The mayor and commissioner of the city of North Miami Beach recognizes the importance of civility. The city of North Miami Beach requests that all in attendance to exercise civility towards each other. >> Any speakers? >> None has come forward. Mayor.
>> All right. Seeing none, I know our city attorney is coming up the stairs. Uh so but before we get into the discussion item I wanted to say this is just you know an update see where we are. I know there's
been correspondence in certain issues and people wanted to feel have the confidence that this is being very transparent and and I want to give everybody difference in that regard. So, um
before we begin, uh I'd like to see if uh we can start off with um Commissioner Sue with your thoughts on >> Yes. Thank you. >> Thank you for um for that, Mr. Mayor. Um
I just wanted to voice my concern. I think I had sent an email about two weeks ago um expressing that I believe that we should actually cast a wider net and really work on recruiting or getting a head hunter. I um checked with the HR
also um it looks like the cost of it is ranging between like the lower 20s to 40 in the 40 range. Um, I think it's it's a small price to pay considering that, you know, we've haven't had we haven't had
the transparency or the way of recruitment for for the city manager position that has been like up to a certain standard, right? We needed a head hunter who would help filter out um impartially
um not bringing in people that we know, people that we think are going to be good um but instead like really looking at their credentials and really seeing I mean if if the candidates that we have now actually measure up then you know it would be no problem but we would have a
stronger pool to to choose from. Um, I think we should cast a nationwide net. Uh, do a uh, you know, do a um, and I'm sorry, I'm I'm like hung up because I'm seeing myself. I'm the only person on the screen. I was
>> We can We can hear you, Commission. We can hear you, Commissioner. >> Okay, you can hear me, but I can't see you. So, I feel like I'm talking to myself. Okay. So, um, thank you, Mr. Mayor, for reinforcing that. But yeah, I think that um just to create transparency and let and let our residents know that like we really care
um they have elected us for us to you know represent them and let them know that you know this position is really important to us and we know this is important to us. I think we are at another you know we we're at a crossroads. We are expanding. We are
reinforcing. We are repairing. We are building. There's a lot of things happening in North Miami Beach. We really need somebody who has that wherewithal to, you know, to carry this forward. And also, it would be somebody who is going to stay with us regardless
of whether, you know, we have some commissioners that are we have a commissioner terming out in in next year. We have um three terming out in the two years after that. So, you know, I mean, like there's a lot of a lot of things going in the normal attrition of
the commissioners. Um, I think it's important that we choose somebody who's very very good at what they do. Um, and the the thing that I mentioned in my email is about the is about the connection to the county.
Um, we have a very strong city attorney. I mean like I honestly when when I became a commissioner I really thought that I would you know I would like to learn from him because he had so he has so much experience and so much knowledge
uh being a mayor himself being you know an elected a state representative being a city attorney in various places. Um, you know, I thought that there that would be the case. And yet, like sometimes like, you know, there are certain things that that that get in the
way of somebody who that we you know, when we have that kind of connection. So, what the connection that I'm looking for for North Miami Beach is a city manager who is going to be our city manager, who is going to look after the
interests of our residents and the the interest of our city. So, um, right now I'm feel like I'm repeating myself, so I'm going to, um, I'm going to yield my time. >> Um, so
go with >> I will go with a Are you um, Commissioner um, Turnoff? Sorry, I saw the two pink and it was Sorry. Well, you know, I I appreciate Lyn Lyn Zel and what she's looking for in widening the
net, but I thought we got a great response with over 70 applicants. And you know, my personal opinion was I wanted to keep it to Florida. And the reason why is Florida is different than everywhere else. And especially if you
come from this county, it's a big plus for me. That's just my opinion. Um, >> Mr. Mayor, did I do I have an opportunity to re to rebut or refute or or add? >> Um, well, I was just trying to >> Oh, or later. I'm I'm
>> Yes, you'll have a an opportunity to respond. I just I'm going down the line like I usually do. Um, so just um, Vice Mayor, do you have any your thoughts? >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. If you can come back to me. >> All right, Commissioner.
>> Okay. So I thank you so much uh Mr. Mayor. So I think that we have been transparent in our search. Um I know when I went to the League of Cities conference in back in August in Orlando, I went to the manager the county
managers booth I believe it was and um I made sure that they were aware of it and they said yes, you know, they put it out there. I also spoke to um Jay, what's her last name? An Tory. >> Anton.
>> An Anton Tony who who was actually a manager here many many moons ago. She's also part of the um something with the Florida managers. And um she said, you know, if you put it on the um on that
website, he goes, Jacob knows what website. and it was done because I did search and um she says if you've put it out there it's it's out there and um I you know um Florida is is it's we're
we're different. We're not just like any state and actually South Florida should be its own state. You know, we're we're we're so different than than the rest of Florida. And I I do want someone with
experience. Um I I mean I I'm asking for Florida. I'm not going to start getting picky about it being South Florida, but we we really do need to have someone who who has the connections that can um meet with the different know know who to
call, know who to speak to, know the the the the representatives, know the the senators, have contacts, and we've tried this in not we, but I know that in uh Biscane Park, they tried um a manager from
Minnesota, I think it was, and that didn't work. And um Bay Harbor tried Illinois, was it, and that didn't work. So, we we really do need to have someone
from Florida. We've had 70 applicants. And the reason that we do not have more than 70 applicants is because people watch our meetings and say, "Why the heck would I want to work in North Miami
Beach?" So having 70 was actually shocking that we had that many. And until we can figure out on the day and and I have to say something, I really think that we've we've gotten along really nicely in the last year. There's no bickering. We're really try I really
do believe that the seven of us are trying really hard to get along and to make our city better. But until that is out there that we are trying really hard and we are not bickering until that is out there
real real and and wait and let me rephrase that because people who have applied are real good but there's other people that could have and should have applied and they will not apply in our city because what has happened in the
past not in the present and not in the future, but in the past. So, until we get that stigma out of here, um we're not going to get more people applying. And also, we can't just start going out and redoing this.
We at the we at the commission meeting, we said the first week of October, we're almost getting into the second week of October now. We're we're passing our deadline and our intern manager is here until November
17 19 31 30 31 32 um you know we can't we can't now then get an interim interim manager. [Laughter] So we cannot get an interim interim manager. So we we not and and listen
just because we go out there doesn't mean that the end of the night the decision is not going to be the same as it's going to be in the next few weeks. Thank you for your time. >> Uh thank you Mr. Mayor. Uh well um you know in in looking at the process um
because that's that's what we're here to um discuss is the is the process. Um you know I I I'm hearing Commissioner Sue's points. I'm hearing uh my colleagues points and you know I understand wanting someone
from Florida. However, you know, we we we've had experiences um and and I don't believe that the the uh proximity um will necessarily equal
uh the result of having a manager whose tenure is going to be very long, three, five plus years. you know, I think what's important is um skill set, ability to um to uh bridge the gap between, you know, the state, between
the county, between um other entities. Uh and and that to me is about skill set. It's about being able to look at something with fresh eyes. Um and so I think it's important to uh cast a a
wider net. Um, who knows what that will result uh in. Maybe it might result in uh picking someone who's probably already in the uh in the running or maybe it might result in us seeing
potential with uh someone else. Um but as far as the process, there's been some questions and I believe that um the process does need more time. Uh I do agree that we need some help um and our
staff needs uh help as well because there's a lot on their plate and um so the head hunter is a pretty good idea um and maybe that can assist us with um uh the process of selecting a city manager.
I'm open to the uh extending of this process and and uh looking for uh more candidates and maybe some people will apply even from Florida who have not applied yet um or who were thinking about it and hadn't had the chance to do it. So uh that's my uh thought, Mr.
Mayor. >> Why wouldn't they have had a chance within Florida? It was out there. Why why would you say that those within Florida didn't have a chance? It was >> Well, okay. Well, you you're you're you're in it's it's the wording, but
what I'm saying is if someone didn't didn't apply yet, they may apply. That's what should have applied. >> Okay. Commissioner Smith. >> Thank you. Good morning, everybody. Um, as most of you know, because one of the most important events the city's had, the centennial kickoff. I wasn't there.
I was out of town. And um there was a little snafu changing flights. So the plane was so delayed that I got in at 1:30 in the morning. But I've been researching what this meeting's about.
So I'd like to ask the human resource. We have three names in front of us. I called from Vermont to the clerk's office to ask her what's the meeting about? And she said all she had is discussion on hiring. So I said, "Well,
we each had to give three names. I would like a copy of the resume of every name of the 21 names of seven of us that was put in. Is this three names in front of me,
all the names of the 21? Are there other people that were put in even if they only had one vote that I do not have a copy of the resume? >> Yes, please manager. >> Yeah, Jacob Newman, interimm HR director. Yes, ma'am. Those three names
are uh comprehensive of all the uh names submitted. >> So, there was not one I spoke to somebody in reference to Commissioner Sue's request. I spoke to somebody in Atlanta that put in a request. I spoke to somebody I think in Greenville,
Florida, like under 10,000 residents. >> Nobody put in a different name than these three names. >> Correct. There was uniform uh unanimity in the individuals that were uh uh
requested for referral and it was those three names. >> Okay. >> I'm sorry to interrupt. I'm just curious who put in names. which commissioners put in names. >> Um I've received um emails from uh Commissioner Smith's aid and and
included her uh from yourself, Commissioner Smuckler, and from Commissioner Turnoff. >> So, four commissioners didn't even bother to put in names. >> No, I would like to wait a second, >> please. I'm hang because I have a Commissioner Smith. Go
on. Sorry. >> So, there's a few things I'd like to say. Number one, when we have a meeting like this, I think as commissioners, we'd like to know a little more detail, not just a general. I I like to study. I like to see what we're doing. I don't
want to be blindsided that there were seven of us that picked one name, so we're just going to vote for them. >> No, no, no. Um, this Wait, let me be very clear. When I made the request, right, and because I made the request, it was just an update. We were We were gonna We had other dates scheduled later on. One one of the reasons why I was
kind of concerned of even having it in the morning. This was supposed to be an update in that sense. We can have discussions uh and but what have you the reason why I chose the morning is because I know Suka starts tonight and it goes on to like um for several days now that would have kicked us off to
next week and I know there's issue there when I was looking at the scheduling it was going to cause problems. So, we're looking for like probably like uh October 20th. And so, I was trying to because I'm trying to weigh all everybody's concerns and showing the respect because that I have to do that.
I have to >> and it was and and it wasn't trying to blindside anyone. Commissioner Smith, believe you me. Okay. >> I'm not trying to do any of that. >> I just want to say how much I appreciate that. >> That's all. Please. That's all. >> I appreciate what you just said. Unfortunately, we come to where we are from where we've been and I have sat up
here so many times and been blinded. seen a B and I don't want to continue that >> tenants have a tendency to go up. So I appreciate that this is just what it said a discussion item. >> I also want to stress Commissioner Suz because you know makes a lot of sense.
