhaps it might be a good idea uh since we're talking about just public assets that are managed
through third party agreements um you know perhaps you know simultaneously unidad maybe also the MDPL uh building uh these are all great uh public assets that we have that if we can help them,
you know, in in their management of leases and and activities, you know, that helps generate their funds to to subsidize operations and ongoing maintenance capital and renewal expenditures possibly. Uh but not just unidot, you know, let's look at some of
our other assets. >> All of them. Yeah, I think so. I think that'd be a useful exercise to take an inventory of what we have and how they're being used and can we help them generate more revenue. >> Yeah. I just don't want to single out un because we have other as ocean front assets for sure. >> Maybe we can get them in a room with the
folks from the Shane Center because the Shane Center as well. >> Yeah, that would be great. >> That's another great >> Yep. >> Mhm. >> Okay. >> I just need to be brought to commission as a thing or can we just >> do that? >> We can just do that. >> Okay.
>> I just want to comment quickly that I actually did attend a bach mitzvah at Uniad. Um, this was now 3 years ago maybe, but it was a great B mitzvah and so I'm sure Cindy was the one that sold that to him as a great venue. Thank you, Cindy and John. And um, and I absolutely support this and encourage, you know,
more folks to take advantage of the spot on the weekend. We need to add as well as MDPL and let's see what we can do. >> Yeah, we were joking. I cuz I I attended apartments for there and it's it is an underutilized space which I believe our convention center too as well but that's
a separate conversation that I'll be bringing uh we'll be talking about probably a commission meeting but um there's a good conversation so thank you >> thank you bring it back up all right so just you know again more about nuts and
bolts uh kind of renewal and replacement stuff and here's the the last one uh we got roof replacements at the panel building. We got uh the the Miami Beach Police Department Community Center roof replacement, the ratunda, we did do a major structural project there which determined there was roof replacement
needs there. HVAC work, pool, electrical improvements, things along those lines. >> And now we go into the pay as you go fund and that actually comes from a dedicated military as well. Um just like the CRR, we did not increase the revenues based on the increased property
values. we kept it flat at last year's number. So that uh 5.9 in addition to the funds that Jason mentioned, the transfer of $2.6 million to the golf courses as well as a $3.4 million that we uh have an interest income and then we did have an
additional $1 million. Sometimes throughout the year we have projects that get closed out and we also get uh interest income as well. So we had a total of $12.9 million to allocate. There was a request of $78 million. So we do have $65.9 million that's
unfunded. We try to fund the projects that were most critical. So for the slides moving forward, if you see a blue font on the project, it was on the list that we talked about previously and these were items that we were asked to consider funding in the 27 budget
process. So again, another thing I would mention is that some items here say partial funding. So, for example, the citywide bridges, there is a current appropriation of about $6 million already um we were able to partially fund if later on when we get the July numbers and we have additional number uh
funds, we could come back and add funding to the bridges. Uh we also have projects that say there we either apply for a grant or they're split funded. Split funded means that you'll see this project show up maybe once or twice, twice or thrice in the process because
we're using PIGO funds here and we may be using some other miscellaneous fund to fully fund the project. Uh, one of the biggest items we're funding here is a marine patrol dock improvements. Last year we were were able to allocate I think it's about $93,000 and now we're
actually allocating the rest of the project. Uh the second largest item that we're recommending is the final portion, well almost the final portion for the golf course renovation. Um we again have been using their own surplus. I believe it's about 500,000 that's left unfunded
and we're hoping by the end of FY26 that we'd be able to fully fund uh those that project. Tika, and maybe this isn't a question uh for you, but for the golf course, when is the operating contract up for
that? >> Yeah, I'm just sit up front, dude. Please. >> Yes, sir. I'm I'm pretty sure it's September or October of 27, so we have a little over a year left. A and the discussion we're having with the tennis center
made me think of this. Would it make sense to essentially as we're looking at different operators or management agreements say go out and
have a new operator fund it or at least see what that proposal is? It it certainly is something we could look at right now we're under a management agreement which would be different but we certainly as we're looking at having to revertise and you maybe reset I mean instead of spending
$2.5 million of taxpayer money and albeit I get that it's due to the operations of the golf course but I'm not going to make that granular distinction here. instead of spending $2.5 million of taxpayer money, put that as part of the bid for the new operating
agreement for the golf course. Okay, we're offering a 10-year contract. Let's see the proposals what a $2.5 million renovation is going to bring back. >> Does that make sense? So, if I could,
um, the $2.5 million is just the latest installment of what I believe is a $9 million >> renovation that we're anticipating. >> Um, certainly, we could structure it that way. However, it will require us to
enter into a long-term agreement so that they can recover their capital. >> And it's going to mean that we're going to have a lot less control over what happens. Right now, the city basically manages all of the budgeting and all of
the decisions that happen >> at the golf course. We have a third party operator that handles the day-to-day, but they can't do anything without saying mother may to the city. >> And there are, if I may, there are a number of major also capital projects
that are planned in nor for the Normandy golf course. I think there's a couple million dollars coming up in a year or so for soil remediation uh that I've been speaking with environment and sustainability. We'll have to move forward on as soon as we can which will be the next chunk of money probably for the 28th uh surplus we use and then
we'll be setting aside you know the surplus of the of the golf course money for eventually the Normandy course uh renovation which will be in five or six years. Correct. >> Yeah. I mean, can we do something to explore those conversations before we
commit $2.5 million now and further money in the future? I'm not saying I'm dead set locked into that, but I a public private partnership all options should be on the table and the private sector essentially bearing those costs and then getting it back through a
longer term management agreement is certainly standard operating procedure in my mind. So, I guess the good thing is that we're kind of just setting this money aside. >> It's not that we're putting it into a contract and locking it up. Um, and so
at some point in the future, if we wanted to change our mind, this doesn't overly tie our hands. >> Um, and obviously we're always open to conversations. Um, my fear would be that there would be
folks that would want too much in return in order to front. >> It's a public, right? >> What's that? >> It's a It's a public procure bid, >> right? It's not just a bilateral bid where somebody has this over the barrel.
It's they, you know, we put it out to an RFP. >> I'll make a comment on that as well. Um, of course I'd be open to hearing things. I've been approached by developers about projects there similar to what's going to happen at the Nikki Beach location.
The Miami Beach Golf Course in Normandy are special. Our residents love it. There's free parking. The food is affordable. And once you enter into a public private partnership, all of that changes and not necessarily
for the better. I feel what Eric just me our city manager just mentioned is we still have control. We lose that when we do uh PPP. >> Well, isn't that what we're doing now? We essentially have a somebody >> have a management agreement. So, they they don't own part of it. They're not
building up, but any RFP that would come, they would want to build up that way. >> Um not proposing building on the golf. at least the developer that came to me wanted to destroy what's there now build up and I was like no
>> no I I haven't been privy to any conversation like that you know I can imagine uh Russell probably wanting a nice tower on the eighth hole but um you know certainly that's this >> courts behind people's h in front of people's houses >> yeah um I had never
had a conversation uh about anybody want to do anything on the golf course I just thought all options on the table. Um, and if this is the best way to go about it, uh, but I'd at least like to see with the contract expiring,
um, agree, we want to maintain, uh, a degree of control. This is just essentially, uh, seeing if that would be possible that the manager operator would bear some of those costs. And if it doesn't work, it doesn't work. And I think if I may, um,
my recommendation, and I'm kind of shooting from the hip here, but if that was the way you wanted to go, I would wait until we're ready to pull the trigger on the construction contract and then maybe look at doing a procurement for a design, build, operate, maintain.
>> Okay. um >> design, build, operate, maintain >> for the course itself because you're going to have um a major capital expenditure, but then you're also going to have a long-term operation and
maintenance. >> I'm just going to I'm just going to inter interject. >> This golf course is in the heart of a residential neighborhood. abuing every side or most sides of this golf course are single
family homes. Um and so and so I just want us to be very mindful of that. I I think if at any point we're going to go in a different direction in operation uh management who our partner is in that golf course, we first need to start with
a town hall of the residents um and and the users of of the golf course. Uh people live right in front of the I live right in front of the golf course. Uh there's a lot of other people who live right in front of of the golf course. Um this is the first time,
Commissioner Dominguez, that I'm hearing of there being a developer interested in taking over uh that that golf course. For many years, this golf course was operating in the red. Um this golf course is finally operating in the
green. I think both of our publicly owned golf courses are now finally operating in in the green and my understanding um just from my years in public services municipal golf courses usually don't
operate in the green. They they're they're usually not good business models. And so right now we have a partner that that is handling this very well for the city. Generally, I don't get complaints from residents on how our
golf course is managed other than, you know, the straight ball golf ball that lands on people's yards. Um, and so and so I just want us to be very mindful of the very unique location of this of this
golf course. Um, that you have residents and families that literally share property lines with this with this with this golf course. and if something were to even be considered to be changed that it start with the residents um before we
got into too much decision making. >> Yeah. And to be clear, this is what I was mentioning is exactly what we're going through at the Northshore Tennis Center where there's an operator under a management agreement there and we are contemplating extending her contract and
she actually makes the capital contribution for the construction of the cafe. Right. So, it'll be something like that where we would just see what the tradeoff would be um for something like that. And Eric, is there I mean has anyone approached the
city of any has there been any interest whether informal or formal conversations about any change to this property? >> Not that I'm aware. >> Okay. >> All right. >> If if I can jump in on this. Um the golf course is a Donald Ross
designed golf course. And the reason I know this that it's a big deal is because when I moved here a thousand years ago, my then husband is an a is still an avid golfer and he was super thrilled about the fact that we were walking distance from a worldclass golf course. And that's what it is. We
shouldn't leave leave lose sight of that. I don't know about the the original architecture, you know, the course design of the North Shore or the Normandy course, but the one in the heart of our city, the one that people come to on vacation, um, is a worldclass
designed golf course. And both of them serve as community centers, not just for the people who live around them, but for community meetings of all stripes. The food is good at both places. It's accessible, as somebody else mentioned. Um I you know do we want to find
somebody else to operate potentially but I would never be supportive of seating any more control than we have now. And um I was under the impression that these capital improvements were being
generated by the revenue that they are. So it's not that we're taking money out of the budget. It's a question of the money could go to something else in the budget which I understand and is a very valid point. Um, but I don't think that we should be overly hasty to find
somebody else to operate. Um, not to operate. I I would be very cautious about finding a new operator. Um, because I fear that somebody would want much more than we would be getting in control in in return. and the $2 million or even the $9 million advertised over
the next 30 years because that's how long these repairs and and reimagination should last at least um is is not a lot of money for a huge amount of benefit. So my unsolicited two cents on that. >> Okay. All right. Thank you.
>> All right. Let's not beat this to death because it was just a theoretical thing that I threw out and we could explore that in due time. >> Okay. So, we'll go back up to the um PGO list. All >> right. So, this is the the last of the list of PGO projects. I would just
highlight the Flamingo Park uh stadium. The turf that we talked about, the majority of the funding is in PGO. Um there's another project for the Normandy Shores Golf Club. That's coming from their surplus as well. Uh the Polaro Park basketball court lighting, that was a commission priority. And then the
Monument Island, we did fund a portion last year, and this is the final amount for the project. And this is to have some rip wraps around the island to prevent mooring on the beach. >> Okay. So, next we're going to go into the resort tax capital uh funds. There's
one for uh North Beach, South Beach, and Mid Beach. So, this is generated from the 1% of the resort tax on room rents. Uh this is for eligible uses are are tourist related capital projects. And that that revenue on that 1% is 60% transportation primarily the trolley
system. And then 10% to North Beach, Mid Beach, and South Beach. 10% uh for the arts. So, first we have the the north beach. Uh so we have the lifeguard uh towers cross braces. Uh that's there's a
amount in every one of the three funds as we go ahead and do those replacements. Uh some money for alleyway restorations. Uh the beachwalk ballards, the Northshore fitness center relocation, uh Muscle Beach, the kayak launch item 287. those funds will will
not be added and those will be allocated up to project 283 which is the beachwalk ballers and we'll make that note and then there's a few smaller dollars for rhythm foundation uh projects. >> Can you I'm sorry. Can you explain what
the Northshore fitness center relocation is? >> Sure. >> Yeah. So, right now it's on the second floor. They're going to move it to the first floor and I'll let John explain why. >> Yes. Um the Northshore parking center that is a DCF child care site and it has
a lot of restrictions with co-mingling adults while the kids are in program. So if we're able to move that the down to the first floor, we could have that amenity available to people more for more hours a day. >> Okay. And there was an issue because we were audited with our sites a few months
ago and some afterare programs went away. This would alleviate that issue. >> Yes. Well, we we've resolved the lensure issues or we didn't have issues at Northshore. This would allow us to have that amenity available to the residents because right now we have to have a lockdown during certain times of the day. >> Okay. >> Maintain the lensure.
>> So, here's a question because I I love this idea. Mhm. >> And also we are building a new worldass sports complex on 72nd Street which in theory, no pressure, David Gomez, I'm looking at you, no pressure at all, but in theory
shovel in the ground next year. So, and two years to build. So, does it make sense to spend three and a half uh $357,000
to cover us for three and a half years? >> Fair point on the move, but we do need new equipment. That equipment is very old. It's time to replace that equipment either through a purchase or a lease. >> Okay. So, when we move to the new building, will we take the equipment
with us? Can it be designed so that we can move the equipment? >> We we we can do that. Yes. >> Because right now CIP I believe is building us a shell >> for the fitness center. >> Oh, the equipment too. Okay. So, he's
doing the equipment. Okay. What I don't want to do, and I I'm not trying to cut services from community um amenities, but what I don't want to do is buy new equipment with let's say it's 40% of the
cost, whatever it is. Buy new equipment today or in January and then in three years buy have have already paid for new equipment again. So either find a way to bring to select the
equipment for the the short term to be moved into the the long term or rethink this. I'm not you see where I'm going with this because we're spending x number of dollars to buy something that the way I'm hearing it is just going to be replaced in three and a half years.
>> If I may the >> What exactly is it me? Is it what exactly is the equipment? >> It's your typical plate system. You know, you see any, you know, Crunch, Crunch Fitness, LA Fitness, you know, you have the different plates, the
different upper body, all the different body part workout stations. >> What do you mean plates? Like >> the cable, the the cable plate with the pin. >> Well, that should last 10 years, not three years. >> No, it's not it's not an issue of the equipment not lasting. It's at the
Northshore Community Center complex that whatever we're calling it 72nd Street complex is currently designed what I'm hearing to include equipment already that that's already identified. So why would we buy new equipment in place
currently and then not need it in three and a half years? So it's not an issue of the equipment not lasting. It's like we're buying >> it's a fair question >> the same thing twice basically. If I may, David Gomez, director of capital improvements, the facility being designed for the 70kin street community complex complex was always intended to
be augmenting the services at the Northshore Community Center. Specifically, the fitness center was supposed to be a higherend fitness center that I think is going to serve somewhat of a diff different population. They may or may not uh coexist with the
same equipment or the same uh users. It's up to the commission and and the city on how we program it and how we use it. >> When I asked about future uses for the existing facility, I was told that there are no plans for it. So now I'm hearing
that it's planned to stay open. We're going to have a community center a block away from a community center. >> There different uses. For example, the the 72nd Street Community Center has the the aquatic complex. It has the fitness
center, which is the it's always been described as a higherend fitness center. Um, the existing community center has the tennis center, has the the child care and and daycare stuff. So, it it's they don't necessarily overlap.
>> Okay. I mean, the higherend fitness center in a community facility at 72nd Street, it's not anatomy. I mean, we're not talking about some crazy super fancy cryogenic gym. So, it's just a gym for residents.
>> Yeah. >> Okay. >> So, we're going to have two gyms. >> I I don't know if parks was programming to keep the existing one going or if they were going to merge them. >> So, we could probably use that if we're going to have a much better gym at 72nd Street complex. We could probably use
the space in the Northshore for something else. >> Correct. If if any if anything were to move from Northshore to 72nd Street, the fitness center would be one of the top things that could move and then that
that square footage could be used for a different type of program. >> But but Commissioner Bots's saying is why why spend how much was it? >> $375,000. almost half a million dollars on something that may be not needed in a couple years. >> That that is a fair fair point. If we
were to open up in 3 years um open for business, I could see that we could also take but the equipment is old and we do expand use of the center by moving it to the first floor because we don't have those childcare lockdown issues that we could work around by moving to the first
floor. So, you're not only getting new equipment that we need, we're getting extended use to the community. What I can do is look at a lease option. >> I was just >> I was going to ask you about that. I would I would rather lease it for a few years. And I mean, if it's exorbitant, then that's not great either, cuz we'll
find a space for gym equipment, but let's let's look at leasing it. And also, what is the breakdown between the cost of expanding to the new to the floor to the first floor versus the equipment? like we got a lump sum of 30 375 is 75 of that moving and 300 of that
um the equipment or vice versa you know so that that makes a difference too >> yeah I can break I have that breakdown I won't have you watch me go through my papers but I can get that information >> okay thank you >> okay if I may it seems like this project this capital project is being requested
to be cancelled and uh then an operating budget enhancement would be submitted by parks for relocation and a lease amount out and then we'll see if we're able to uh fund that uh separately through the operating budget. So, we'll make a note of that. It was 350. We'll put it back
up. 357,000 and um we would recommend just like the the bust um the project 283 the beachwalk ballards uh security ballards would be where we would allocate those uh funds. So, we will go ahead and >> Can you tell me about the rhythm foundation audio system club deck and
theater seating? uh >> facility >> facilities. Sure. >> Good afternoon. Uh Adam Guza from the Rhythm Foundation. It really should say Miami Beach Bandshell audio system, club deck, and theater seating. But uh to
give folks the overall picture on each of those items, the audio system is an update to our audio the audio system that has been in the building and has been in there since 2014 2015.
uh which is quite the feat uh as far as lifespan of high uh sensitivity high-tech electronic equipment on in an oceanside open uh open air venue. And so
this would be an an update to that that system. What we're seeing here is also this price also reflects a very deep discount on the part of Meyer Sound System. This is the same sound company that works uh at the New World Center.
It's sort of like the Ferrari of sound systems. Um we have >> And does it replace it or >> replaces it? Yeah. >> Now, what's the lifespan? >> The lifespan for this is 8 years is the usable lifespan. Um the last one had a
similar lifespan of 7 to eight years. The expectation of it would be actually be lower given the operating conditions, but we were able to stretch it out to be 11 where we're like on year 12 13 of that particular um sound system. And
what's interesting about this, what's noteworthy here is that we have convinced me to come on as sponsors of the band shell. So they gave so they discounted the cost of this high this is
the latest technology that they're rolling out. They discounted it by over 50%. With the understanding that the band shell could become a case study, a sort of showcase venue for the for the sound company. So, there's going to be
some associated marketing on the part of Meyer to promote this brand new type of audio technology that they've that they've created. So, not only are we saving the city, saving the public dollars here through this sponsorship,
we're also promoting the Miami Beach Band Show in the city of Miami Beach as is a truly state-of-the-art performance uh venue. Does this tie into the broadcasts that you all do? >> No, this is separate. This is separate
to this. This is a sponsorship directly directly with the the sound company that >> No, but I mean the audio system >> the audio system is tied to our broadcast in as much as is part of our network of technology. This is basically
the the speakers that you hear the music playing from when you come to the to the venue. I mean it it is a music venue. >> Yes. >> That cannot operate without decent speakers. I mean New World Center, New World Symphony >> plays in one of the most acoustically
sophisticated, well-designed um audio facilities in the world. And we had just upgraded their outdoor speaker system to be better than it was for similar reasons. Um you just won I I
don't remember the name of the award but the um the band shell and rhythm foundation and new deco ensemble just wore won a very prestigious award for broadcast >> a golden telly it's called and hopefully we'll add a Emmy to that to that list
too but we won't know until next spring >> and it was a super I happened to have gone to that performance >> it was super cool there were interactive elements there was snow there There was scented air. There was amazing sound for the holidays. It was absolutely
fabulous. And that doesn't work if you go to this amazing venue and the sound sounds like crap. >> That is that is is is correct. And so, you know, we're we're really happy that we've been able to extend the lifespan
of the current system that we have as long as we as long as we have. That comes from a lot of maintenance. Um, uh, tons of of of of maintenance. All of which the Rhythm Foundation has paid for all of that. And we think with this new
this new system, it's going to sound better. It's going to be bring us up to up to date with the latest latest technology. And as a part of the promise of this of this new point source technology they
call it is that they're much greater control of the uh of the acoustic environment. Meaning that you have better control of of stop of setting the limits of where the sound stops controlling and containing the sound to
within the within the uh ring of the band. >> Can can you speak to the other items too please? >> Sure. And then the other items that we had up there was the uh decking. So in the band shell in the rear there's a elevated there's an elevated deck um
club or club level. So that request is to replace the the top levels the the the wooden actual wooden decks. So not the structure of the of the club level but the wooden decks. So you know where people walk. Um, this is another one
that that uh has it's at the coming to the end of its usable life. Of course, we very much keep it wellmaintained and anytime that there's a piece of the decking that is soft, we we replace it. Um, but it's about time for us to do a
wholesale um replacement of the whole top level of the of the decking. And then the other item on there is the theater seating. And that is essentially to help uh is to purchase more chairs to replace our theater style seats that
have just you know are worn or broken down after 5 years of of of service. >> Okay. Thanks. >> Okay. Thank you. >> You're welcome. >> Okay. We'll put it back up. >> Okay.
>> Jason Dick Payak launch still closed from what I understand. Right. >> I believe this is from a Sorry, John. This is a secondary uh location item and I think there was a commission action on this. >> Is this the same kayak launch at park?