There's a ying and a yang to it. Let's go with a head hunter. Let's go nationwide. However, I spoke to somebody from Atlanta. I know there was there was somebody from California that had applied. So, as last time I looked at a
map, California and Georgia were in the nation. So, those that looked and wanted to move and wanted to think about it, guess what? Out of 70 applications, if we had known that we could have had, how many people were from out of the state
of Florida? I find a very interesting thing because I've been here long enough. it it you know to have a long-term manager means this city's going to go forward. To have a long-term manager more and more when you research how do
you make a great city? How do you really take the residents up to so many levels that people are envious? And the bottom line to it is when you do things your visionary can't be for this week, this month, this year. Your
visionary has to go out 10 years. It has to go out 20 years. You have to have a vision of what's going to be. Where do you want to have long-term plans? And to have a manager that comes for a year,
comes for two years. None of that applies to North Miami Beach. None of it. So, you look around you and you see the advances of Sunny Isles, Aventura, North Miami, my gosh, Miami Gardens. How could you not be envious? And how could
you go home at night and rest your head peacefully as a commissioner? What the heck are we doing that we're not, and I said it shamefully, we're not moving the city forward for the residents? And that
all comes under a strong manager and it comes under a mayor and commissioners that work well together with different opinions and yet get the job done. Okay, I'm getting off my band stand and I'm
going to say a little bit about the three names I have in front of me just so that people will understand. Not them in particular, but them. Where do they come from? them. Why are the three names in my packet?
Why are those three names Dade County? And when you interview people, you have to understand something. Date County has a very unique click.
Has a click. and Dave County 100%. You have to get the right person in there that knows how to I won't use the word manipulate, but if I put that word out there, you'll understand. They have to have the right personality to groove
with the click. And so I just feel and I I felt very strongly about this the last couple months. We have given votes that have gone for no reason in Phyllis's mind in this seat
absolutely should have never been blatant blatant blatant and a win anyway. We need a manager that can come up and say like when I was first elected the way they handled it, commissioner, I
see what your goal is. I'm gonna get you there, but let's not be a headline. They have to have be strong enough to be able to say, "No, Mr. Mayor. No, because I hear what you want and I want
you to have it, but we're not going to spend the money." No, Commissioner Smith. You look cute in that new outfit. But the answer is no. We have to have a manager that likes me, that loves me, that loves the
commissioners. But you know what he's going to say? I love you, but not enough to screw the comm the residents. And I'm using strong language because I want you to know what my mind is thinking. That's what we're looking for. We're looking for somebody knows government, somebody
has a strong will, somebody that loves us, their their sister's dating their cousin. It's okay. I'm still saying no. I'm still saying no. So, the three names in my file, we don't
have to reveal reveal the names, but those three names happen to be very strong people in Dade County. And you know, people say, "Don't hire somebody that was fired from another municipality." You know why they were fired? Because they did say no.
And we want somebody that will say no. We want somebody that's willing to lose their job over doing the right thing. That's who we're looking for. And I have to tell you something 100%. I
understand how people feel. I understand about going hiring and doing. I just kept thinking about that because I I read uh it was read to us Lyn uh Commissioner Sue's request for a head
hunter. How many people who live in Ohio that we would hire would come here so excited to get out of the snow, so happy to be in Miami? Would come here and four
months later say, "What the heck did I get myself into? I wouldn't stay in this job. There's not enough money to pay me." So, let's realistically talk about hiring somebody. Let's talk about somebody that is a managerrun city
that's a manager that has all these employees to have to make sure that they're happy that they do their job that they accomplish the needs of the residents. And guess what else? They make seven people understand
that what their goals are will get there, but we're only going to get there the right way. And you know, I know it sounds like I'm on a speech again, which I have a tendency, but I want the public to understand my thinking, my process.
And yes, I got in at 1:30 and yes, they would give us vouchers for hotel, but I would be here for this most most most important vote or most most important discussion, not knowing which way this was really going to go if I had to crawl because
this decision at the end is how our city's going to be hopefully 10 years from now, 15 years from now, 20 years from now. Let's hire somebody that looks at the goal of vision of the future,
making sure it's run perfectly to the best of our ability in the present, but we're also making sure that the future's protected for the residents. So, thank you for my time and I appreciate all of you.
we can all have something to do. >> Yeah. I I don't All right. Can I All right. So, okay. The one of the main reasons I wanted to call this um particular meeting is this. Last time when we first had this discussion about setting the process, I had a lot of talking heads out there, which I should
have been more cognizant of. I had a commissioner that wasn't a vice mayor that wasn't here. I had another commissioner that was not here. And since this is going to be a collective decision, I wanted everybody to participate. I'm glad that we have everybody's participation. There's a lot of objections which I saw from
Commissioner Sue's email about the process process and emails from various other residents saying X Y and Z or whatever, right? But at the end of the day, I also know that the decision lies with us to be clear, right? I understand staff's um staff situation like the
staff's position various staff and how they keep pushing and pushing and pushing and pushing on issues and I have to balance that out with the needs of my commission and and respect that whatever decision we make is a collective decision regardless. Please
people have to understand that some people just want stability just to have stability. Some people want to say I want to I was a part of the process so they can make brownie points for whoever we choose. My my my understanding is this. I want to be able to to do something that we have not done in a long long time is be as completely
transparent and I've seen it from various aspects. We've all fall into that trap going back decades to some to some degree or whatever. And I don't want to go h rehash it, but but I also want to be honest with myself, especially in the position I am to say I
did everything I could to make this as extremely transparent as possible. I want to let the the constituents know the ones that don't even like me. I want to say, hey, I did everything I could to make it very transparent,
very clear, and very open. So, I wanted this to give this opportunity to Commissioner Sue. I want to give this um this the conversation to the people that weren't here. At least when that when that when we're making that determination because I wanted to at least have just that theme to change from what we've been doing for going on
decades. I don't want to do that anymore. I don't want to be accused of certain accusations. They might not be true. And like I buck some I've bucked other accusations in the past, but I'm not going to lie, that accusation has remained very like a bad taste in the
city's mouth. And like we just got to be honest about it. >> Why? >> Meaning that what you said before like how things will just pop up and managers will be rammed in or what have you. Like the past, let me be very clear. The past. So for me, I have no issue with having more time to
be quite frank. I don't I don't have an issue having more time. I have an issue with possibly paying a head hunter to do it. I have an issue with that because I don't think we that's needed. I have an issue with the fact that we we're not paying as much for a city manager that we mind you we passed a budget that was a quarter of a billion dollars and we're
paying how much are we like Jacob how much is the >> 250 plus >> 250 plus to me that is look I understand we got to be cost effective but if we really want good people we need to pay we need to pay a fair wage because this
job is not easy and I when even when I was talking with a joke just go back to our our demeanor I've even try to work out a resolution that says Whoever we choose, we're going to treat them honestly and fairly. Not sending emails, making them feel some type of way or or or or or or lambasting them in front of
the public so we can just exert ourselves. No. To to work off of civility and decorum to say that we're working to collectively because at the end of the day, like when something bad happens, they blame us. They blame each one of us. It is what it is. It's it is we can't bifocate ourselves anymore. It is what it is. So, we blame the manager,
they're blaming us because at the end of the day, we're the the buck stops. So I have no I want to show that we want to be transparent. So like I that's why I wanted to give at least this opportunity to express to to the vice mayor as well as commissioners who were not there during that when we were trying to move the schedule along an opportunity and
express that I have no issue with with with having more time. I I would like to increase the I would like to increase the wage because I think that's a little bit too too small. I don't think that's that's where it needs to be for something that that for a budget or for a city that has quarter of a billion dollars that we have to manage moving
forward. and the and appreciation is going to keep rising and rising over the years because this last year was like what 190 and now we're at 250. We need someone that's competent, but we have to pay them um the right amount of money or the people that just barely want this job are going to try to go
after. I'm not saying the people that have been selected. I'm not saying that. I'm just saying that I want to give that opportunity to see what we can have and if we can pass a resolution to show whoever that might apply that we're really trying to do business and to do it right and have to find the right person, I have no problem doing that. And I hope that it passes unanimously
that we could agree to that type of civility amongst ourselves and with with our management staff. So with that, I'm going to go to give Commissioner Sue a second, but I don't want to use that bite aspect because that's wrong. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Vice Mayor, sorry, Vice Mayor. Oh, I'm sorry, Vice Mayor. Go
ahead. You said you want to go last. >> Thank you so much. Um, I think all that I all that I'm thinking about was already said in different um facets and different ways. Um, we create the culture of this city. I want to be clear to that point. Um when we what whatever
we project about the how we feel about the city's image, we have to understand that we have ownership and in what we put out there. So if we think that the city is chop liver, then that's what's going to be reflective of what of the culture. So the culture starts with us and perpetuates to staff and so forth.
So I want to be clear with that point. Um, also I did want to have I did have a question about how the three candidates were selected because when I received the 455page document of the 71, usually they give us a binder, it's separated, we can go
through it very easily. The process of going through 455 pages was a little offputting. So, if there's a way for us to to clearly be able to see these candidates and then you leave us with a very interesting way, like Commissioner um Smith said, to reach out to 71, we
can do that, but then that opens up us up to different liabilities in different ways because we don't know if we're being recorded. We don't know what's happening when we're meeting with different candidates. So the transparency process also protects us from getting into a danger zone as it
relates to what's the clear hiring process, background checks, etc. As it relates to local, yes, local connections are very important, but you know, we see what's going on with different issues that we have and we might need someone
who's having an outside perspective. The local perspective is very, you know, very toxic right now in different ways. So, uh, you know, for a lack of better term, it's n it's 10:00, so my wording might not be all there, but nevertheless, I do support the fact
that, um, we need to make sure that this process is is vetted well. And also wanted to know when you get let's let's say we were to decide on these three in the next month, how thorough is the hiring process? from
the legal perspective, what else can we put in place to make sure that these candidates are properly vetted? Because if it if it's individual commissioners meeting with 71 people or the top five based on the local preference or whatever, I do think that
this needs to be extended um for us to have a because when you give me 455 pages, how am I supposed to really vet these candidates? You know, I would just love an answer to that. M the the um candidates had been
separated first by those um those those meeting the preferred qualifications as stated by the the commission. Um so they were attempted to be filtered um but not for purposes of exclusion just uh for convenience uh to make the process
expedious expeditious to you. um we certainly can provide some additional uh insight into it um and help you better manage those candidates. Um it's within your abilities to meet with them directly. It's encouraged and that um
those conversations need to occur um they can occur uh outside the public sphere. Um and whether they occur here in public is is uh at your discretion. Um any candidates that that do get selected will uh receive a preliminary
background and then a very formal uh background screening similar to any employee that comes in. Uh and it includes criminal history, driving history. Um you know, we we may wish to see um social media posts and and um information about their
>> I I appreciate that just like they do with USCIS. I want the same thing. I want um I want a social media post as well because what I don't want is I don't want a ninth member or eighth member of this commission. I don't we've had plenty of that. We don't want that.