>> It's not the park you one. >> No, it's it's different. This is another item that goes back to last year's committees that came out of committee with a favorable recommendation. And this budget request is to work on design and permitting for an alternate location because the Park View Island one is
closed. Just curious where what location >> it is? Oh, 81st of Very good. There's a pedestrian bridge. There's a city parking lot and it's adjacent to the city parking lot. >> Have we done water testing there? >> Um >> Amy, I don't mean to put you you that's clear. >> My my last thing we need is another
beautifully installed kayak launch that closes a month after installation. >> Uh yes, Commissioner, we did do analysis. This area has a lot of flushing um from the bay and and and the water quality looked really good. Okay, >> quick question. Um, where are we with the um with the implementation the
funding the funding the funding for the nanobubbles technology because I understand we we submitted a permitting to the county a permit application to the county. We're waiting to hear back and that should not from what I understand we're not talking about years
like so many environmental things that take years of regulatory review before it gets approved. Um this was supposed to be an approval within a few months. Um where do we have the funding in this proposed budget for the implementation
of the pilot uh nanob nanobubble technology? >> So we have a couple of items in here regarding um >> water quality. Maybe Amy could jump in. >> Yeah, the the nanop butter project is funded in the storm water. We haven't gotten there yet, but storm water. Yeah,
we'll get to that on the utilities, but yes, it is um it's approximately a million dollars, but the capital side is in this budget. We'll become in a few slides. >> All right. And and just for the benefit of the public, the nanobubble is the technology, the new technology that is hopefully we can test to hopefully once
and for all address the recurring water quality um and elevated levels of nutrients in in u the Parkview canal. >> Correct. >> Thank you. So in Mid Beach uh we just have really two major projects. Uh again with the
lifeguard uh tower cross bracing replacement and the 41st street corridor. Uh this was partially funded with geo bond. Uh there was an allocation last year, a major allocation last year from the the mid beach uh capital fund and again uh this year
which was another $ 1.4 million gap that uh CIP had identified. So that we will be able to get that project that important project across the finish line hopefully. And then in South Beach again with the lifeguard tower cross braces uh an upgrade for the uh the lighthouse in South Point Park alleyway restoration
and the big allocation there is the beachwalk security >> ballards. >> It is a >> always broken. >> Yeah, I think it's always broken. >> We've had some issues with the uh synchronization of the lighting and the
>> I get emails about it all the time. Well, not only that, but uh I I remember I thought you were being a bit heavyhanded uh when we first got elected about the fountains, >> and it it's been magical since then. Truly. Um you walk by there, it's one of
the gems of our city. >> You could tell that how a city functions if its fountains operate. >> Eric, >> it's Confucious. Okay. So, next we're going to move into convention center. >> All right. So, convention center is an
enterprise fund. So, they have their own funding source uh for all their projects. There's a total of 14 projects that we're recommending. And the biggest project that we are funding is the roof replacement. So, you may recall for the last two years prior to this, we have been funding as we go and this would be
the last allocation for this project which is about $24 million. Um the aeroponic garden was a recommendation from the commission to ask us to try to fund that. The convention center team has asked to fund some um an activation space where the binary tree used to be.
Uh a lot of the other projects are renewal and replacement projects at the facility. >> So they fund this. >> Yes, it's from the convention service fund. It's our fund. Um but all the revenues less expenses um on our enterprise and there actually are
dollars set aside from resort tax. So uh after we pay the debt from one of our 1% revenues, those dollars are set aside specifically for renewal and replacement at the convention center. >> Could we ever do something more creative on the rooftop of the convention center? You know, if you look at an aerial view
of the city, it's probably one of our largest assets. It's beautiful. There's nothing around that would inhibit its view. And we just have like concrete >> like I don't know we uh >> do an aerial mural.
>> I hadn't thought uh >> that's a great box. >> Yeah. >> I mean because we can't re-engineer the building to sustain a green roof which is what I would really like to do. I know we've got an issue an opportunity already to do a hydroponic garden that would take up part of the roof. Um if that's where it ends up going through
Commissioner Dominguez do a mural. I mean, we have drone shots all the time. >> It's not expensive and it wouldn't it wouldn't damage the structure. >> I I mean, I know a large portion of the roof is obviously at the parking garage, but there is regular roof and I'm not sure if anyone's able to speak to that
or um see Marina coming up maybe speak a little bit about that. >> At one point years ago, there was a conversation of art there or something like that. >> It it couldn't be used for anything recreationally um or even Yeah, unfortunately it's it's a weight
issue. We've looked at a lot of things, everything from solar panels to green roofs, but if you're talking about the 500,000 square foot um area that's just over the halls, it is definitely a weight issue. Um so there's very little
we can do there. We are that's the area we are re-roofing. So it will have a new roof. Um, as far as doing art there, you know, I'm I'm sure we could maybe look into something like that. Just painting something or having something.
>> You could literally just have somebody paint waves on it >> so that it look like a swimming pool on top or the continuation of ocean. It doesn't need to be a big fancy anything. It could just be a, you know, like the way that the um um water towers are painted to look like pools, right?
>> Yeah. It doesn't need to be a super fancy artist. It just needs to be >> like, you know, awesome. And it's the the the weight of the paint. That's it. >> I think that's something that we can welcome to Miami Beach as you fly over. You know, that's something. >> Oh, that could be fun. Like one of those
little postcards, the retro postcards that say welcome to Miami Beach. >> When I was the expressway Authority, we did that with hedges. If you fly along 836, you'll see welcome to Miami date in hedges along 836. >> That would actually be really funny. And and I I love that idea.
>> Something we'll make take a look take a look at and see if they can fund. >> Okay. >> And just I'll ask even though I know the answer because you're clear. There's nothing that we could do that would be a long-term revenue generator, you know, put an outdoor area that the convention
center would be able to utilize for concerts or after convention happy hours, meeting places, things like that. You mean on the rest of the deck, which is where the parking is? Because up there, nothing can we can't it was never
designed to take that kind of weight. Um on the on the parking deck, um it is designed for the live load of cars. But the problem you will have there, uh which we have looked into this before, being able to program it and put a tent
or put some kind of um footprint there is that you don't have the um the exits. Yeah, >> there's not enough egress uh in order to have a volume of people in one location. >> And I as you see the great work Freddy's done and the caliber of conventions that
we're having is very congruent with the direction we're taking our city in. Right. It is just topnotch. So Freddy, congrats to you and your team. It's uh it's really going hand in hand the direction we're trying to guide our city. So absolutely. Okay. I just wanted to inquire. Thanks. >> All right. Thank you. We'll put it back
up and we'll move on to uh city center redevelopment. >> Just a quick question. Do you know if the convention center advisory board has had an opportunity because I know of all of our advisory boards, I think one of our most robust advisory boards is the convention center advisory board and you
all have presented this to them as well, right? >> I have to ask the convention center facilities department. I know most of these are uh rule replacement. The big one being the roof, which I know I'm pretty sure has been discussed by the advisory board, but I'm not sure if any of these other electrical upgrades or
CRR projects have been >> I know that Freddy is very involved um with them as is our economic development department and and Heather is if it hadn't, I will >> they're very involved. They're very hands-on and uh they take great pride in it. So, it would be great to share with them.
>> We'll make sure if that hasn't that the department does go reach out and and share that with them. If there's any concerns, we'll make sure to feed that back. Okay. >> All right. So, there is actually a small pot of funds um in the CRR renewal replacement funds. So, they can only be
used on in the city center RDA campus. And so, what we did is we looked for projects here either at city hall or the 777 building and moved some of those requests over here before using our CRR and PGO dollars. So, we have four elevators here that need some u
modernization. So, we're recommending splitting the funding here. um HVAC controls for city hall and then some other ADA improvements at the 777 building including elevators and more HVAC. So nuts and bolts CR on this
campus >> before and I'm so sorry to go back to the convention center issues this morning. We had a very robust conversation at the neighborhoods uh public safety neighborhoods quality of life committee about certain uh traffic
um potential needs for traffic studies for potential signalization, potential redesigning of the west side of Convention Center Drive. Should any studies funding be needed for any of that? How can that be contemplated
uh as part of the uh budget for for for the upcoming fiscal year for the for the convention center? >> I would say if the commission was given direction in that area, that would be something that the relevant department would submit a a budget enhancement. Probably sounds like initial planning and design work, which would probably
fall more on the operating side. Uh but probably could be absorbed within the operating budget for the convention center. So we'd have to uh as we obviously this just happened this morning as discussion but it would have to be submitted by the said department to then be considered. >> Okay. All right. Thank you.
>> And apologies. What is the 777 building? >> It's the building where CIP is right behind >> building. >> What are we doing? Like what is that? >> That's the city's office building. We was purchased a number of years ago. >> Is anybody proud of that? like walking
past city hall. Does does that look like a great facility? Like I don't know. >> I do believe that you know we're also putting I think like close to $1.3 million of CRA um RDA city center
dollars towards the 17th street garage. Um and you know we're investing in buildings here in this city center campus that I don't know what is the useful life. >> Yeah. exactly >> of these of these buildings in city
center. And I do think there comes a point where maybe nothing is going to happen, you know, over the next three, four, five years, but you need to start thinking about the planning of this area. What is the future need of of this area? How much money do you contribute
continue to reinvest into these buildings if there is a better use of some of these parcels in in city center? as part of the discussions that we want to have, I believe, as part of the 17th Street master plan, if we are going in the direction of protecting Lincoln Road
as a historic district and not encouraging any type of redevelopment there, shifting that that potential redevelopment to 17th Street and as part of that analyzing what the city center district looks like and how can these
lands be be better used, what is going to be the future need of city hall. you know, we continue investing money in this building and this building itself, you know, has has its challenges even down to the flies that we can't get rid of from this building. Um,
>> so I think it's a great question you're bringing up, Commissioner Magazine. >> Yeah. >> And I want to say we had the same kind of theoretical discussion whether last budget uh season or the one before. I don't know if it's the administration
that should do it or we should do it legislatively. Um, but I like where you're going, Commissioner Fernandez. Just kind of a master plan. We're just piece milling this together. Uh, and it has nothing to do with what's inside of that building, but when or the great
work that our employees doing there, but when I drive down 17th Street, I see that building, I I don't say, "Wow, that that is Miami Beach City Center." I go, "Oof, oh my gosh." Um, so are we throwing good money after
the bad? You know, I just think we can be a bit more world class seeking for our own city center than the product that we have there. >> So, the city acquired that building. Um,
we did not build that. I think that's probably why it looks the way it does. >> Yeah. >> I don't know if it matters who built it. It's just uh but hearing you loud and clear that we want to do a long-term
vision plan for what this campus looks like. >> I think this campus and 17th Street, you know, uh I think and and I think that's that's the broader conversation. I think there's a lot of opportunity, missed opportunity with our city center campus
most certainly. Um, I would like to see if we have RDA dollars that are available rather than continue uh putting dollars into infrastructure that might be past its useful life. Putting dollars into what
is the master plan and what is the vision, you know, making sure that we have the dollars to be able to start looking at the master plan for city center and 17th Street. If I may just uh for these capital dollars obviously are very specific and
remainder dollars are left over from from kind of uh legacy funds uh on the operating side as you all recall our inter uh local agreements I think which is on the sixth or seventh amendment with the county doesn't allow us to add any additional RDA expenditures. So if we wanted to look at that you know with something we could use um general fund
dollars to um explore that option but I think the manager is hearing that and we continue that discussion. All right, I'm going to move on to parking, which is speaking to I think what the commissioner was mentioning in our on our briefing. So, uh the next three
slides are a list of basically CRR or capital replacement projects for uh the city's garages, whether the 16th Street Pen Garage, the 17th Street, as we've spoken about. Um we're spending a lot of dollars to keep our garages uh you know
up to date, plumbing, roof, fire uh fire alarm, uh elevator. We always know elevators are always an issue especially in these open air structures. Uh electrical upgrades again things you would expect in open air uh structures.
Same thing 4 uh 42nd street uh traffic coating. So you're going to see uh you know waterproofing is one of the most important things you can do for a building down here. It protects the overall structure. So, uh, making sure waterproofing, painting, joint replacements, uh, through across the the
bridge decks and 17th street is a mill and resurface of the first street, which obviously the first floor. So, I apologize, first floor that needs to be, uh, dug up and fixed. And then lastly, I think it's the last slide on parking. Again, a list, you're seeing all really
nuts and bolts pretty much of uh, uh, structural work and real placement being done throughout the city garage. Primarily the dollars are at our city's garages. >> I'm sorry, just >> while he collects his thoughts, Jason,
um, I had some questions about the cameras. Where was that on the convention center? >> Move the cameras. >> Cameras. >> The one you had spoke about um, the other that was back in PO Fund. I believe it was Pride Park. It was Pride
Park. um CCTV camera installation. So, it was the purchase I want to say 19 cameras along with the infrastructure and I think the the detail estimate was provided to you this morning from police. Um it looked like from what I was looking at most of the dollars are in the infrastructure itself. Running cable, running conduit, electrical, uh
power, things along those lines. >> Was it 13 or 19? >> It was 13. >> Oh, it was 13. I apologize. >> And how much was it? >> 125 including the infrastructure. >> 125,000. Yes. >> Is it here? Can you go back?
>> No, that was in the back in the be very beginning of the presentation in the PO. >> Okay. >> But that detailed uh estimate you asked for was provided to you. >> And sorry. >> So, so it's $125,000 for 13 cameras.
>> Is has there been any issues with Pride Park? Why do we need >> I'll ask police uh to come up and speak about that project? And um PJ, if you could pull up the slide, please. >> Good afternoon, Commissioner Swain Jones, Chief Police. Um you know, one of
the things I've been wanting to do for quite some time is to get more eyes on Center Drive and Private Park and and around the entire city hall campus. This is particularly useful during large major events. We have lots of people who are very seeing the campus in of itself.
The cameras in Pride Park would help us sort of meet that that need. Um I think off the top of my head I looked at the numbers just the other day. The cameras themselves cost around 23 million $25,000. The bulk of the cost for this project is based on infrastructure which has to be done one time one time only.
Uh Major Eric Garcia in charge of tech and cameras. He can probably go into specifics for you if you need more detail. Is this something that the police procured or is it procurement? >> Good morning, Commissioner. Uh, I believe Pride Park is an unfunded
project. So, all we have is our estimates right now. At the time that we go do the purchase, we would do uh quotes from city vendors. >> Okay. Um cuz I'm looking at the um the breakdown and a lot of it is
just licensing for these cameras. Um 15,000 for engineering services. Okay. Um another 13,000 for three communication load centers. City contracted low voltage cabling estimate 25,000.
uh 22,500 for Cisco switches and power supplies, 23,000 for the actual camera equipment, 3,000 for the
for the green space, 3,000 for the license, about 11,000 for the electrical equipment or the the electrical work. Yes. Um, I don't know. I just that seems like a
lot for 13 cameras. 125,000. Where are they going to be placed >> throughout the campus? We're going to cover all sides of the >> We can't put them on the on on the actual like city hall building and point
it toward so we don't have to have so much conduit that we have to pay for or we can do it on the convention center hotel. not the hotel, but the the convention center itself, the point at um the park, all those are options, but
obviously the park is where people are going to be, and you need things at the level where uh you'll be able to see what's happening with people themselves. You can't identify someone from a rooftop camera. You don't get facial pictures. is you don't get clothing full clothing
descriptions from high overhead Overwatch. >> So, does this get plugged into our Arctic or is it >> the these cameras once they're connected? And the reason uh we're using all this uh connectivity and licensing
is to get bring it into our main uh video management system that connects to all of our uh systems including the Arctic. Yes. >> Okay. So, it will be plugged into Arctic. Absolutely. >> So, Major, you were just saying that when it's placed on a roof, you the
cameras you don't have access to facial technology. >> No, it's not facial technology, but >> cameras, but I think that's what you just was that I thought that was what you just mentioned. >> Cam cameras are used for different purposes. Cameras on rooftop on rooftops are usually for an over give you an
overall view of an area. We usually call it Overwatch, but in order to have in order to identify someone, you need a camera at human level, not from above. In other words, >> because I I when I went to the Arctic,
you know, there's a couple cameras that you have on top of some of the buildings and they zoom in. >> You can see someone's face. >> Yes, sir. But they're not recording someone's facial someone's face at the time that an incident occurs. We can zoom in from something at any moment in
time. But in order to record what happens in a park and record someone's characteristics, you need a camera that's at a at a at a different level than overhead view. >> Well, what level?
>> Human height. >> Yeah, you're not going to have a camera at a human height. It can be damaged. Like >> I'm sorry, what was that? >> You're not going to have a camera at like a 6 foot, right? You're going to have >> No, they're 8 to 10 feet. I think 12 feet I think is the highest that we that we try to go with. >> Are these the typical pulse like what
you have on the beachwalk? >> Of course. Yeah, they they serve different purposes. >> Okay. I mean, I just I don't know. I I think that spending 125,000 on 13 cameras
I mean it's a lot. >> Is it funded from Jason? Is it funded from the convention center since that's officially the convention center campus and adding security to and public safety protections to events that happen as
part of the convention center campus? >> It's being funded through the payo as remember the commission a year or so ago removed that uh from the convention center and placed under the management of the parks department. >> But why why I mean she brings up Commissioner Bob brings up a good point. We change who manages the park. But so
even though if we even though we change who manages the park for for good reasons since the technology benefits events that happen at the convention center, Design Miami, the boat show, um
the when Adobe was here and they bought out the park, could they not at least split fund with us even though the city manages? >> At the end of the day, it's the commission's decision. It wasn't one that we would recommend just based on the management structure of it being under the city's general fund with the
parks. If the commission wanted to use convention center dollars uh to fund this project, it would be within your purview. Wouldn't want it doesn't obviously wasn't how we had recommended it. Uh again, because of that shift that it's not part effectively of the management of the convention center. It's as it was shifted specifically back
to the parks. But if the that's the will of the commission will shift the funding. >> Jason, uh let me ask you this. I mean the convention the the park pride park even though is being is being the day-to-day management is by is by the
parks department >> the rental of of this facility that's being packaged by by the convention center. So the convention center is actively promoting the pride park to attract a certain type of convention
that wouldn't go that it's coming here and they're not going somewhere else. Why? Because we have the amenity of that park available that we can offer to it. And so to the extent that we could use um funds such as convention center funds
that have limited and restricted uses to fund something that benefits the convention center, we should because now we can unlock general dollars that we can use for some of our other needs. But yes, it's managed by the parks department. Um but the ones that really
benefits from it is the convention center because they are actively packaging this and uh voting it. >> Was that and profiting off of it? >> Yeah, I think that there's an nexus in that argument and I think that's fine. So we could shift that project over to the convention center fund. Uh and then
the dollars that were in PGO I would recommend that remember the bridges project uh didn't have enough funding. So we just transfer that 125 which was part of PIGO to supplement the uh the bridge project >> which was a bridge project. >> Uh we there's been an there's an annual allocation to public works department to
do rehabilitation renovation of the city's own bridges. Um and we were able to get most of the funding for but not all of it. So, I would just recommend that um just like the security ballers when we remove funding from something else is so we can if the commission seems okay with that, we'll show the
125,000 being moved to the convention center fund and the 125 that was in the PO would be added on to the citywide bridges project. >> I would totally support that. >> Yeah, but I mean that sounds great, but what other options are there? Right. >> You know, I mean I just I don't want to
just do it on the fly to say like, you know, we're going to fund the bridges. That's important. But are there other just as important projects that need to be funded that we should all >> They're all listed in They're all listed in your agenda, I think, on pages.
>> What is that? Sorry. >> 59 >> 59. Well, no. Those are all fully funded. I think it's the pull out >> the attachment A. >> Do we need to make a decision today on this? Can we at least >> No, the money if if you want the the funds could um just be left unallocated for now and we bring back an update in
July um at the July 17th uh one where we give kind of the other way around. We give a short capital update and then we majorly go into the operating and we could give the capital update and show a recommendation there and in the interim the commission could go through the attachment A which is all the the full capital program and if they have a
different recommendation on where to fund it and again we'll be doing briefings for all this and we can have those discussions. Absolutely. >> Yeah. I just I think it it merits at least a pause and just a more of a thoughtful, you know, analysis of where we could use the dollars. I'm not saying that the bridges is not a bad idea, but
just I don't want to do it on the fly. I don't I don't think >> I I have no issue with that. I would just my enthusiasm was let's get the convention center pot of money to cover it and we'll figure out what the money savings goes to. >> And and good job on that. Thank you. I mean that's that's a great uh that's a
that's a great way to take take care of that problem because we do you know if the convention center is benefiting mostly from this park we shouldn't use pay their general fund dollars to to fund this shouldn't be come from the convention center. >> Yeah that's fine. So, we will go ahead and show that moving over to the uh
convention center and then we'll show the 125 as just unallocated at this time and we'll come back with a recommendation uh at the July commission meeting and then we'll also give you time to go through your packet identify any other either CRR or PGO. Actually, you could use the dollars and get it
transferred over to the CRR. So, if there's a a CR project uh that maybe you find is important, but we will come back with a recommendation and we can get those dollars allocated out um at the July 17th meeting. >> Okay. So, I think I'll put the
presentation back up. We'll get into transportation. >> So, we're on to transportation funds. Uh you may recall at the May retreat we mentioned that their budget is structurally imbalanced for 27. And so we're recommending not doing many projects with the transportation fund
until we have a full conclusion of how we're going to balance their budget. So a lot of the items you see here with a negative, we are not deappropriating those funds. We're actually just swapping where the funds are allocated right now. So some of the transportation and mobility funds are being used. We're
using other funding sources and making the project still available. So, the two items that we're actually recommending for funding is item 459, which is the citywide bike lanes project. That was previously called the 17th street bike lane project, but we're not doing the
bike lanes anymore on 17th Street. So, we're recommending just changing the name to be citywide bike lanes, not specific to any street. And then we're going to apply for a grant and hopefully we do receive the grant and we'll have the match dollars available. Uh the only other project we're recommending is a
street lighting improvements. Uh we're partially funding it uh using um local option gas tax dollars that are available. >> Can you go back please? So for the Beayshore neighborhood traffic coming >> I mean it's it's listed twice.
>> Yeah. So we're we're literally swapping the funds. So we're it's net zero. >> We're from a lessed it's more >> going to be funded. >> Yes. >> It's funded and we're just swapping the funding source. Okay, got it. >> Same for the other two items with the
negative. You'll see them in slides. >> Yeah, the next slide here will show those popping back up, >> right? Um, so the three the four items that we're actually recommending funding are starting from the second item down. So for the West app phase three project, we're setting aside funding for flashing
beacons for pedestrians when the project is done. um some crosswalks at Bay Drive, traffic common at 47th Street, and then for Sunset Allen 2, that would be some traffic common with some signs and some um painting.
>> So, next we're going to move into one of the biggest infrastructure elements. I know the commission's been we've been talking about this for a bit, so we're going to talk just a little bit about utility funds. Um and as we kind of spoke about we are really just recommending at this time funding for uh anything that is really in the consent
decree area. So the first element uh is just a funding swamp in the 25 water and sewer bonds which we did the declaration tent to issue for public works that project 477 that water main replacement normity is a is a very high priority. So they're just actually defunding some of these other projects which can
temporarily pause and using that dollar to make sure that project moves forward. and then 483 and then on the next one uh is is der you see German EPA consent degree those are kind of an Azure smaller consent decree projects that we're required to do and then this next one you will see everything that says
CDSA that's consent decree or settlement agreement so these are part of some type of um you know kind of legal obligation that we have to make some upgrades to our system so that's where our major dollars are really going for in the water and sewer area now storm water Um
I'm sorry this is just the end of the the same thing with the funding swap here. Apologize. Uh then the on the storm water side uh they did have more available dollars. The fund had generated additional dollars and anything that was a standalone we were able to move forward which is storm
water critical needs uh and seaw wall projects coming from either resiliency or old bond dollars that we have. And then the I think the main and then anything that's tied as an NIP would be held off until we kind of resolve the issue. And I think the commission is working its self well through through that issue and we'll deal with that at the June commission meeting. Uh but the
last item I think is what commissioner Fernandez was mentioning related to the park view island water quality improvements. That's the nanobubble. So this is the capital side of it uh for the acquisition and deployment of that uh technology and there'll be a small uh recurring operating expense uh that
we'll be we will deal with at the July 17th meeting and they would obviously have to go hand in hand because you have to obviously have the capital expenditure going hand inand with the operating expenditure. Well we'll we see we can get that across the finish line which we think we can. >> And then the final three slides that
you'll see are all the cashall funds um that we have. So we have a lot of little funds that we try to appropriate at the end of each year. So FIRE asked for a new outdoor training facility. They actually have their own training and technology fund and it has about a million dollars available. So we're
recommending funding it with their own funds. Um big ticket items here. The marine patrol dock improvements. We funded most of it in PGO dollars, but this 240 came from the settlement agreement at the marina. So they had a contribution to the project of 240. um
the Park View Island entrance sign um entrance improvements and the Allison Park dog park improvements also came from the Doville settlements. So we're appropriating the dollars per the settlement agreements. Uh the other two item well the rest of the items are split funded. So you're literally seeing
the smaller portions of projects that we discussed in prior slides. And >> then this funding source I'm sorry is what's the funding source here? >> Uh there se which one? >> Which project? several >> like for example the the entrance sign.