I would assume we don't want that because they're not elected. So, thank you. >> And I think that's to your point, I think that's um something that we need to clarify, right? So if these c let's say we have a top four top three how do
we know these folks are well vetted besides a qualification process >> they have not been uh yet uh as they move through the process uh they can be uh and and that would ensure that anyone that we bring into this organization you know is is meeting um the standards of
the city uh we do that in conjunction with the the city attorney's office uh to determine what is u perhaps exclusionary or what may be a public record that needs to be brought brought to your attention >> and >> to be clear on that commissioner uh my understanding I mean people keep talking
about a top three if I heard correctly uh a number of members of the commission have not even submitted theirs the contemplation as I understood it was that anyone that was named by any
commissioner among their top three potentially that's 21 now I don't know there's talk about three I don't who they are. I haven't seen what those three names are and I haven't looked or asked, but potentially and and maybe
presumably some people will see some names they agree on, but potentially there's 21 names and the contemplation was anyone named by any commissioner would get immediately a preliminary
background check. And then when you set like semi finalists, let's say that because some people agree instead of 21, let's say there's 15 names that are named by at least one of you or a dozen.
If you cut that to, you know, whatever cut you make, six, seven, eight, everybody among those would then get a thorough background check while you were meeting with them. both privately and
publicly. Every one of them the contemplation is there would be some kind of public interview that the public could attend that the commission could ask questions that members of the public not could get up themselves but could
submit questions in writing and if a commissioner wanted to amplify that. So there'd be a public meeting, there would be such private meetings and you would set, you know, if you said, "Well, I don't want to be recorded or had that conversation." Um, I guess you could
sweep the room or something. The cont say I don't want my conversation recorded if it's a private meeting. Obviously, that's one of the reasons to have a public interview for every whether you want to call them finalists, semi- finalists, but the the idea would
be it's anyone you name. And as I understand it, when the contemplation was that each commissioner could name three names, I don't think there's anything that was
in the rules that said that if a commissioner felt strongly about someone as a candidate that they could not write down a name among their
of someone who didn't submit a formal application. If there's somebody that the commissioner wanted to strongly advocate for, I mean, that's ultimately your decision to allow that or not. But if a commissioner says, "Hey, I've got
somebody." Well, well, to be clear, when we were going through that process, it was like maybe wait, Commissioner Sue, I want to just clarify one thing. Sorry. Sorry. when we were deciding that it was kind of like the process was moving very quickly and I was trying to adhere to you know certain time constraints or
what have you. So that's why I guess that wasn't so clear. We do have an opportunity to clear it up but um vice mayor if I want to go to commissioner Sue if you >> Yeah. I just think I think that the transparency portion is >> if we open it if we were to decide to open it up then anyone who would want to
apply can apply. That way everyone has a chance to see what those qualifications would be. That's how I feel about that. But I do think we should reopen it. And I also want to highlight the fact that we create the culture of the city. When you put negative bites out there,
negative bites come right back to us. So we create that culture and let's be cognizant of that fact. >> Commissioner Sue because I want then we can have that but Commissioner Sue go ahead. >> Thank you so much Mr. Mayor. Um can
everyone hear me? >> Okay. Thank you. So um I just wanted to address some of the concerns that some of our my colleagues or the commissioners and the mayor had um during this conversation. So, I always
compare this to like I it's it's almost like a joke, right? Just because you were the CEO of Pepsi doesn't mean that that the next step for you is to be the CEO of Coke, right? It's like, oh, I'm echoing back
into myself. >> We can hear you. >> Okay. So, so that's my point in trying to say this. These are transferable skills. Any CEO that jumps into a position and
has experience in leadership will have will not have a problem in >> we can't hear you. Wait, we can't hear you. >> They won't have a problem in situating themselves in a position because they have had those skills that are
transferable. So, it doesn't I don't believe that it matters. I don't think that Florida is special. If anything, I would say Texas and California are way more special than Florida is because they have more rules and more laws on top. California has more environmental
issues, has more, you know, social service issues than Florida does. Florida considerably has a lot less laws. Um and uh I don't believe that that is the fact that we have 70 applicants
and only about eight pass the uh the qualifying amount that the HR had filtered. That is something also to consider that if we have 78 applicants and only eight qualify that's like 10%.
And so if we're looking at this and we're thinking like, wow, we have 78 and you know, something to celebrate about. I I'm not quite there with you yet on that. Um the next thing is
I think uh the mayor hit it on the head. We um we don't want an eighth elected official. In my experience as being in the commissioner, it's not a long time, but I know that my agenda, a lot of my
colleagues agendas get pushed to the side because the manager has his own agenda and that's not I thought that we were elected to create that direction and he was create he was there to do the dayto-day. I don't want another
commissioner. I don't want somebody who's going to come in and dictate and do what he thinks is right for the city. Now, going back to another colleague who mentioned something that said
um who who said about a manager that should be celebrated because that manager had said no to somebody. Now remember, if that manager had said no to someone, they had definitely said yes to somebody else. So it's not that just
because they said no, it's supposed to be celebrated because she or he had said yes to someone else. And how are we supposed to know which is more right and more just?
and only because we like the people she said yes to and don't like the people they said no to. So we're okay with it. Like so back to the initial issue was how have we been selecting the managers
before? Always from a reference, a friend, someone we know. Like there was something that has to be said like we all went to the retreat and um
our trainer was talking about the lid. We're asking and and and with all due respect Jacob >> Jacob is a HR manager, right? >> And we're asking him to select his
future boss. That's >> that is like the most absurd thing to me. >> That's not >> I think >> No, no, that's that's his job. That's not what he's doing. >> We shouldn't make excuse me. >> We're not making accusations, but finish your thought. Um, Commissioner S
>> accusation. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> What I'm saying is there's there's a lid, right? like how the scope of what um Jacob could understand and what he could see who would be the person who
would be suitable in the position. This is why I think that if we really want to keep it transparent, I still suggest that we do we we find a reputable head hunter. The head hunter screens
everything that we were talking about, including whatever the city man attorney was saying as well. He's saying that, you know, we have to do background checks, social media, this, that, the other, everything that is related to that person before we even
meet them. Then we have a short list of maybe they say here's tier one, here's tier two >> from the head hunter. If we feel like, wow, let's go for tier two because, you know, up to tier two,
then we have what BOA had, which was, I think, like eight candidates or something, not necessarily top three. But then you can see how that public interview was something that really made it shine, right? Then you really see
what the skills of the person that you really want and who would be suitable to fulfill that. Um, I still think that like, you know, we are chairman of the board, right? We're
looking, we're picking our CEO, right? I think that um we do want to find somebody who is like capable with the transferable skills that we need and not be attached so much to the connections that they have cuz we have
so some of the people that are in this room have tremendous connections and still we have so many issues because the issues are not the connections. the connections. We pay lobbyists to to
have connections. Why do we even worry about it? We need somebody who's going to do the daytoday. We need somebody who is going to execute the job that needs to be done at hand. Pick up the garbage. Make sure our city is safe.
They don't even have to have the skills to run the water plant. I mean this is like he just has to have the common sense that like yes we need maintenance. Yes we need service. Yes we need you know stability in our water
plant. We need funding to repair to do the you know INI RNRs. But that's what he needs to do. That's all. And that's the transferable skill. So, whatever it is that you guys I mean I don't know if you we're still attached
to this the connection bit. We've got lobbyists for that. We're hiring enough lobbyists and I believe our budget has about $400,000 if I'm not mistaken for lobbyists. So I don't think that that connection
issue and then hire lobbyists on top of that and then have still not have the day-to-day work done. Please, we have got to get out of this old pattern, right? They say that um
the definition of insanity is doing the same thing expecting different things. And I hope that I would like be a sounding board for you and um maybe hope to to have you see my point of view.
>> Okay. >> Thank you. >> Commissioner Flormon and then >> Oh, then Commissioner Smuck. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So um once again I think like um we were saying earlier um this is about
the process right and so I think that we need to figure out what is exact what it is exactly that we're going to do um we have we have the current quote unquote process as it is um with that current process when the
date changed for our meeting you So I didn't know whether or not that meant we had more time to submit names or not. Um so that's the current process as it is. Do we refine that process? That's one. Number two. The other option is do we
expand the search nationwide? And I think the third option would be do we expand the search nationwide through a headhunter firm. So, you know, I I I think we have to be
clear as to what the process is cuz that's what we're here to discuss and then make a decision on that. So, um you know, that's uh what I wanted to add. Mr. Mayor, >> Mr. Well, first of all, I want to say to Jacob, you have been doing a wonderful
job, not just with this process, but being the interim HR director, and I thank you, and I hope that you didn't take um what was said before as an insult because um you didn't deserve it. You are too good for that. Um there were
there were there are 10 um people who made the preferred list. I called um actually I called all 10 but two of them um never answered. I called them a few times. I'm not I don't very seldom do I
ever leave a voicemail and I did not leave those two um a voicemail. So I have spoken to eight of those 10 and I spoke to two others. So I have been doing my due diligence. We were
supposed to turn in names by September 30th. That's what we said. I turned them in on September 29th. I chose to speak to the 10 preferred. Again, I didn't speak to two of them.
I'm We have a decision to make and I wanted to be part of the process. Do the right thing. Call everybody. called the preferred called some that were on the
uh uh met some requirements or something like that. So I I I'm done. I there's no more work for me to do. I I did my job. I turn I did what four other of you should have been doing and having that name in
there. And when I would call them, I would say to them, why do you want to work in North Miami Beach? and they would all give very good answers. What I really meant was why the heck do you want to work in North Miami Beach, but
nobody understood the question that way. We are so fortunate that we even have these 10 that met the the the preferred qual the the preferred list. I remember um when we were looking for the previous
city manager that um somebody called somebody emailed me and you can do a records search. I'm sure it's still in my email somewhere. Someone emailed me from out of state saying that they applied, you know, they hope to meet me one day and so on. And I responded, good
luck. And then a few weeks later, a few days later, a few week I don't remember when they send me another email. Hey, I'm watching your commission meetings. I'm I'm not I'm I'm I'm withdrawing my name. So, again, I'm going to say what I said before.
People don't are we're not people are not dying to work here. And and I do want to say and I'm sure I'll get criticized for agreeing with the mayor on this, but but um you know, Biscane Park is paying $210,000 and Biscane Park
is Park is the the smallest city I think in in Day County. So that is something to really that's >> Yeah. So it's okay. No, so that that is something that we need to consider. But
again, we're seven of us who um who need to make that decision. And um I just want to say that I I don't care who gets mad at me for saying this to be honest with you. We have three
people who made the cut. And I know and Commissioner Sue, if if it goes your the way that you would like that we do it nationwide, don't think it's because you made good points. It's because certain people here do not want those three
people who made the cut. So, they're agreeing with you. I'm looking at the TV because that's where you're at. Um, they're agreeing with you only because of they're not happy with the three that made the cut. And not because you're making I'm not saying you're making a bad point. I'm just saying they're not
agreeing with you because >> you're making a general statement. So, you have to speak for yourself. >> I think I'm right. I I like I No, no. Let Let >> Like I said, I don't care who gets mad at me for saying that, but um Okay, that's it. That's my my my uh for now.