>> So that's coming from the Doville settlement agreement. >> So the entrance entrance sign and the Allison Park dog park uh that's coming from the settlement from Doville. So when they give us the funds, we appropriate them in the capital budget
>> and okay >> the agreements were specifically for these projects >> for those amounts. >> Okay. So the the DA specifically prescribed that these dollars have to be used for this. Okay.
>> Correct. >> All right. >> Yeah. At some point I, you know, I I do want to see, and this is so out of context with this here, um, but at some point I do want to see what in, you know, from the North Beach funds that we
have is is going to be addressed to affordability issues for renters in in in the North Beach area because that that is one of the big issues um in North Beach, but that is also supposed to be addressed through the North Beach CRA. In this case, I understand that
these are North Beach funds that this DA speci specifically and contractually obliges us to focus on this. Um, it's a matter of beautifification, but I also want to see at some point, Mr. Manager, you know, how do we identify funds um
through the CRA to address uh renter affordability in this part of our city? Yeah, I think I you know, you've heard me say it a million times, 10% of our revenue generated to into the CRA must by law be used for affordable housing.
Um, and I would encourage the CRA to start thinking not just about um building or rehabilitating existing buildings. I don't know what the law prescribes if we're allowed to do rental as opposed to um I don't know if anybody from economic development is here, but
um if the CRA funds permit us to do rent assistance because that would be something we could effectuate immediately. We don't have to wait for purchase. We don't have to wait for rehabilitation and um that would be tremendous. >> Perhaps we can start a referral to the finance committee to look at
>> Let's Can we Do you know off the top of your head if that's legal? So, so there are a number of different programs that you can do that all are underneath the affordable affordable housing including side including rental. >> Perfect. >> I would like to see what our options are for renter assistance because more and
more I'm just hearing more and more about renters being being pushed out uh especially in this part of our city. And uh and there's a lot of talk, you know, with with the state uh reforms and and property taxes, but at the end of the
day, the ones that are not benefiting in any way from that should the amendment pass are the renters. And the renters of our city who are seeing everinccreasing costs just because living in Miami Beach is a very expensive proposition. Um and
so and so I I would love for us to have an item perhaps sent to finance uh where where we can see what are our options to be able to create a renter assistance program in North Beach using perhaps dollars but also more broadly you know
throughout the city because you know throughout our city it is an issue. >> Also I'd like to mention that uh Dr. Terry is here and since her department actually handles rental assistance um I'd love Dr. for you to come up because this is what you do day in and day out. So, um, all over the city and you know,
as chair of the affordable housing advisory committee, we had a very robust meeting last night where we discussed how we have some money set aside and we're happy to also incorporate that um 10% from the CRA because we're discussing where that will go in terms
of if we're going to purchase a building or purchase units uh or continue with rental assistance, which is something that you already do. So, I'd love for you to be a part of that discussion as well. >> Thank you. Good afternoon. Alba, Office of Housing and Community Services. Yes, for rental assistance, what we do
utilize today is general funds. I'm sorry, um, federal funds. So, for that, there is specific AMI attached to it. So, those are CDBG home dollars. >> As it should be. Thank you. And, and so, as we move forward with this referral to finance, I just really want to make sure
that Dr. Terry is is in these discussions. Um, as well as the affordable housing advisory committee. They're a very robust group and we had a great meeting. We've been having great meetings, so I want to make sure they're in the fold. Thank you. >> Are we Rick? Are we allowed to um refer from this meeting to Does it have to go
back to commission? >> We would have to place it on an agenda. >> Can you please uh draft that for for Wednesday's meeting? >> Sure. >> Thank you. >> And I'll co-sponsor as chair of Ahack. >> Sure. >> And me as well, please. >> Sure. We'll put the presentation back up and
we're just about wrapping up. >> All right. So this slide just has all splitfunded projects. So you would have seen all these projects before. These are just using up all the small funds we have available. >> And the last one is a few >> and the last one again has some split funded projects. I would just focus on
the bigger items. We do have a fund balance in the building fund. Uh we are recommending setting aside 9.5 which is a high number. Um building will go and you know figure out what kind of AI permitting solutions they can come with. Um, the commission would have to see
that and make a recommendation. >> I I think that's just a little too high for AI permitting software. I mean, the whole point of AI is that you can custom build it yourself to your needs.
I don't see how we need to pay or set aside $9.5 million for that. I mean, I know they're flushed with cash, but it doesn't mean we should spend it. Well, one thing is there there is state laws related to the amount of fund balance that they have. So, a lot of these calculations go into that that that
estimate. >> So, there's state law related to what? >> The the uh building fund is only allowed to have a specific amount of reserves. Um >> otherwise, return it to the developers. >> So, hold on. So, what does that mean? >> I think as the commissioner was just stating, I think the process is in
general to the user. We could there's I'm sure there's other programs that we can spend $9.5 million on and >> and absolutely we've had >> encourage small businesses to you know open up businesses without you know >> well they have to be only dollars that
are allowed it's very specific in state law what you can use building department funds for it must be for uh you know implementing and reviewing the state building code so it's very very very restrictive what we >> I get it we you know we got to use we got to use it you know before we
before we lose it. >> But still, I don't think that we should be spending 10 nearly $10 million on AI software. >> And I would I would agree that I would I would suspect this is from a budgeting perspective and that's what this exercise is very important to do. I do believe that because a lot of this will have to go back to commission based on
the dollars that we're speaking of. But then I think would be appropriate to know what is the realistic number because I you know I know nothing about software or you know AI software procurement and how much it costs in the
marketplace. I what I don't want is for us to be told in a in a line item this is what we need for for AI permitting software and that is not what it is. I'd rather know okay we have this balance that that remains unallocated that we
need to determine how it's going to be allocated. Um so Frank good afternoon >> good afternoon uh Frankana IT director. So this number as was noted is budgetary and the projection there was based upon the complete replacement of the current
permitting system assuming that um a new system would be needed to have a full endto-end permitting review um that was AI augmented and a lot of other components to that. Um there's an RFQ that is currently being worked on for permitting review AI assisted permitting
review completeness check that we're working with building and several other departments with. Um, but that is a projection on replacing the entire system in its entirety. As a kind of worst case scenario to your point, just an AI tool wouldn't be that. Um, but if it's determined that replacing the
system would be required to have the level of efficiencies that we've discussed, that's where that number is coming from. >> Yeah. I mean, you know, I'm sort of in the infant style stage of AI, but you know, AI is supposed to reduce
cost, not cost $10 million to implement. I think it I think at the end of the day, you really need just one or two programmers who really understand how to set up an AI system to build out a functioning um
model for promoting system. I mean, you can hire I mean, I'd rather hire two, three staff who are professional AI coders who can build it out for us that are proprietary to us than spend $10
million, >> right? I mean, I'd rather >> it's a little ridiculous. I don't I I don't feel comfortable with that. I I think that's that's that's like a boondoggle. >> And Frank, I agree. Um, do we put together like a little AI
committee where we can rely on some resources uh from outside of city hall as well? Right. This is a very quickly evolving, >> right? >> Um, sector, if you will. Uh, I know a guy
that works um in a company adjacent to mine. I I think met Eric and he's very well verssed in AI and he's been talking to me it makes my head spin but I think we have a lot of resources that uh maybe we can kind of collaborate on just for
like a best practices and how to implement. By the way, do you have a new look? >> Uh I you look cool, dude. >> Is it the beard? No. Is it the beard or something? You look pretty cool. Uh I must say um but go ahead about the AIAR.
Um, so we we do meet on a regular basis. >> I have his high school yearbook picture, by the way. >> Oh, don't do that. >> No, put I'd like to I was digging it. Don't change anything. Um, going back to your question about the community and what we have uh with
some of the businesses in the area, we meet I want to say at this point probably weekly uh with someone that's bringing something that has either come through you know the office of one of the commissioners or through our you know technology circles the point of contact. >> Um you'd be >> yes I'd be the point of contact. Yeah. And we meet on a regular basis. Um
Carlos and and Vince and I you know have met as well with some uh companies that are projecting that. We've built a number of tools internally obviously not to that scale. Um it really depends. So again the number is high Commissioner Suarez but it was very conservative assuming that it would require a
wholesale change to our entire permitting software. Um we don't necessarily know that that would be the case. Uh there are ways to wrap what we have in that. Um, >> so I just I mean I'm being you know totally transparent and fair. Um, I
asked AI is a $9.5 million buildout for a permit system in Miami Beach excessive and it says it depends on what a building permit system means. If Miami Beach paid 9.5 million for a complete enterprise
permitting platform replacement, including software licensing, custom development, workflow automation, online citizen portal, document management, plan review tools, GIS integration, migration of decades of permit records, training hundreds of employees,
multi-year support and maintenance, then 9.5 million is not automatically excessive. Large municipal software projects frequently land in the5 to20 million range, especially when they replace legacy systems used by multiple departments. So
that being said, is that what this is intended to do? >> Again, from a budgetary standpoint, we were assuming that if we needed to leverage the amount of automation that needed to be required with the complexity complexity that we have, it would be somewhere in that ballpark if
we were to replace an entire system. It's not saying that that is the recommendation. Um, but looking at building funds, um, from several conversations that we've had, if we needed to do a worst case kind of scenario, that's where we would project that this would end up being. Now, there
are other AI related um, enhancements that we've been working on and some of that is coming from, you know, the results of the RFQ that I mentioned earlier. I think once we land there and we understand what that scales out to um we would be able to have better numbers while we can and have
built some AI tools here internally um there is a level of complexity and when you have an enterprise system many times it's a closed system so you're limited into what you can and can't pull from which kind of also leaned us towards what would the cost be for a complete replacement if we went that route um and
as many of you know I'm sure from you know watching the news and just being aware of what's out in uh private sector right now. AI costs are astronomical. Um it's affected everything we do from buying laptops and servers and storage to software licensing. Uh quite frankly, every technical company out there is
raising prices and blaming it on AI. It's just part of the way that the market is working. >> Let me ask you this >> if I could just as a follow-up to the commissioner's question. Um and remember this is a just a budget number. this is a a placeholder and ultimately we would
have to bring back any purchasing to the commission that's in excess of $100,000. >> But I think if the industry sees that in our budget we have allocated up to $9 million available to it, I don't think it puts us in a good place. Um it so we
had a special commission meeting that the mayor convened a while back about the building departments >> and and so the directive was to pilot um AI and so you all put together an RFQ
>> uh for that and that went out in March and people were responding. It was a 30-day response period if I recall properly. There was a 30-day response period. Uh due to the interest in that proposal and the amount of follow-up questions that we received, we had to extend that deadline a number of times
uh just to allow the biders appropriate time to bid on it correctly. And we are finishing the review, the technical review of the responsiveness now. So I expect that's you know on my shop primarily. Um Christiey's team has been very supportive on helping us with the
proposal portion. So we should be done with that here shortly and then we'll be able to well I don't want to speak to the camera process. >> So it is under the corner of silence but we did receive a vast number of responses about 30 something. So >> okay great >> they've been they're being reviewed um
internally and then we hope to bring something back once we could evaluate them pilot and come back. Yeah, because I I just want to remind everyone that the intent of the commission was that while we understood that full-blown implementation of an AI system might be
more involved and might take a longer period of time, we really pushed for there to be a pilot quickly implemented uh so that the public could start to benefit from the efficiency and the time
savings uh that that that it would generate. So by when given given the extensions you had to provide in order to pro to provide for proper time and competition within the marketplace. By when do you anticipate having a recommendation uh from the
administration for the commission? >> We need to have the evaluation committee. So hopefully we can have that in the next month or so >> and then if we're able to do that I don't see why maybe after the break September if possible we can shoot for that.