>> Okay, >> mayor. I think Commissioner Smith was trying to ask me a question. Maybe she still doesn't, but I did see her raise her hand. >> I'll wait for my turn. I'm making notes. I >> Okay. Okay. So, because look, um I wanna I wanna I want to land. I want
to land. I want to land. I want to land. Um so the issue is to commissioner Flormon's point there's three options that we can do right one option is that three op there were three op three because there really is just
three options right let me let me to the attorney let me I know what you're going to say but like I we either open it up to go um to go nationwide um to and let the process go by uh we
can you know see what comes in through Jacob's office and what have you and work it out through the the parameters that we've already set out to with the same parameters that currently are but open it up nationwide two get find a head find a head hunter
um and and utilize their services to you know sift through all the applications that might result and three um pretty much work on the current process that we currently have. Okay. So, the one issue that I have
because I really want to, like I said, I I feel that one of the reasons that we only had as few as pe 70 people and not more outside of the the political issues and the and what people are are saying because I've seen other people work in more difficult jobs, but you know, you got to pay um the right amount to get
someone that's willing to take the take the risks, right? So for me, like the only issue for me is that hey, if we do open it up, which I'm for I'm I'm saying that now is that we increase it to at least $300,000 up up to $300,000 because I think that's a fair amount given the
fact of what type of city we are, how big we are, and because I'm I'm kind of resistant to the head hunter because I don't want to, you know, put that much cost out there or whatever. Uh but also, you know, um opening it up um and to to
Nationwide says to to to to the same theme and the same thing I said before. I want to let the community know everyone may they like me or they don't like me. They like us, they don't like us to see that we did everything we could possibly do to get the best candidates. And if it's the same group of people, it's the same group of
people. But I know that I can say that we did everything we could possibly do to to alleviate anybody's concern within reason. And I think that given the fact that this particular um appointment is such a vital one, I just want to do it
the right way and to change the theme that we've been pretty much set on for the past several years, if not a decade. >> Can I have a point of person privilege, Mr. Mayor? So, I wanted to echo what you said, but also highlight something that
um Commissioner Smuckler said. If the candidates come back the same, if we do decide to open it up, let it be. So if the same people are, if it's stagnant, it's the same amount, the same people, same names, I'll also feel more comfortable in saying that we did our
due diligence in opening it up wider. But I I have to refute the point that she made of, well, I can speak for myself in saying the cannons provided, are the cannons provided, but are there better? Is there more? And I think it's fair for us to be able to venture
through that point. >> Okay. So, for before I pass it on because I want to land the plan. Okay. So, my motion >> Well, I'm going to I'm I'm going to I'm going to switch over. I'm >> Please don't make a motion until we all have our second >> and then >> Okay, Commissioner Smith.
>> Uh, you know, I made a lot of notes. I'm going to start on two very important things. I really appreciate the vice mayor's statement. We we don't realize we're doing it when we say why the heck would somebody want to work
here? They didn't know that that's what I was thinking. But you know what? Just making that statement, it went out in public right now. So, we have to reframe our minds. I happen to appreciate that thought and I'm going to keep that in mind. We have to reprogram our minds
what's been in the past. I've been on this panel so many times looking for a manager where we put the numbers and whoever got the highest number where we interviewed the each one where they waited outside till it was their turn you made a time when they all five could
come the same night I've been through a lot of process one of the processes which was very interesting was a process where we all voted seven of us 100% that if they didn't have one of these qualifications they didn't qualify
ify and I think that's what one of the human that's the role of the human resource I I'm not I just want to say when somebody put out that the human resource director's picking his boss he's not picking his boss we're picking
his boss he's doing his job he's taking the applications we got as I did when I got the last finalist I looked at where did they go to school what degrees did they have did they have the masters? Did they have a degree in in government? One
of them had a doctorate degree. I looked at their qualifications. I looked at their history of who did they work for. Where did they work? And they went from town to town every two years, every year. I looked at what size of the town
was it? 7,000 people. That's how I eliminated who I made my phone calls to. And and when they wrote why they wanted to be here, why the desire was the woman I spoke to who was just she just kept moving up. She want knew at six years
old she wanted to be in government and she's a woman that's probably in her mid late 50s. So that's the way I eliminated who I have to focus on. But I just want to say when we seven decided
if you didn't have a water plant in your city in your past that you took care of elimination. You had to have at least one of these five things. A city of our size >> degrees in you know in government or and not all
of these one of these. Um, and so we we narrowed it to five people and four people voted on somebody that had none none of those qualifications.
And when they stood before us and I said, "Why would you work in a municipality where you're one vote away of being fired?" So, I can just say there's a lot of things that go into this. But I want to mention a few other things real fast.
One, salary. If we're going to give salaries, we're a poor city. We can't keep giving money and money and money and money until we see that you can do it. Could we at least give the money in increments? Come to work. Want to work
here. Money isn't your driving factor. If you live in Ohio and they're paying you75,000 and it snows every winter and you have an opportunity to go to Miami for 300,000. Boy, oh boy. Oh boy. I'm going. So, let's let's calm down a
second. I understand what you're saying, but we don't have that income here from the revenue. We have 400 and something employees we're paying for and we're not getting the job done. So money doesn't buy it. Money doesn't buy the job. The
personality, the upbringing, the drive you have within you as a person, the honorability that you were brought up with, that's what gives you a good manager, not the money. So let's do it in increments. You'll come here and every three months we're going to give
you, etc. Um I I'm I'm trying to get my head around this extending. I hear my fellow commissioners say they want to extend. Extend. Extend for what reason? I I have somebody from California. I have somebody from Georgia. What What's the
extension going to do? Who Who more are you going to get? Somebody that wanted the 300,000. Somebody that wanted to move to Florida. Somebody I mean I don't understand the extension. Don't take these three. But I I'm just not understanding what more you think you're
going to get. Who who's out there that didn't have enough drive to become a manager that they looked on the website? Who's out there that locally, statewise, the management for League of City knew
knew for the state? I I just want to also say that um how long does it take to vet somebody if if if does it take a week? Does it take three weeks? How long does it take
to look in social media? And >> there's two levels. >> Yeah, we we would um like look to an outside expert to do a a comprehensive background that goes to civil suits. Um you know, we'd want to see if they were involved in any any um legal actions,
social media presence, accounts, um you know, what what their presence is. Um, and I would would say we would expect about a week to two weeks depending on the volume of candidates. Um, and again, we would look for an outside expert, a background investigator.
>> And that's for level two, the thorough. >> There's a preliminary screening that you do first to just make sure somebody's not like, you know, a convicted felon or has, you know, criminal entanglements or, you know, some huge ethics issue
that pops up immediately. And you can do that because it's less expensive to do that on anybody. Like if you had 15 or 21, anybody that a commissioner is interested in, even if it's one
commissioner, you do the preliminary. When you get to the point that you consider what your I call them semi finalists. I mean, it's not a formal term, but you know, if you, you know, cut it to, you know, to 12 or maybe you
cut it to to eight, you don't have to have a a pre-arranged number in your head, but the ones that have some serious consideration, then you do a full background check on them, including all the things that were discussed. And
and that's probably a week to 10 days, I think. And for you don't want to necessarily do that. Now there's some cost to that. It's not it's certainly worth the cost, but you can do a preliminary which is cheaper on you know
20 or 25 people and then when you look at the ones that you're serious about before you do certainly the public interviews. I mean you're one thing we've tried to stress is this is a process you need to keep for yourselves.
You know, I I the process is quite unique in North Miami Beach in my past. Let I'm appreciative of the mayor saying it's going to be different this time. Um when we hired an attorney once, we hired we reached out to the community and we
got attorneys and mayors from other cities on a panel of five to help us select who the next attorney is going to be. And they narrowed it to five people. and and then that narrowed to five people. One of the persons that was on
the panel that wasn't one of the five became the attorney. So, you see from my background, it's so bizarre what we're doing. I I I like the fact that we're very transparent. We're having this meeting. What I like to understand, if we're not going to hire head hunter, and
if we hire if we're not going to do that, then I need and I see that vice mayor is very um convinced. I see the commissioner Sue is convinced. I see the mayor's convinced that we should extend it and so is Commissioner Florine. I don't want to leave you out. So the
majority are con or >> No, I want to clarify. I I'm not saying for me I would limit the amount of money we'll pay for a head hunter. I know for a head hunter. I'm not saying that it's a it's a it's something that we
can't avail ourselves to. I just don't want to spend 40 grand or whatever. Well, >> I like if it if it was if it was a reason if it's say we'll cap it at this amount. But if we can't, we we defer to Jacob, then we'll defer to Jacob. But I want to at least I want to like if we can if that's an option that that people
will feel more comfortable with, have it this is the amount of money we'll spend for a header um fees or or services or whatever and then let the further remaining um um duties in regards to stepping it out to Jacob's office. We could do that. But I just I didn't want you I I don't want you to be I don't
want to mis you know take my my my my my statements. >> Okay. So that's what I heard in the first conversation from you. >> So um what I wanted to say is if we were going to hire head hunter we're about two and a half months late on that discussion.
>> I mean we're so late on that discussion number one. Number two who's to say the head hunter doesn't have a cousin or sister that they want to make sure makes the cut off. Who's to say that? So there's a lot of angles that we have to pay attention to.
I I want somebody to convince me. I want somebody to convince me why an extension would change what came in who is going to apply. How are we going to find a number? We
have 78 people that applied or 70. Who's going to become number 79? Who's going to become number 80? Why didn't they apply on the social media, on our website, on word of mouth, on reaching out to them? Why didn't they apply in
two and a half months? Who was sitting back at their desk and said maybe, no, may Oh, you know what? You know what? Now that I still see it there, yeah, I'm going to apply. I I don't understand
what the extension's going to bring to us further. somebody that hasn't of the 78. I I have to tell you again this when you hire somebody, it's not they have a what are they called? Not trial period. What's the word? >> Probation.
>> Probation period. Le let's calm down a little about salaries that we're not paying enough. We're paying a fortune here. And don't forget once you hit that salary here, you've got to hit it there. You've got to hit it there. the the charter officers are based on together
who's getting what. I I'm just saying let's let's find somebody and let's find somebody that we all can think we can work with that works for us and the primary reason that they're
sitting in that chair is to take care of the residents >> to make sure the city runs well. I again um let's not finish discussion on two rounds if we need to go three rounds. >> Wait, Commissioner Smith, I I look what
I don't want to feel is >> I've been in this position before where one commissioner is saying convince me otherwise. I don't want to I don't want us to do that. >> I I don't I know I I know that, but I my thing is I don't want to get in that whole like convince me to go with you.
>> No, I don't want to be convinced to go with you. I want to understand it. just I'm trying to do the study. Somebody teach me what different how I'm listening because I know it's very important to vice mayor and I know very important to Lyn Commissioner Sue and M
commissioner Mc Mckenzie Florine. I just want to understand where how it's going to end up different. >> I want Mr. If I can I I can't I'm not a fortune tellers from my seat I wouldn't be able to give you and say okay these 25 people are going to apply right but
the analogy that I wanted to give is just like when we have a city event and we promote it in our minds is well promoted right but 10 people show up or 100 people show up to that same analogy the broader promotion of this particular
position I I don't know all that was done Jacob and I want to commend you for, you know, standing in the gap and doing what you do professionally. But I also want to say that if there is any supplement that we can add to the process, I think it's fair to to look over that and not gleam over it.
>> Let's ask him what more can be done and what was being done. And can I just say one thing to you real fast because we're answering my thing. >> You're right. Maybe another 25 would h if we opened it another month, but what if we opened it two more months? >> No. Wait, wait, wait, wait. I wait. I
wait, >> may I soon? >> Commissioner, wait. Before you go, look, look, this is big. Okay, look. >> You know what, Mr. Um, I want to I want to I want to clarify because like I said, I wanted us to at least have something we could move on and agree on
if we're going to move on and agree on something. We can still have discussion, but I just like I said, my thing is that like and I want to be clear because since I I want to make the motion and I'm going to just all I'm making the motions for like o extending it
um the process extending the pro or extend open reopening the the the process and to increase the amount of the pay from at least from where at least to 275 to try to do that 275,000
or up to 300,000. That would be the best mark. Okay. So, I know Wait, let me I'm not saying I'm not saying that we we will agree. >> Sit down. >> Right now, it's $ 250. >> I know. So, that being said, I want to make a motion that we reopen the process
or reopen the o opening to $250,000 just on the process and we can work out the particular areas. Do I have a >> motion? Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. My motion is to reopen the process and increase the salary from 250 to up to $300,000. >> Now,
>> favor, it was pointed out to me the other day technically, you ought to pass the gavl just just for purpose of making the motion and then when you're done with the motion, you can take it back. I want to be clear on the record though
that when the commission makes a decision and votes and there's an overwhelming vote, somebody came up the other day and said, "Oh, the whole thing was void because the mayor didn't pass the gavl." No, that is a parliamentary nicity that can and should be observed.
But when the commission expresses its will, you know, a little technical detail like that does not nullify when there's agreement. So it's it's a better practice. It is really not a mandatory practice. I want that on the record.
>> Okay. So So this go ahead, Mr. Mayor. Just for clarity, because some of us had mentioned uh the head hunter. Sorry. Is your motion inclusive of a of of a amount for a head hunter or >> up to up to um uh $10,000 for head
hunter services? That's my motion. >> Mr. Ma'am, would you like to do step by step and also >> Okay. Okay. Step. Okay. So, then we can add we can add amendments. All right. >> Head hunter for $10,000. >> Okay. But I what I'll do is this. We can amend it, but this is my initial motion. We can we can we can amend it. I can
agree to an amendment moving forward. If not, but I just want to get past this process at least. >> I'll second the motion. >> Okay. We have a motion and second. Commission. Commissioner Chernoff, your discussions. you can >> what I'm concerned with is I thought that we kind of was very open
to the public in the process that we've been doing and we did it from the commission deis we all said what the process that we wanted to do we told Jacob to go out to get the applications I think Jacob's did a great job I don't
know what you think is going to be different if we open it up and get a couple more applications how the process is going change. That's what I'm concerned with. >> May I piggyback on that? I I'd like to ask Jacob if he could come back, please. What did you do and what would you do
more if we did this? Because I feel what Commissioner Chernoff is saying. I feel we're 2 and 1/2 months too late. We already did this. We said this is the way we're going to do it. This is the way we're going to handle it. you weren't happy to get and I'm not saying
you weren't happy but the appearance is when you had 70 applications it wasn't enough even with the process we had so you want to do a different process and I want besides a head hunter what did you do and what would you do different if we
did not hire head hunter to try to get more applicants before we vote thank you >> sure so the the primary difference may be that we may lose candidates uh by the the delay we almost Uh we also may gain candidates um you know just based on timing. Maybe they're looking for for
work now or they found other work. Um if we were to open the search up up again uh and to do so nationwide, we'd look to additional advertising sources such as ICMA uh the nationwide professional association that that would help expand the reach. Um we did limit that to
statewide associations, Florida League of Cities, Florida City County Managers Association, Miami Dade. Um, so there is a broader uh net that we could cast uh by um uh purposely going out and and looking at nationwide candidates um or
or even just readvertising it uh to include, you know, Florida candidates that maybe weren't looking at that time. >> I think that was part of our process, wasn't when Commissioner Chernoff wanted to only stay Floridawide. So, >> but no, >> but also remember when we were having
this discussion, at least two members weren't there and I was and I was trying to manage everybody's and that that expectation that night. >> Who wasn't there? >> Commission Vice Mayor wasn't there. Commissioner Sue wasn't there. She She wasn't there. >> When the process >> when we're talking about the process, yeah, she wasn't there.
>> She She left. >> She left. She was not feeling well. >> And I'm sorry if I said that. I didn't want to. But what I'm saying is that that's what happened. Okay. That's so that being so >> I have a question for Jacob as well. >> Okay, Jacob. Commissioner Commission.
>> Mr. Mayor, I also was I still have >> Let let Commissioner Smoker go and then we'll go to you, Commissioner S. >> All right. Um, you know, we and we did bring it up. We about um legal actions, right? But I'm a little bit concerned about that because nowadays anybody can
get sued. Just you you looked at them the wrong way and you're getting sued. So, yes, I understand that we're going to look into their legal actions, but nec suing someone or getting sued doesn't necessarily make you a bad person. So, I'm I'm a little bit
concerned about that. >> It's not a disqualifier. >> Is this a notice that >> somebody who's a felon is probably a disqualifier? Okay. >> But someone that's engaged in a civil action as part of a background check. It's the same with social media. I mean
absent something outrageous. >> So it's justifational. It's information for the commission. >> And also I just wanted to say that um I I'm not in favor of starting with a high salary and and I think I um Commissioner
Smith uh correct me if I'm wrong, but um 10 years ago um when you had U Manager Garcia, I think she would it was like merit-based. I think she would like every every few months you guys would >> I don't recall that. >> No. Okay. >> You might be right. I don't recall it.
>> All right. Because I I'd like to see maybe like a meritbased type of of of I'd like to start lower and then they have to earn it. >> And can I just interrupt one quick second? One of the applicants put that they want 270 and our cap was 250. That
didn't eliminate them from my thought. I said, you know what? If this is the candidate, >> I don't I don't think everybody had that same thought process. Maybe there were >> No, there was somebody wanted 300. >> There were smart some of them. But like you said, hey, sorry. >> Clarify, Commissioner Smith. Some of
them probably said that, but without it being across the board, people would say, "Well, let me stick here." That we have to be fair. >> Oh, no. And somebody said they want 125,000. And one person put, "I want a dollar." >> So, >> was that Trump? that that person was saying, you know, I'm coming for the job, not for the money.
>> And then and then the last thing I I want to say for at least last for now, what we are doing right here, right now that we've been doing for 1 hour and 20 minutes, this is why people do not want to come and work for us. >> Okay. Okay. >> That's democracy.
>> All right. Everything's democracy. Okay. Okay. So, >> may I have to recognize Commissioner Sue? >> I understand. But what we're doing right now is changing the process. we agreed upon two months ago. People don't want to work for us. >> Commissioner Sue, sorry.
>> Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um, I just wanted to address the intention of a head hunter. Um, why did that person, this person, why didn't anybody apply? When I'm
headunted is when I am performing really well in my industry and they send me a question and say, "Hey, if we could pay you more or if there's a another
opportunity to do this, would you like to go?" That's what a head hunter does. If you look at some of the applicants that have like massive gaps between their applications and jobs,
that's kind of ridiculous, you know? So when you're looking at I mean I'm I'm sorry I didn't you know if any of the people who were applying and they were the ones with the gaps in their jobs. I don't know. I mean that's it's not an
insult to them. It's just for me picking the CEO for my residence. I would love to see someone with a solid work, you know, like track record and um they're headunted, meaning they're
performing so well that somebody wants to pick them out of the crowd and say, "Hey, you know what? You want to come over here now. Um just to address. So that's that's the head hunter situation. It's going to be different. It's not just expanding and
advertising some more in the Herald and saying, "Hey, you know what? you want a job in Miami because the weather is so nice down here. That's not it, right? We do have our issues. We're all willing to work together. Now, if we have somebody who could have that vision and who can
drive it, that'd be great. Okay. We need somebody with transferable skills. Now, back to the and and I know that Jacob does not believe that I insulted him in any way. Okay? I'm not saying that he's picking his boss.
>> It's it's clear it's clear every leadership. So, let me go just clarify that. And I think that I have communicated enough with Jacob that he knows the person that I am. Um the next thing is about the man the mayor wanting to raise a salary.
I think that if you said capped at 300, no more because we don't know who's going to be qualified. If you're looking at city our size, city with our responsibilities and city with our problems, if they're here and they're
able to do that, I would not rule it out, but I would not also like jump into the the deep end and say here go 300,000, right? Like definitely there has to be a probation area time a
period. There should be an evaluation like the we have never had a city manager evaluation. We never had a city attorney evaluation. We never have evaluation with from like we only have three employees.
But none of the commissioners has ever done a done an evaluation on our employees. >> So if we have a city manager coming in, I'd love to have a threemonth conversation with him and do an evaluation. Comm Commissioner Sue just uh
>> Okay, so we do because I want to line because we have a motion. So we have a second. So just on >> I want to I want to I want to amend what this is part of the discussion. >> Okay. So what what is what is your what what is your proposed amendment commissioner sir? >> Proposed amendment is that I'd like to
amend the a head hunter. Usually the salary is about one month. >> Okay. >> Meaning the head hunter fee is one month of the salary. >> Okay. >> Okay. So that's, you know, if you're saying 30,000 300,000,
that comes down to what? Um, >> there you go. >> So you want to you want to you want to amend you want to amend the motion, my motion by uh by saying the head up to 30 um 30,000.