>> Okay because once then once we approve the contract at commission you still have to implement the system and I think you know I just want to remind everyone you know the whole idea was urgency. Uh we didn't want to wait a very long period of time. We want we want this
implemented. >> Agreed. I have a question for the building department. So, when we um Hi. >> Hello. Hi. >> Um when we purchased Betsy Perez's house
two and a half years ago, one of the uses was going to be an outpost of the building department um along with other city services in North Beach. That's what we identified. that's what we said we were going to do. That's where the money came from. Um, that is
no longer the case. We have collectively changed direction and we have had to repay that $6.5 million to the building fund. I did not know that there was a a limit of how much money you could have in reserve. I also know that um um our
former building director was talking about acquiring space to have a permanent home in North Beach. And now that I'm hearing that there needs to be a cap, you know, there's only so much money you can keep in reserve. Um, where
are we on that? I mean, real estate, let me just finish my thoughts for a quick second. Real estate is only getting more expensive up there. Land banking, land banking is a time-tested way to insulate a city's resources. Um,
I know that, um, I think it was the Rhythm Foundation was looking at at office space and a, you know, kind of underwhelming retail space on Collins and they were looking for 10 grand a month. So, renting probably isn't the best way to proceed. So, where are we on
that initiative and is that factored in any place and what's going on with that? >> Yeah, I'll I'll start before I I turn it over. Uh, the second project, there was about a million dollars for office space buildout renovation. Uh but one of the the caveats, the issues that came up um
and speaking with our new building director is um and I think we're waiting on a legal opinion is that there was some changes to the state law that went into effect that may have taken that option off the table and that >> I'm sorry, taken what option off the table? >> The acquisition of a building
specifically for to uh to to fit out the building department. So we may be forced into a rental situation. Uh, but >> you're saying the state wouldn't allow us to purchase >> and I'll let um I'll let him go into that a little bit, but that is I think we're still waiting on a legal opinion to clarify that, but it does appear that
may option may have been recently taken off the table. >> Okay. >> Okay. So, just to kind of go into that. So, uh, Senate Bill, um, 1614 that it's going to go into effect July 1st, took the ability
lot took the ability of us to be able to actually pay for the construction of a building to house the building department. >> But what about if you acquire something that's already office space? >> So, in terms of purchase, it's not stated yes or no.
waiting on so the state would rather have you pay rental fees in perpetuity to have a new building office. >> Well, we don't know that and that's that's the the the point is is it does appear we cannot construct our own building, but we're not 100% sure if it means we can't acquire an existing
building. So, it's it's it's a gray area that is being investigated. I don't know if we have a definitive answer, but so either going back to renting a bigger maybe nicer space and renovating it out very well, which is what's in the budget. Uh, but if we're able to get a definitive answer on that, we may be
able to pivot to to an acquisition. >> Okay. So, that that um enhanced North Beach building facility, whether it's whatever it is, is already in the budget to some degree. >> There's the the the capital budget here does have dollars for a buildout and renovation of a space. Okay. uh whether
it's rented or acquired will be determined. Uh if it able to be acquired, we can come back and they can engage in that process again with Aussie to identify a specific location and we can go back and and even with all of the allocations including this major uh IT project, there would still be sufficient
funds more than likely to be able to acquire a building. So we're we're working our yourself through this problem. So, I'm putting out the legal disclaimer that the FBI and the state who are listening, this is actually a joke. But can we buy buses for our trolley system through the building
department since there's so much money rolling around in there? That was a joke. I don't actually suggest that we do anything illegal. >> Okay. All right. Thank you. >> That's a great idea. >> It'll be a mobile a permitting system as you go around.
>> Well, I I like the out of the box idea. So, so if I could on that, um I also just want to give everyone a heads up that there's going to be a report that's coming out on the um agenda that prints today that talks about all of the u
far-reaching implications of that state legislation that passed in May that goes into effect July 1. So they gave us less than 60 days to implement significant changes including changes in our fee
structure and basically upending everything that we do in the building department today. So um there there's a lot of flux going on right now. >> Home rule. What a cherished memory we have of home rule.
>> All right. Thanks. And then we just have one last item. Yeah, the last item is vehicle and equipment replacement for next year. It's $10 million and the majority of those are for equipment and vehicles for police and fire. >> And then I just finally want to walk you through our next steps cuz this is
remember this is a budget that won't be in place for another three and a half months. So this is a long indepth transparent discussion that uh we have. So that this is um our first capital uh this is our capital budget workshop on
July 17th. We will do the exact opposite where we'll have a short capital update uh on where we are uh as we closed out FY25 and if we have any additional dollars and then the major one will be the uh the operating and that's where you talk about the roll back rate
reductions and and and any enhancements that we uh the manager would be recommending as their preliminary budget. uh then the commission on July 22nd would set the maximum millage uh whether that's roll back or not. You can always lower the millage at the 1st or
2nd hearing uh on September 10th or 23rd, but you set the maximum millage which goes out in your trim notice in August and uh based on the manager's preliminary budget and all of the adjustments that you know we have a few in the capital one we've talked about today. We'll talk about them again more
in July. And then on the operating side, they will deliver the preliminary overall budget and those will go out. We'll have our two public hearings and then uh on October 1st, the new fiscal year starts. So, and this is circling back to what I said at the beginning. I
feel strongly that we should spend some time, it doesn't have to be all evening, but starting these brainstorming sessions. I mean, what the news were delivered here is that we're going to be facing at minimum a what 7.6 7.9
somewhere in that range >> a million dollar deficit and if we follow the legislation that we passed a $17.9 million deficit. I don't think that's appropriate to make those decisions and not even prepare for just in one
afternoon budget meeting in July. I I think we need to sit up here and kind of appreciate the situation we find ourselves in and while not getting into specifics, at least talk high level about how we're going to achieve some of
those things. And Jason, I'm not putting you on the spot at all because I'm not expecting a presentation prepared, but if if my colleagues are up for it, at least maybe a half hour or something like that to start preparing for how
we're going to manage towards at minimum >> an $8 million cut to our operating budget. Well, I can just say a couple things to that point. uh one wherever that cut level ends up in the you know the seven to eight or up to 15 $17 million you know that'll be the
discussion but just so yes you we will have a very long and in-depth discussion in July but that is not the be and endall that is where you're going to hear the preliminary you know recommendations of the manager there will things you will be fine with or some things you will maybe not be so fine with you will give feedback and
then we will take that back and make any adjustments through August so when we come back at this first budget hearing in September there's another opportunity to kind of continue to refine. So maybe this big pie, you say, "I'm good with this part, but not good with this part. Switch this out. Give me something different." So there will be more public
meeting opportunities because when you first see that data, you've had the program budget for a bit. You're going to get the detailed line item budget and you're going to get our recommendations on enhancements and re and reductions and you'll have this whole list of additional enhancements that we're not recommending because, you know, we're trying to meet our balanced budget. But
I don't think that's what Commissioner Magazine was was intending. I think what he's intending is having another conversation a little bit more high level perhaps and maybe at the next FIK meeting we can have
a set aside for that 30 minutes or an hour. I was thinking now I mean we're all collectively together but just Eric where where's your head at where some of this is going to come from? Like I I don't mean oh line item $459 of
$118,000, but where are we going to start making some of this up? And we'll have two levels. One, just the bare minimum managing that 7.9 million and then to the legislation that we passed managing
to a $18 million. So, what I was planning to do for the July 17th meeting, just to give you a little bit of a sneak peek at what we were looking at, is, you know, as we've been working through this process for the last 7
months since we got very clear direction to prepare a rolled back budget. Um we've been working with each of the departments to uh realize a 5% reduction in their current service level um costs.
So what we are going to present to you is a list of all of those items that were brought up during those conversations. But I just want to jump in there because I you know I understand we need to find efficiencies,
>> but I just I I I don't want it to be a surprise to anyone. When I ran for the city commission in 2021, I ran saying public safety is my top priority and I'm not going to support any c any cut police, fire, ocean
rescue. Uh, you know, those are areas that I do believe regardless of what happens with a voter amendment, uh, regardless of our of our desire as a policy to have a rolled back budget. Those are areas, uh, where we do not
take away from the level of funding. Those are areas that I believe every government, every municipal government, our main purpose is always to protect life and property. Uh and that is the very basics of local government. Um ever since I started working in public
service at the age of 15 that this is what you learn local government you're supposed to provide for the very basics and you know I'm I'm I'm going to be very strong about you know while we do want to see a rolled back budget while
we do want to see efficiencies there are places where you take funding away from when necessary when you have to. but most certainly not police, fire, ocean rescue. Um you know there are certain things like maintenance of parks, streets and sidewalks. Those are just
very basic levels of government where I do believe we do have to maintain the level of service that that that we provide and then and then once and then then you look at at the other areas um just want to be very clear and
transparent about that in my position. If I could add um to to that is that I think what the manager was getting to is that it since we we're we have an opportunity here uh because though we only have to and these are still preliminary numbers that we won't know till July 1st and get the the the final numbers. But if we're to set let's just
say they are correct and $7.9 million what we know we need to cut to make a balanced budget. but you're going to be given a menu of 15 or $16 million. You'll have those options uh without having to, you know, you'll be able to have those options and remove those reductions if it's something that is not
palatable to the commission. And I think that's the great opportunity that you'll have through this process. You won't be forced to do $15 million worth of cuts. You'll you'll have to do eight, let's say, and you can meter yourself down a little bit. And again, if there's some more that are not, you could give direction and say, "We'll come back with
something more in September," as an example. So, you have a good opportunity here. You'll have a menu that you don't have to take the full the full thing. You can take some things that will not be palatable to some. And let's say we get to that 8 to or even
$10 million or X what Commissioner Fernandez mentioned. What is our path there if that entire, you know, 62% of our budget is off the table? >> Is off for what?
>> Is off the table. I'm not sure I understood the question. >> Right. If that 60 62% of our budget is public safety and uh in general, if that is off the table for reductions, where do we come up with $10 million?
>> Yeah. Can I just chime in before you chime in, Jason, and just just philosophical discussion? You know, I don't think any department should be exempt from review, right? I think there are inefficiencies in all of our
departments. Um, that doesn't necessarily mean, you know, by us having to review fire and police's budget is somehow anti- police or anti-fire. I don't think I don't think
I don't think it's a golden cow that we just don't ever touch or scrutinize. I think it's the opposite. I think it only makes I think it makes it better because you know if if they are running more efficiently it's good for everyone. It's also good
for the department. It becomes leaner. It becomes more efficient for for public service. Um, you know, public safety is a priority, but protecting, you know, safety does not require protecting every line item
from scrutiny. >> That that is correct. However, when you listen to what was told to us, 5% to the level of service, not to the budget, not to the operations, 5% to the level of service. And and I think that that's a a
a distinction. And I just perhaps maybe I misheard but but but I just want to make sure I understood correctly. Where is the cut coming from? >> But I just want to make sure >> maybe maybe there's a nuance Mr. City Manager. Are we you know >> but I need an answer to my question.
>> So the CSL budget is what we have. >> What is CSL? >> Sorry. current service level budget is what it would cost to provide the exact same services this coming year as cost us the prior year. What we've sat down
with each of the departments and said from your current service level budget for fiscal year 27 >> are there any other budgets besides CSL for police and fire? >> Sorry, are there any other budgets for police and fire? Overall, when we do the
budget, we start with the baseline. So, everybody's budget is baseline. How much does it cost next year to do what we're doing right now? >> But I think but but I think if and I don't want to speak for you um or put words in anyone's mouth. I think from our perspective is how do we deliver the
same level of service more efficiently >> and and that doesn't mean taking away from the service level and maybe and because I I that's where I feel many of us might be is deliver the same services
but find efficiencies so that we do it more efficiently so it doesn't cost us as much maybe maybe you have less swarm personnel in in in office positions maybe you as the mayor's initiative had of seeking more unsworn personnel doing
doing office work and that type of stuff. >> Well, that's what I mean by the nuance. I mean is sworn officers in administrative capacities considered CSL. So >> in police department >> CSL budget is basically looking at the
total headcount, total number of individuals. It's up to the department heads to allocate those resources in specific areas based on the policy direction of this body and obviously with input from
the manager's office. But um what we've seen over the years and I think you saw it in the uh LTC that went around yesterday that was a direct result of an ask during the budget retreat is that
we've not seen significant increase in headcount over the last 10 years um on non public safety related efforts. But yet, both on the public safety side and throughout the city government, we
continue to expand services. We continue to deliver more. Um, I'm just worried that you're getting to a point where the expectation that we can just cut $10 million out of a budget without cutting services is unrealistic.
>> Well, that that's where I wanted to start having these conversations here. And >> and I think yeah, Commissioner Magazine, if if I may, not to beat a dead horse with Commissioner Magazine, is that's we kind of want to get a heads up on that before the July meeting. Is is it
possible to do that perhaps at a FIRK meeting at the next FIRK meeting where we can set aside another hour and get a preliminary draft of of what staff is coming up with to do at a minimum obviously eight but
remember we all promised the residents that we're going to be doing a roll back rate. We made a promise to the res. It's not it wasn't a promise to me. It was a promise to the residents that we're going to lower your taxes >> and not raise your taxes. So, you know, I just I want to make sure that this is
not coming as a shock and then come July, we just have to, you know, make these these adjustments. I I think Commissioner Magazine is very correct where we should have as much advanced notice of this as possible so that we
can really go over it. >> Yeah. If I can >> and I think if I can Jason high level where I'm thinking this goes right and I've said it for two and a half years because it was very easy to see the trend line of where our expenses were
going and just expecting a decline in the growth of our assessed valuations is I've said this exact phrase we need to do more with the same or else one day we will be forced to do more with less and
I hope we can get to this point without doing more with less. We all need to push ourselves to do more with the same. So to the extent whether it's in any department, including public safety,
including our police and fire that I think the absolute world of, right? If we have an output of a 100 by 100 employees, so you have a output of of one to one.
If we if two people retire or step away from the job where we're not forced to make cuts, but we have less people because of attrition, what we're going to need is not maintaining that onetoone output. We
can't say, "Well, we're going to get an output of 98 because we have 98 employees." We need to keep that output of 100 through 98 employees, right? We're going
to need to ask more of all of us, ourselves, our city staff, administration, and our frontline workers, right? And that is the only way we will not be forced into making forced
cuts. Okay? If we do not address staffing levels proactively, we will be forced to do so through headcount reduction. And I never want to do that. I think the world of every employee here, right? So, we need to ask more out
of every single one of us to maintain current service levels and actually go above and beyond that with a little less resources because if we don't do that, we're going to be forced into
reductions none of us want to make. >> If I could add to the conversation because it's not a one-way street, right? We have a police and fire and ocean rescue um services uh to handle the very many major events
that we have in our city. Right? We talk all the time about the fact that we're an 82,000 person city. Well, that's true on a Tuesday afternoon, but on a Saturday evening in December or for the next 6 weeks, we're a half a million
person city. And so the the two other things that are part of this conversation that are not part of the budget process per se, but are a a a conversation that needs to be had is how much do our events that we that we
welcome to our city generate for the greater good, right? Because if they end up being a bigger drain on our system and services and staff, what's that? then um then maybe we should do fewer of them. And I'm not talking about the
really big impactful ones that define the city, but you know, not for nothing, we've had Art Basle in December. Um we had uh the Food and Wine event in February. We had um the month of spring break. We had uh which was great. We had
um um where are we now? What month are we in? June. We've got FIFA going on now. We had Memorial Day and who was missing one. So that is every single month basically. We have major impactful events in the city which are amazing and
we love them. But that's also why our staffing levels of sanitation and um fire and police are at the levels where we are because we couldn't handle those events with the level of security if we were a city staffed for 82,000
residents. And that is a fundamental philosophical discussion that we will need to have going down the road at some point if we do not find other ways to generate revenue that are not based on property tax. So >> or fees on our residents
>> or fees on our residents. Um so so bringing new industry here. you've you've brought in several um I'm having conversations with the city manager and with with people uh in the county about revving up our our film industry um and
generating income from that to to transition the city from a seasonal event-driven real estate based income generating town to something that is yearround sustainable has growth um opportunities
is is a philosophical sea change the same way that reinventing Ocean Drive and South Beach as an an arts and culture district as opposed to just entertainment, not getting rid of entertainment, not getting rid of events, not getting rid of the beautiful
real estate that drives so much of what goes on here, but if we want to be something else and protect ourselves, insulate ourselves from these kinds of discussions every couple of years on the whims of somebody else's economic decisions, whether in the state or in
the country, um we need to think differently about what we are as a as a city and as a community. And that's not a conversation for today or even really for the rest of the budget process. But it is a conversation that we should all be thinking about as we go forward and think about our legislative pri
priorities, the policies, what we want to incentivize here, who we want to attract, what we're going to offer. I mean, we talk about it all the time that we have worldclass parks and wreck. I mean, really kudos. worldclass parks and wreck. From the facilities, the weight
system notwithstanding in North Beach, we'll take that. No, but seriously, from from the facilities to the staffing to the programs that we offer, um we have worldclass arts and culture. Again, from the facilities, the actual facilities to the programs that we offer. Um we have
Albert and her staff who are taking care of our um underresourced residents with rent assistance and food assistance and navigating the system. Not to mention the $10 million that we spend in homeless outreach. I mean, these are things that make us who we are. And if
we're going to start thinking that we're going to take things away, um, we need to either decide that that's not who we are and therefore lose the people who've chosen to move their multi-und million lifestyles or billions in some
cases to our city. They could have gone to Sunny Isles. They could have gone to Miami proper and they're coming here because of what we offer in our totality >> or we're going to have to attract different businesses and shift the narrative of who we are. And so again, it's not a conversation for today or
even next week or next month. But it is something that we need to really think about because, you know, nobody wants to take away the things that make this city special and safe and distinguish us from Miami and and other parts of Miami date.
I mean, this the statistics that you were asking about, Joe, in the beginning of the meeting about what percentage of of our um revenue came from new construction was disproportionately high in a good way here on a tiny little, you know, and it's not even uh weighted for
for this the size of the area in which it was built. I mean, if you do that analysis, which I don't know how to do, but I'm sure somebody here does, um it's even more disproportionately favorable to Miami Beach. And that's because we are something that doesn't exist very many other places in the
world and certainly not in this country or this state. So we need to be careful. We did promise that we are going to try our best to keep costs low going forward, but I do not feel that that is going to
be a prudent decision at the expense of what makes us us. There is a balance to be had there. I agree with you, Alex, about the public safety. a thousand bazillion percent. I agree with you, David, about trying to find ways to do
um at least the same with less. And Joe, that's I know that's your phrase as well, but we really have to have serious conversations going forward in the next year about how we do that without cutting to the bone and killing the goose that lays the golden egg. And one thing and Debbie maybe uh it's
something you can examine with all of us you can come up you know um crime prevention through environmental design it's a it's a very >> accepted >> you know accepted practice we don't do that right we don't do that one way to
essentially make sure and it ties into your kind of event uh discussion where well we have to have all these major events because we haven't built a real economy yet and we don't have a residential population that can support
our small businesses for how many years have we all turned on channel 7 and go there's a video from Mitch Novc's house again somebody else happened that like have any one of us or staff as well gone
hm I wonder what it is about that area that that is such a hotbed for this crime that then strains police Jones and his team, right? Perhaps if we had better environmental design in certain
areas, we wouldn't need such a drain on our resources, right? Just like these huge events are drains on our resources, there might be an ROI for that, a return on our investment. And but if we see these areas and Debbie,
maybe it's you working with us and with Chief Jones and really it's it's part of what my vision for Washington Avenue was in other areas of our city where we won't need so much police. I always use the example, you know, I say, "Chief, do
you need to send more officers the first in Washington or 10th in Washington?" And why is that? Right. it it's because of our environmental design, our urban planning. So, if we want to have less of a strain on our resources, I think urban
planning is a huge part of that. Um, I don't know if you just you came up and you're you know, you're you're you're a veteran, but you're new. Um, what are your thoughts on that, >> Debbie? I couldn't agree with just to input. you might be about might be about
to say, you know, one of our challenged corridors is Washington Avenue. And >> you know, you and I have spoken extensively about how we can reimagine Washington Avenue more as not so much residential, but just to to
reignite it so that it's not just a single use corridor where you don't have eyes on the road that you, you know, right now it's just the business owners, right? But if you had residents also living there, you just you fundamentally
have much more eyes on the road and and less blight and less need for police interventions. >> Yeah. And I guess that's what I'll ask. Are are there areas of our city where we could better design it? We could have
better urban planning that we wouldn't need such resources from our police and fire. >> Um yes, I agree with you 100%. Um there there are several different tools in terms of urban design and urban planning. The SEPTED guidelines are excellent. You know, I will give you my
commitment that we will work with the police department. I know the police department also has some experts in that septed field. Um when we're reviewing new projects, but also things like land use, um allowable land uses also factor
into to public safety. Um, one of the, just as an example, one of the issues we're seeing on Washington Avenue is a lot of those um, businesses do not create that activity. We do not have a lot of residential um, uh, housing stock
on Washington Avenue corridor. And what we see is we see businesses that are primarily late night businesses that um, achieve their their desired effect by blocking out their storefronts so you can't even see in. There's not that connection to the sidewalk. So, there's there's many things. There's also things
that that we can work with the public works department on in terms of lighting and that type of enhancement on Washington Avenue which also uh helps um public safety issues. So I think um you know I can speak for the planning department that we're committed going forward to not only look at different
land uses. We are we are somewhat restricted right now in terms of removing allowable land uses but certainly incentivizing um land uses that we would like to see that just by you know it's it's a zero cost right in
terms of cost to the taxpayers by changing a nightclub to to an apartment building that is the cost 100% of a developer. So there are lowcost and zerocost things just from a land use perspective that we can try and and implement in terms of a policy. And then
there's also um smaller projects like lighting and maybe coming up with some more robust uh septide guidelines that we could follow and work with uh with Chief Jones on. >> You've said better in one minute that I've been babbling on about for years and years. what you said is perfect and
it literally gave me goosebumps because that's the vision I want to carry out for our city, right? It has nothing to do about development or this or that. It is creating a better lived environment for our residents and our visitors that are here. And in doing so, it also helps
us with our budgetary issues. >> I want if if I >> I have a question. I'm sorry. I've been um so have we ever had in the past um Eric a consultant or someone that on staff that actually um presents
some type of long-term plan for Miami Beach and where we want to go. I mean, because I appreciate what you're saying, Debbie, but I feel like the planning department, I mean, you guys, you know, assess projects as they come up and they you you know, developers will contact you and say, "Hey, I want to do this here and then this is our plan and what
can we do and what can we ask for and what can we get?" And you work with them. But I don't think anyone has ever been on staff that necessarily says what Joe wants, which is, excuse me, Commissioner Magazine, which which is like, well, we want to get here, you know, or we want to what's where's the
sweet spot of too many events or events that actually lower that keep our property taxes low because they bring in the resort dollars. So, we need those events. We need that tourism. It pays for itself. we don't really have any type of visionary process which I think you've been speaking about several
different times which is why you presented that um bimonthly commission the workshop so we can kind of talk about this but I don't think we've ever really had any type of cohesive plan as to where do we want to get is it more residential is it you know less
nightclubs or is it maybe a nice combo of both or do we want to model ourselves like New York City or Austin Texas or Monaco have we ever had a consultant that does citywide for what we want our future to be like in 10 years. >> But commissioner, that's I wouldn't want to trust that to a consultant. That's
what we're elected for. >> So, but is that though? Because like I said, you know, I mean, the planning department like you guys don't or or do you? And and you know, maybe I'm wrong, but I've just never known of you or Tom or anyone. I mean, you're just one department, right? So, it's not like you
could sit down or or could would would we need to convene like all of our directors? you know, you and parking because we need to make sure there's enough parking and then we need transportation because we need to make sure our roads aren't at capacity and then we need to get, you know, public works involved to make sure we have enough toilets that flush. And then, you
know what I mean? Like, has there ever been a strategy session about where to get where we want to go in 5 10 years, 15 years, and and where will we be and what does that require? And so, that's why I suggested the consultant because there are consultants that do all of that urban planning and poor Debbie like Debbie, hey, tell us, you know, I'm
ready to go. Tell us where we need to go in 10 years. Abby, >> I'll say this. >> Fix all the problems. >> You were too talented and loved this city too much to be a code reader. I want you to be an urban planner. >> No. And and >> how does that feel Debbie? Can you tell
us where you want to go? >> Certainly that is a you know best practice right in terms of looking at holistically the in the city um incorporating other departments. I think we can do, but I think we we we try to do that, but Commissioner um um
Matteo Selenus, you're correct. We we tend to look at projects on a case-by case basis, right? So, we're more reactionary. Um I think what we could do is and what we have done in the past is look at projects on a case by case and then look at certain areas.