>> Yes. And I' I'd like it to be a hybrid with the HR oversight, meaning like Jacob still gets to take a look at that. Um, it's a nationwide search like you said, and we have to set a time. >> Okay. >> So, I think that the head hunter is
actually the one who actually comes back with the time >> if I'm not mistaken, Jacob. Maybe the Okay, Jacob, I know we have a commission meeting coming up on the 21st between now and then. How quickly could you get um I guess
solicitation for head hunter between now and the 21st where procurement is not here. >> Would you expect to be able to um provide proposals from several firms that are familiar with the area that have worked in successfully uh in in local government here within the past
year um and can should be able to do so by the 21st. >> Okay. So this what I'll this okay so this is what I'll so I will accept your motion but and say that depending on who we have and we select on the 21st as as a head hunter then we can
determine the time period and how long it'll take to complete the process. Is that amanable commissioner Sue? >> Yeah. Can I change that? Um >> okay. What do you want to >> No, no, no. Okay. Okay. I think I think 30 30 is a fair number. >> All right. So yeah. Okay. >> So I accept
>> to pay 30,000 >> up to up to >> up to >> up to just like up to. So I just so I can rehash my motion. City attorney, let's do this. Do this for me please. >> Please. Your motion as I understand it. Mayor
>> is to quote reopen >> the applications. >> To >> you mentioned a national search. >> Yes. And if I understand what you just
said, the decision about a head hunter hybrid model >> not be made until the 21st when HR can present you proposals and you could then determine if you wanted to accept any of
those proposals. >> Yes. >> Is that your motion? >> Excuse me >> for clarification. So, if we don't accept those proposals, then what? >> No. >> And who are we? Yeah, but who are we? We're not qualified to to know who who a
good head hunter is or isn't. >> Oh, excuse me. I omitted the clerk points out to me and I omitted your motion is to raise the cap for potential >> candidates up candidates up to 300,000.
Not it's not to pay 300 >> up to >> I'm I omitted that. Excuse me. I'm sorry to interrupt you. I think what Commissioner Smucker was asking as I again as I understand your motion.
>> No what I want to vote on on um on I want to vote on the particular head that head the head hunter on that date regard on the 21st. >> Do you see propos? >> Yeah. Yeah. And then >> so so this motion is for the head hunter and for the salary up to 300.
>> No, can we re re repeat it before we >> number one? >> All right. >> Quote, reopen the process. Close quote. What that means, you have to determine. You
have to flesh that out. number two to conduct a quote national search close quote. Again, what that means is Commissioner Smith points out, you have had some um applicants from out of the
area. So, what it means to quote conduct a national search, you you need to clarify. number three to ask HR to solicit some proposals from head hunters and you
will consider that item further on the 21st when you see what the proposals say as opposed to a cap right now mayor because you don't know what the proposals are going to be and whether you want them. And number four, to raise
the maximum up to advertised salary to a cap of 300 mistake. That's a mistake because then everybody's going to want 300,000. >> Well, I mean, >> could I could I make a comment, please? >> I'm going to excuse myself for a moment.
I need to take a moment. Go ahead. >> Oh, go ahead, Commission. Commissioner Smith, >> I have two thoughts. Number one, I'd like all these separated, not one motion. And I'd like it to be four motions. Number two, if you're going to open it, I like a deadline. >> Open till when? Before we vote on it.
How long do we >> Well, I we're losing our manager the end of November. We had our interim manager the end of November. He's already put it in his contract. We had a process. What we're doing here today is negating the process.
>> That's exactly what we're doing. Call it anything you want. Negating our process >> and having a new process. >> Right. This is True. >> So my question is if that's what we're going to do, there has to be a deadline. And before we vote on that, I'd like a
discussion. What are we going to do from November 21st or November 17th? Because it's the holidays, Thanksgiving, Christmas, travel plans for commissioners. When is the process going to be that we have a new manager? Okay, those are my questions. >> Okay, those are your question. Okay,
wait. Commissioner Smith, >> I'm not being critical. I just want that. All right, hang on. I agree with clarity. So, okay, just to be clear, I comm the the motion was clarified by the city attorney, right? Broken up um and
amended by Commissioner Sue. I took in cons uh as well as the thoughts from Commissioner Flormont. Right now, we're going to vote on that motion. If it fails, we'll break it up as suggested and move forward from there. Okay. Well, I can't I make an amendment to that
motion to that we break it up. >> But it's it's it's I I I just want to like if it fails, it fails. I'm just going with my >> Well, nobody actually seconded that motion. >> So, you didn't? >> Yeah. Okay. Well, I'm making a motion that we break it up into four.
>> Okay. Let me >> There's already a motion on the table. >> Can you Can you make a motion when there's a motion on the floor? >> Commissioner Sue, >> she seconded something. You sec are you What are you Commissioner Sue? So >> I'm seconding her to split up the four
things. >> Okay. >> Third thing is was my suggestion. >> Okay. So So now we're Okay. Because I because right now I have to pull back the then I'm Okay. >> So I will because now I'm just trying to like figure this out. So because we
initially we just wrapped up the motion. Now you you want to break it up. Okay. So, what I will do is I will revert to to split it up in two parts. I'm gonna split up in two parts, right? >> Four. I think it was four,
>> commission. Okay. I want to split up the two parts. Commissioner Flormon, are you since you're on my second, are you fine with that? >> When there's a when there's an amendment, you have to also get either she resends it. What's the part? What is the what's the Robert Rules of order
when there is a motion, a second, and then an amendment, and then another you you have to figure out what the proper >> the amendment. So far, we haven't voted on the amendment. >> I would love to hear from the attorney on how to properly do that. >> I think he stepped out for a particular reason. Okay. So, Commissioner Sue,
because right now we h we had a combined motion that had one the the the head hunter up to 35 or $30,000, two oh 30,000, two, opening up the pro um opening up the process
nationwide, three capping it at $300,000, and four, having making a decision on that particular head hunter on the 21st. Those were the those are the most that's the motion that was presented. You said
you wanted to break it up. Is that Do you understand what we're voting on or >> No, I understand what you're voting on. I I understand also that um the reason Okay, so the reason why I'm supporting Commissioner Smarkler is because I want
it to be as transparent as possible. >> Okay. >> So we don't feel like anything is being bunched up. My intention on voting for those four items have already been set. >> So, so my thing is that look, what I want to do is to vote on the motion
because it's already package and if it fails, we break it up. That's what I'm saying because I'm I think that's that's what I'm saying. If if you're saying that that's inclusive of if you're fine with that, is it fine that we just vote on this particular motion and see where it goes? >> I'm I'm fine with it.
>> All right. All right. Now, I'm going to >> Now, the thing is I could right cuz Oh, but we're still waiting for the attorney. >> We can we can still call the vote because it's a vote. That's what it is. >> All right. Okay. >> So, Madame Clerk, can you So, we for transparency, we can do a roll call,
please. >> Commissioner Shernoff, >> no. >> Commissioner Fimmon, >> yes. >> Commissioner Smith, >> absolutely no. >> Commissioner Smuckler, >> no.
Commissioner Sue, >> yes. >> Vice Mayor Jean, >> yes. >> Mayor Michael Joseph, >> yes. >> It passes. >> Okay. Now we can vote on the particularities
of what that means being that giving direction to Jacob on how we want this process to be mitigated from the head hunter aspect and how we want it to be um from from like the hybrid because I I I I heard that mentioned during this discussion. So if anybody wants to make
a motion on the aspect of how we want that to be done, please do that now. If not, he has his direction. So that's what I'm trying to figure out. He should come. >> Okay. So, so no, no. Go ahead. Go ahead. Commissioner Smith, >> I
number one, if we're only voting now, if we're only discussing the head hunter, how we hire head hunter and how I would like that head hunter to be specifically in government field. I want them to be because I know head
hunters are I know people that work in that field and they are limited to um there many of them look for executives for certain company kind of companies. So that's number one. I want to be limited to government and number
two she's saying up to 10% of the salary. Well to me the salary is going to be maxed at 27 um 275,000. Now it's going to be 300. So if that's
the case, then we have to make sure that the head hunter how they do it to get a time element. So there has to be a time element with the head hunter. Does he have two months? Does he have four months? Does he have six months? And that'll have to be with another one of the discussions
on another one of the items that just passed. Thank you. >> I'd like to say something, Mr. Mayor. You said that if this motion passes, we can come back and separate them. So, let's separate them. >> No, I said if it doesn't pass, we'll separate them because that's that. But
we pack it. >> Well, if it doesn't pass and we don't need to separate, we would separate. But it did pass. That's what I'm saying. >> Okay. >> Yeah. I'm not sure why some of you voted to allow 30,000 300,000 for up to
300,000 for the manager. I I don't know what you were thinking of, >> Jacob. in regards to >> and then say that we're spending >> Jacob in regards to the process of hiring a head hunter because and and having it because like I said I I I would want you to be in that matrix as
closely as possible. I want a hybrid approach to reduce cost and depending on what procurement brings back that would might reduce how much they would eventually charge because you you're taking a brunt of it or what have you. So the most cost effective I mean like we're going to get the proposals and the most cost effective we're going to go with are the ones that we feel more
likely to go with we're going to go with so you have your direction and you know bringing that for us on the 21st commissioner. Um to uh Commissioner Smith's point, um when you have the responses from the head hunters, part of
your decision-m I'm assuming is going to be um they're going to submit what their processes are going to are and how long it would take, etc., etc. Is that correct? >> Yes, sir. >> Okay. I just want to make sure. So, we would have that information as far as whether they need 30 days to do a
nationwide search or whatever it is. you know, these processes typically take um approximately 14 weeks. Um you know, we're we're talking about um you know, soliciting proposals, uh making a decision as to, you know, what what party we may wish to pursue, uh
completing that contract, uh and then initiating a process that um they may wish to uh relook at our job description. Um you know, is our message uh for our ideal candidate uh accurate? Um, are we being uh purposeful in our
our determination of salary? Uh, preferred qualifications. Um, you know, how we highlight ourselves to advertise our uh the city and the opportunity to the best of our abilities. Um, you know, the the uh ability for those candidates
to then apply uh for them to be screened. So they may provide us with a abbreviated time frame but you know this is essentially restarting that process um before we even have that process in place. >> Mor
I just wanted to follow up with that because I think >> I I can't speak for everybody what but I I know the 14 weeks is definitely not what we're what we're looking to do. So um I know we mentioned having those uh head hunter firms uh in front of us by
the 21st. So at that time you >> saying that we want to expedite this. >> Correct. >> And the proposal should be inclusive of that. >> Right. So the proposal should proposal should be inclusive of the timeline um and how the process would actually function uh through that firm with your
oversight. So just to Commissioner Smith's point, thank you. Um, Commissioner Shernoff, >> thank you. Concern with the now motion that passed that you're not going to start until at least the 21st and that's
if you hire somebody on the 21st. That's going to def delay our timeline even more and then we're going to find a problem with our current manager and whether he wants to extend or not. >> Okay. Okay. So, do we want to address Commissioner Smith's point of the
current contract that our man our current manager has to kind of align that timeline? Did you want to speak to that, Commissioner Smith? >> No. Thank you very much, Vice Mayor. I I wanted to speak real quick to a question that Commissioner Florami asked this um
human resource. Um he's saying it's a 14week process. Then how are we going to undermine the process and have it here in two weeks? >> Is the job opening? When is it going to reopen? So even if we have the head
hunter conversation, will the job posting be when will that be reopened? >> So I would seek a little bit of clarity. A head hunter um typically, you know, somebody that places individuals into positions. Um, an executive search firm
or placement uh agency is what you would typically use for city manager recruitment. They would handle this uh process from start to finish. Um, again, they do offer some abbreviated time frames. Um, but if we would be using their services, uh, you know, they're
going to want to provide everything that they can. They they need to um professionally uh present to you the best candidates, source them. uh there there will be in uh a lot of interaction with you as commissioners to determine what it is you want. They provide that
direct interaction. So if we are to look for a a head hunter placement um as you may see in other uh areas of the city um I I don't know how available uh individuals will be to be referred
immediately in that relationship. No, but what what I was asking is I understand and thank you commissioner form was helping me say that it's a 14w week process for the whole thing and then to bring us names but in the next two weeks people that are in government
they still have to almost like bid show us what they're going to do for the money. >> It's not just that there's four people in government we pick one. They have to show the him what what they do and then he the human resource what they do for
the money and then bring it back to us for who are we going to hire? You're just going to let him pick one. I mean how are we doing that in the next two weeks? That's my question. And then we can get back to >> one thing is this. I want us to open putting putting out the posting right
now doesn't stop the header. I think things will I think it'll we'll get people right away and that that could help us speed up the process. So you can do what we're asking right now reposting you can do this right now. Getting the head hunter will help us swift it and like I said I'm trying to have a hybrid model but you having more of a lead
anything on this issue as well and the people that you procure should understand that. >> Okay. So >> so so so to be clear I understand what you're saying if the process was not totally within your control or like you you b you you hired someone but we're not looking for that. We're looking for a mixture of that. Jacob understand that please. And to be clear, so we'll we'll
repost the position immediately. We'll uh make uh outreach to uh nationwide advertisement sources uh at a salary up to $300,000. >> Yeah. >> Okay. While we also solicit proposals
for services to uh place or or uh secure someone for that position. >> Exactly. Yes. >> So >> So when are we going to have a new manager? more or less >> um at at this rate. >> Yeah. um you know uh we haven't decided
how long that position will be uh advertised for uh and what next steps we'll do to select interview uh and secure that individual the process for contract negotiation or or notice that they may need for a
>> so January >> January sounds that would appear to be a more uh likely time frame. >> Okay. >> So we need to make an in terms of The thing that the HR director said about additional time for contract
negotiation, if you make a selection, >> you can bring the person in if you have general agreement on just, you know, >> we've done that before. I've seen we've done that before. >> You can start them and still bring the details. >> Okay. But we're still looking at we have, as I believe Commissioner Smith
said, we have holidays. We have a week of Thanksgiving. We have two weeks with Christmas and Hanukkah. Things don't get done during that time. Why don't we just shut down the city until January? >> No. In answer to your question, Commissioner, if you do decide ultimately
>> to do head hunter or executive search that as opposed to what you've >> had in place if you just whether you reopen or whatever, but the executive search >> and significant to organize a special meeting. You know how how many times um
to the clerk, how many times did you try to organize for everything, not just for today? Every time we have to organize a special meeting, we no one can come on this day, no one can come on that day. It's always it's always an issue to even get and I understand we're seven people,
seven different lives. So, we're looking January if we're lucky. >> Mr. Mayor, could I just ask you something? So, this is an important discussion because well, you said we did that before. The only people we brought in and paid for them from California was for the water plant. >> No, no, no, no, no. I'm saying that
well. No, I'm not. No, >> but that's a discussion we need to have. Are if we have a candidate from um Iowa, are we paying for them to fly here to meet them? How how are we working out that? Look, I think a lot of these Well,
in regards to those type of discussions, I think Zoom is is is a is a way to really have your interactions with them. You don't necessarily have to fly them out. Fly them out for that. I mean, you can have >> Well, the public would like we would have >> those things can be recorded as well. >> I'm I'm not I'm just saying like those
things can be recorded as well if that's what you want to do. Like if you want to if you if the public wants >> because it really concerns me. I'm just putting on the record of 300,000. Many times when I took a listing it those days it was a fixed rate of 6% and people would bulk and my standard answer
was when you close if you don't think I earned the money you don't have to pay me a penny and guess what everybody always paid me but to have somebody on the record I'm concerned that they'll be money driven I wish it would say instead
salary based on in incentive I I I understand what you're saying about compet competition, but I understand what the income is in Aventur, what the income is in Sunny Isles, >> but but >> I we have to be comp. >> No, no, but but to do that approach
because Sunny is and Aventura don't have a quarter of a billion dollar but uh um budget. They do not. They might have a lot of wealthy homes, but we are from a budget standpoint, they we dwarf them. I mean, not dwarf them, but they dwarf Wait, how is it? We're bigger than them.
Let's just say that. Way bigger. way way bigger >> income wise. >> Not even I'm just saying from the budget like the the manager doesn't operate by what the what the um by the standard of what the uh average income of a household. It works off of the budget that the city brings in. Understand that
>> our our budget our budget our budget is >> $250 million. >> 68% goes to employees and and we get complaints. That's what we need a manager to fix. >> No, I understand it. But I also want to make it very clear that you can't have that approach when you say oh well
Aventura and no they they are they're we are different in very in a lot of respects they do not have a water plant they don't have a lot of our infrastructure a lot of their stuff is outsourced to begin with >> but that extra $75,000 or 30 or 65,000 you're possibly paying has to come from
somewhere else. Our revenue didn't change coming in so it has to take away from something else. Um I I would just again when we get to that topic, let's just make sure hopefully that the majority agrees to do in increments based on merit. Thank you.
>> Mr. Mayor, I also want to highlight that when the person comes in, whoever that person is, they're going to negotiate that range, that salary. So we have that opportunity then on that sliding scale to say it's going to be in a negotiation process even when that person brings in
their contract as has always been in the past. So I wanted to put that out there. I also want to put out out there that all of us here were we're were elected and we're doing it not because of the money. Let's highlight that. And and the
fact that we come here to the meetings and govern is not because of the pain. And I think every employee in this room can say I'm underpaid, overworked. They show up every day because they love this city. So the the the employees that we
have in this space are not just working just because of the paycheck. If it was for that reason, we would be working 8 to fives and making whatever yields from that. So, I think that again the framing of what we do is very important and people do want to come to a
state-of-the-art city with a quarter what you said >> $250 million >> million dollar budget water plant. We have assets here. Let's not undermine that. >> Mayor is a legal point to HR since for the moment you're reopening and you're
instructing um HR to readvertise um whatever you're going to do on the 21st. uh so that you don't have an issue. I think that you want to instruct HR for the moment reopen and say all resumeumés
to be submitted by the 21st of this month. If on that date you make any other decision to extend it further, to reopen it, etc. That's a decision you can make in a couple weeks. But for now,
if it's being readvertised, don't leave it open-ended until you make a decision on that on the 21st. Well, I I want to leave depending on what I'll say is I want to open up for between now at least to the end of the month, 30 days or what have you. 30 days
have the head hunter depending on what the proc what he proposes or she propose if we pick if we pick one from that process. Uh and then yeah, that'll be the consensus. I mean, I don't think we need a vote. >> Mr. Mr. Mayor, >> go ahead. Commissioner Fleman, I want >> because this this word consensus, we
need to we need to vote on >> Okay. So, I wanna I want to extend it. I want to extend it for 30 days and um the the um reopening for 30 days based on the parameters. >> A question with that >> today. >> Wait, I have a question with that to the attorney. Why does reopening it and then
waiting till the 21st, why why does that then negate the fact the the start of the um of a head hunter coming in? So, us extending it and then reopening it when the head hunter comes in. Is that what you're saying? >> You You're going to >> That point wasn't clear.
>> You're going to vote on the 21st on considering head hunter proposals, executive search, executive placement as Mr. Newman's >> to s to sift through it. >> Go down that road or not. Yes, you can
vote to do it, in which case you're going to be turning those decisions over >> largely to the executive search. >> But hold on, hold on, hold on. >> If you wait until the 21st No, I know you're not waiting, but if you come and
then hire a head hunter on the 21st. >> No, no, I don't want I don't >> then he only has nine days. >> Commissioner Turnoff, I'm not trying to do that. What I'm saying is that I want to open it up, right? depending on um what that the parameters that we got from the head hunter in that sense. I like I said I want a hybrid approach
because I want him to help us sift through and if he has if he if he has a way to get garner more people to put it in within that >> we're only giving him nine days. >> We're giving him 30 Wait >> well 30 days from now we're giving him from the 21st >> is going to be a very short
>> how would you how would you envision? >> Well >> I would say you can't do anything until you decide on the head hunter if you're hiring a head hunter. I see what I see. >> Mayor, excuse me, >> if I can answer the vice mayor's question, >> if you're opening it today, >> yes,
>> I'm only suggest all I'm suggesting here is you're opening it today according to what you have in place based on what you apparently voted while I was out of the room. That said, you have no other
decision. So, you need to deal with the decision you're making today to reopen it today. And whatever it is, I just suggest that it not be open-ended. If you decide on the 21st when HR presents
proposals, if you decide to hire an executive search firm, you're really going to be substituting a completely new process that's driven by them for what you have in place. You may or may not do that. That's the will of the
commission. But until you do that, it based on what you're already saying, which is reopen it. >> No, because only >> Mr. Attorney, the the head hunter is adding more people to the pool based on their searching mechanisms. So, it's not
technically changing the process or the qualifications. It doesn't change the qualifications, but they will have a process who if you hire one, they will have a process that you heard from Mr. Newman that usually not necessarily
mandatorily runs >> runs 14 weeks. If you decide to go that route, that is essentially a new process. If you decide to do if if a majority of
the council commission decides to put a new process in place, okay, with an executive search firm on the 21st, so be it. That's your your decision to make. I'm simply saying that until you make that decision,
you're saying as of now, you've directed HR to advertise it now. And whether it's till the next commission meeting or it's 30 days or I'm my only the only legal issue I'm
raising is when HR readvertises don't have it just be open-ended because that is not the proper way. You should have in the readvertisement a due date you set now. So you keep the
existing process in place unless and until you decide presumably on the 21st. Are you going to have a new process with an executive search firm or are you satisfied? Maybe you got some more.