We haven't I mean undertaking an entire citywide um master plan would be quite the challenge right it would be a multi-year process um it may like a lot of our master plans that we've accomplished over the years may not result in any sort of quick action um
that's what I think I see you know for Washington Avenue where we've got an item now that we're working through but there's been probably eight Washington Avenue plans since I've been with the city you know so I think There there's it's a catch 22 sometimes with thinking
too large in terms of we we come up with these you know year-long planning processes and then we don't actually you know 3 years after the the process is over it's it's harder to implement individual projects. So I think it's a balance. I think we need to be more
holistic. Um, and we need to be more proactive. Um, and I think, you know, the the commission is going to be a great partner with that because right now, you know, it's not the planning department's perview to propose all these significant changes. That's that's really a policymaker decision and and
you know, of course, we're here to assist with that. Um, but certainly we're ready to roll our sleeves up and and start thinking maybe a little bit differently. >> And I appreciate that, Debbie. And I just want to say that as we're asking everyone and every single department to do more with less, it's going to be
tough to now create a vision for the whole city and where we want to go in 5 10 years. Um, so I, you know, thank you Debbie for that and I hope get this together, figure this out >> and and doing better. Yep. >> Just to speak to that before Eric gets
involved. Um, you know, I I thought about that a lot after I got elected is like, how come staff didn't come to us with ideas and it turns out that it's backwards, right? I mean, we're the pol we're the policy makers cuz we're the ones who get
elected because we're the ones who knock on doors and hear from the the electorate of what their needs are, not the other way around. I don't want to hear a consultant's idea of how Austin should be Miami Beach. that's they they haven't spoken to the thousands of
residents like we have on on on their issues and their concerns. So, you're right. You know, we're going to have we that's a multi-year process and by the time it's done, there's another there's another set of >> idea and the consultant kind of says, well, this is how you get there, but it
comes from us, you know, and you guys are the professionals that would give us the suggestion. It's a, you know, respectfully, I'm I'm the commissioner who wants to have, you know, as least consultants as possible because I trust the planning department to carry through my vision just like they did with Washington Avenue. You know, I said,
"Hey, Debbie and Tom, I want to reimagine Washington Avenue, make it more residential, make it more walkable, not add the traffic, and really address this the vacant storefronts and blight." and they
did, you know, and and I trust them. I didn't have to hire, you know, we didn't have to hire a consultant to do that. I fully trust staff's, you know, recommendation. I think it's very easy to say, hey, look, you know, where do we want to see each other this city in 10, 20 years and
and have the people who are here to that are already hired who've been here for, you know, decades to to really give their insight. I don't I don't know if it's necessarily a good idea to hire, you know, consultant who's going to, you know, take your money, right, or our
money or the taxpayers's money for what they think their vision is. I think it really comes from top down because we're the ones who really speak to the electorate and and talk to thousands of voters on a monthly uh basis and you
know we're we're the ones who who should be giving the policy direction not not not through not the other way around right and and that's particularly why you don't see staff coming to us saying hey this is our idea you know for Miami Beach it's you know you
carry out our vision. We're not here to carry out your vision. >> Correct. >> So, I I want to go back uh to a point I made earlier is one um one of the last meetings that we had, you know, I asked staff,
segregate out the 62% that's public safety from the budget and show us where we've had most of our increase and and you prepared that LTC. I think Jason started with his presentation with that today. And PJ, I don't know if you if
you have um that. There we go. That's that that's the image that I wanted to see. And so, you know, what what stands out to me here is that, you know, we have areas where there are not the direct services that our residents are
receiving, where we have seen tremendous growth in economic development. We've seen an increase in the budget of $2 million in procurement. Uh you've seen an increase of of over a million dollars
in CIP and finance and in facilities. I think I think it's it's uh it's it's $4 million. You know, over over the past 10 years, it seems like, you know, we've seen an increase, I don't more than 50%
increase. Yeah, certainly more than than 50% increase over over over the over the past 10 years. Now, does that necessarily mean that we're overspending? Probably not. But does it does it suggest that there's room to
examine uh whether whether every increase in in these lines remain justified? I think so. And so before we go out and we take away from the essential services
that our residents are getting in police, fire, ocean rescue, maintenance of sidewalks, streets, and parks. I rather us take a look in these areas here >> and especially those line items that
aren't the frontfacing services that our residents are getting before before we we touch any of those direct services and most certainly before we touch any of those services
that are the most essential core public safety and the very basic tenants of being a municipal governments, you know, and and and I say that with much respect for all of these uh entities that are here and including, you know, a lot of
the stuff that has been discussed here today, especially, you know, um line items that are important to our to to our brand and who we are as as a city, including arts and culture that we want to preserve as much as as possible. But
before we go into preserving that, I truly feel that number one, we need to make sure that we have the funding secured to maintain the level of service in the core areas of our government. And then seeing some of these other areas
where where where we've had $2 million increases over the past 10 years, $4 million increases over over the past 10 years, you know, multi-million dollar increases. Um and seeing okay there especially areas that are not
front-facing, especially areas that are not direct services to our residents. Seeing where we can find those adjustments and those efficiencies so that our government can continue providing the very core basic services
that are expected of a municipal government. I have um Commissioner Fernandez, I have an item coming up at the next meeting for um AI consulting to see how we can go into every single department, not every single department, and see where
we can find inefficiencies and take advantage of that and uh and that just frees up more dollars for what our core functions of government are. So, uh, and arts and culture and public safety and, you know,
everything that we value as a city in Miami Beach. So, I'm hoping that, um, you know, I get I get unanimous support for that. I think that's going to be another way we can, um, attack that issue.
>> Yeah. A and to your uh point, Commissioner Fernandez, certainly part of the reason why we've improved so much as a city is because of our focus on public safety, a clean city, right? So, I would never want to take steps back in
that regard. I I also think that we can have discussions about how to have more efficiencies in those departments while still providing the same level of service, right? just like we have in every single department. Um,
of the I think it was three or four uh departments that you highlighted there. Uh, mayor and commission maybe PJ if you could pull that slide back. Don't worry about um >> even if we rolled back the top four departments ex park and wreck to 10 year
ago numbers that only gets us about a third of the way there to a road back millillage rate right if we would take parks and wreck isn't somewhere I'm I'm willing to roll back on because I think it's truly the greatest amenity in our city along with uh public safety but if
you would roll back the top four uh entities that are highlighted there to 10 year ago numbers, we'd still only get to about half or a third of the way to getting to our road back millage rate.
So, it's not that I'm saying yes, we we you know, we want to roll back public safety or things like that. It's just when that constitutes such a large portion of our budget, we certainly need to we certainly need to >> find ways to run at the same levels of
service with a more efficient government, right? And I'll say that about every single department. If uh we have lesser allocation to the mayor and commission, I'm not going to go out and tell our constituents, hey, you can't call me on
Tuesday because we have less resources. I'm going to say, you know what, I'm going to bust my butt and provide that same level of service even if we have less resources possible. And if that's something that we need to evaluate our own selves and that that's on the table
as well because I will for damn sure lead by example. I guess my point was, you know, rather than saying, you know, >> my thing is, you know, when the revenues are are declining, which I anticipate
this ballot question will probably pass if I if if I had to guess the peop a lot of people and a lot of experts in politics say it's not going to pass. I I I read the tea leaves very differently and I feel it is going to pass. Not
because I like the bill because I do think a lot of things are going to suffer. uh a lot of the important programs that are funded by government and a lot of governments are going to practically disappear. Um but when our
revenues are are are are declining, the budget reductions I believe should be based on priorities and not a specific percentage that's applied equally to every department. Okay. >> And and that and and that is that to me
is crucial. um you know and I and I understand the exercise of of the 5% across across all departments but there are more essential departments and services than others and if that 5%
apply to certain essential core functions of government affect the provision or the level of service of some very basic services of government. I rather then see the cut perhaps be slightly larger in other departments to
protect the level of service of core essential municipal services. >> Wholeheartedly agree. And Eric, just for clarity sake, you just did that across the board to give us a menu of options to say if not here there. Correct. >> Correct.
>> Okay. >> All right. So, I think we I mean I think we've gotten a lot of feedback and I think a good understanding of our structure going forward. I think and then to wrap up for this with the capital, I think we had a couple of elements that we made notes of. We'll make adjustments and we'll make sure to have that back in July. And the
important thing is July 1st, we'll get those additional values out. We got a little bit we got some definite work to do, but we'll be ready, but we are three and a half months out from from this budget. So, we got do have some time and go through these exercise. I just want to thank uh the commission for all being here and giving us some good feedback and some really good discussion here.
So, thank you. >> Thank you, chair. Thank you. >> Thank you so much. >> Thank you. >> Meeting adjourned. Thank you. >> Uh and and if I could, this isn't part of the meeting. Eric, thank you and your team, Chief Jones, your team, Chief Alb,
your team. What an event, John, you and your team. What an event we had to kick off the World Cup. It It was flawless. We We were just Yeah, we were We were the epicenter of the world and and our city pulled it off flawlessly. I
couldn't be more proud. >> Crushed it. Thank you.