>> Oh, because you don't know you don't know if we're going to go with ahead. I I understand your process. No, no, no, no. Here's what I want to say. Okay. >> I I explain I understand your explanation is valid, right? But to that point, even when a head we need to decide what that process is for the head
hunter. So if if we then say that the head hunter is creating another process, >> which I don't >> right that's what you're saying, right? So that needs to be clarified today as well. >> I can't till you see the proposals. You can't and you they're not only going to
make a proposal on price. You've asked them, >> but I'm talking about process. So whether we go with it or not, right, the process of saying, "Okay, we opened it until that point >> is still there." So I I get what you're saying, but what I'm >> Okay. Okay. Okay. So the Mr.
a point you set and then if you vote for a head hunter they will you on money but also on time and time may cause you to reject it or or not. We have we have okay so this will so so I'll say this um between now like
between now and 45 uh 45 45 days it will be open no not 45 days I'm sorry how would you I'm trying to I'm trying to envision the the motion that you would to to encompass that >> you simply need to instruct HR if they're readvertising in the
readvertisement to say that as of today any new applications pursuant to the readvertisement are due by October 21st or November 5th or whatever it is. Put an end date.
>> We need a deadline. >> Yes. Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner. >> Okay. So, go ahead, Commissioner Foreman, because you I want to I want to I want us to try to like >> I got you. I got you. Um but I'm just thinking that you have to give that firm a reasonable amount of time to do their
job, right? Um as Commissioner Chernoff was saying, you can't just give them nine days. So um >> but then separate with all difference commissioner you're setting I'm agreeing with you what they asked correct you have to decide correct so you have a motion >> um it would be you know if we're going
to have a meeting on the 21st would it I think a reasonable time would be 30 days from that date so 30 days 30 days from October 21st >> how many so to the next commission
>> 30 days from October 21st weeks No, no, no. I I was I was going to do it till November 5th, >> like pretty much give them this uh between this time to the 21st and from the 21st on. >> Okay. Okay. >> Do I do I have a Do I have a second?
>> Okay. Okay. >> From today >> for what? >> To reopen the process and close the process. >> To close the process. >> You mean we're going to hire Hen Hunter and when the next >> No, no, that's not decided. >> Wait a minute. Just accept it. If the process is closed, then whether it's a
head hunter, whether it's his national advertising, the process is closed in 30 days. Head hunter >> unless you vote differently on the 21st. For now, >> you're putting an ad >> and the ad should have a closing date for applications.
>> And whatever you decide on the 21st, >> which is in front of you, you'll decide that if and when you decide it. But for now, you need a clos. We definitely need a closing date. But here's my process.
If you on the 21st, let the head hunter have 40 days. >> No. >> Then though, just in case, we're going to extend the head hunter. >> Then those people that had a deadline till the 30th, they have no the head
hunter is going to extend past them. That's not going to work. >> No, no, but they'll propose a process. inclusive you will or will not accept. >> And whatever you decide your right to decide whether you want
that additional uh not just expense but time and you'll consider it and you'll vote. But in the meantime, if you're opening it today and you're placing an ad, put a closing date in the ad. That's
your process unless and until you vote to change it on the 21st. But you want this ad place today. >> Yeah, but also >> Okay, with all respect, we're setting it up to change it because Excuse me. Let me just finish. >> Hey, hang on, hang on, hang on. No, no, that's that's not what we're doing.
Okay, understand. >> Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Wait a minute. >> Commissioner Smith. If we're hiring a process, >> if we're hiring a head hunter, Just a second. if we're hiring a head hunter and we're saying on the 21st
that at that time we could extend that 30 days because right now we're saying the process to go nationwide for Mr. Newman and our human resource. Right now we're going to give him a deadline which we need. It's going to be 30 days. But
don't forget on the 21st we could change that. Why in the world are we just setting ourselves up? Because a head hunter cannot possibly do it in 10 days. Why aren't we staying? We're going to make the process open for 45 days now.
And that will include the head hunter and include the search. Otherwise, we're we're in the middle of changing it. >> Commissioner Smith, that's what the answer to your question is. >> Okay. I'll take back your process >> and I'll make a motion to make it 45
days from today. >> And I will second that motion >> and then then in 45 days we'll have a special meeting and they'll change everything again. >> No, no. I'm I'm I'm optimistic. >> It happened now. Why won't it happen? >> Madam Madam clerk, can you please call the role? >> I don't even know what I'm voting.
>> Wait, please re No, no. re restate the restate the the >> Commissioner uh Chernoff has moved to in the ads that are currently being run again as of today with an eye towards
making them available nationally which is all you've decided with a couple of things about the salary etc. that the closing date in the ad that's going to be run would say
resumeéumés are due by 45 days from from today. You have no decision that you've made today about hiring or not hiring a head hunter executive search firm. You have no decision you've made today, not only
about compensation for that because you don't have proposals. You have no decision you've made today about whether any process that a head hunter or executive search firm proposes
is satisfactory to you. >> Yes. And you'll have to see what they want, but ultimately what you want. And if they have a proposal and you say, "That ain't how we're going to do it."
>> You can either say, "No, thank you." Or you could say, "If you want this, we'll pay you this much, but this is the process we want you to follow." And they could say, "No, we don't work that way." Or they could say, "We're happy to take
your money." But you are making no decision on that today. >> Okay. Mr. >> Except to have for him to get proposals and bring them to the meeting on the >> city attorney. I just wanted before they vote. Mr. Newman or Commissioner Sue on
your experience with head hunters, how is 45 days enough? I want the head hunter job and the opening of applications to be a simultaneous date. >> Exactly. That was my point. >> That was my goal. I want it to be a simultaneous date. So, it's 45 days. Mr.
Newman, Miss Commissioner Sue is 45 days. I don't want it to go longer because we're going into 2025 and and I want to be here for every single minute of in through Christmas, through Thanksgiving through making a wise
decision and not a rush decision. >> And also that the applicants that applied do not have to reapply. >> Yeah. Well, no. I don't think so. May I May I speak? >> Yes. Go ahead, Commissioner Sue. >> Thank you. I agree with Commissioner Smackler.
>> Um, I think the the pile of 70ome applicants that we have should be also given to the head hunters. >> They should help us filter and screen. >> Um, and we don't want to put them aside, right? Because I know that there are some of them that are qualified.
>> Um, but you know, to a certain extent. >> Mr. Mr. Mayor, here's the but we have >> Wait, wait, wait. I'm not Hang on. Hang on. >> But m Madame Vice Mayor, one second. So, um >> All right. >> So, I'm going to say 45 days from today
is not going to be enough. >> All right. >> Okay. If we're going to talk about 45 days from the time that we decide October 21st, maybe. >> Okay. Well, right now right now we have >> most likely I think like if we're going to be realist
>> the selection would be in J in January. >> All right. All right. That being said, we have a point of personal privilege. If you're going to make proposals for a head hunter, how are you gauging those proposals? Is it going to be based on their fee based on a particular time frame? Because if you're going to be
asking for proposals and we don't we haven't set the criteria, how will they give a proper assessment of the job? So, so the proposals that we'll receive will likely be a similar proposal that they provide to, you know, where they do business all across the country or or
here in South Florida. Um, but it'll be a pretty standard proposal. Um, those range from 90 to 120 days. So, it's a a 14week period here. That is is the general state uh starting point. Um, if we're looking to do something different,
you know, we need to convey that in our requests for the proposal. Um, you know, I I >> in our proposal, we tell them we're only going to give them x amount of days based on our >> that I'm fine with that. Like >> current offering. So So just simply say
expedite. Ask them for proposals. You said already proposals that would expedite their normal process and see what they come up. Comm Commissioner Shoff, can you ex so we can get everybody hopefully as much as people as we they were at I was with you at 45. Is
it possible you can go a little bit longer so we can possibly get additional people um to support it? Cuz I'm fine with 45. >> No, no, I think we're fine with the 45. >> 45. Okay. >> 45. >> 45. So what is then the term for that head hunter? Would it be a three-week term, two week term?
>> No, ma'am. They're not deciding that. Okay, they have to tell you what they can do. You're going to tell them, "We want a feed proposal and a process, but we want you to propose what you can do to expedite it." And if it's not
sufficiently expedited, you could say no, that takes too long and turn it down, >> right? But you can't tell them they have. >> Our expeditious process is subjective, though. Meaning if if we say 3 weeks, they can say we can't do the job in 3
weeks, right? But you don't tell what they can and can't do and what they can expedite. For you to set it now without knowing >> what they need, you just might >> I just want to be clear. So basically that 21st, if they come in on the 21st,
if we say 45 days, is that then going to be a 10 day window? If that is what it is, then it is what it is. >> No, you vote whatever you think. If if they persuade you to hire them, they'll tell you how quick they can do it. You
can either say, "Okay, that's quick enough." Or at that time, you can say no. But whatever you're voting now has nothing to do with whether what terms you're hiring the head hunter. It's just to have something in the ad that's being
run and how long you might allow an executive search firm. to your point, you're going to have three firms come on the 21st and then you're going to say, "We need you to do it in two weeks." And they're going to say, "Oh, no. We can't do it." >> Okay. >> And you're going to also
>> Can I say something just really quickly? This is uh to your point. >> Um how about when we do have proposals and um and they're ready, we can call a special meeting. >> Well, no, that's okay. That's not the the the the crust of the issue is the
timing and how much time we will will >> That's what I'm saying is like if we get the proposals in I mean these things are pretty standard for them >> right it's not standard for us >> but could I just ask >> they're going to have their proposal and then they're going to submit their proposal North Miami Beach after doing a
little preliminary research on our city >> so we get the proposals and then like we could just call a special meeting it could be before August 21st >> oh my gosh okay August 21st. >> No, no, no. That's that was on the right.
>> All right. All right. So, wait to be clear. Okay. This is what I want. Commissioner, turn off. Commissioner turn off. I understand your standpoint. I understand the standpoint of the city attorney. I say, can we just do up to 60 days? So, that would be inclusive of whatever the h head hunter could agree upon.
>> I don't like that. I think that's too long. But >> I just want to say, >> remember, we've already been out for how many months? >> But we just we're changing some of the parameters. That's what I'm saying, >> right? But but everybody needs to understand that >> the process >> when we interview the head hunters on
the 21st, we control the >> That's true. >> dialogue. We tell them you have 10 days. We tell them you have 15. We tell them whatever we want >> based on the timeline. In essence, when we have our meeting on the 21st,
that would be what? 15 days from today. Correct. Today's the sixth. 15 days from today is the 21st, right? So then they would have 30 days >> to complete. >> No sir. >> Oh my god. >> If we pick them if we pick them on that day, we can give them 30 days to
complete the task. >> Could you know how much time? There may be a minimum. If it's usually 14 weeks and they come back and say we can only we can cut it to 10, we can cut it to eight. You can say no, we want it
correct within 30. No. And if it doesn't work negotiating today, >> I understand that. What I'm saying is very we've we've said 45 days. Let it be that and then if the firm can meet that then great. If they can't for them to do
that, >> could I just say if you cut it to 30 days or 15 or 45 or 90, what are you doing to their process? How are we sure changing their process? Their process must be gathering emails, gathering, you know, a snail. I'm sure they don't use
snail mail, but gathering emails. And their process may be that they personally talk to each one, whatever. How much are you limiting their process by limiting their day? >> But you're not voting on their days. Now, we're
>> voting on an end date. >> But, Mr. Attorney, Mr. Attorney, we're trying to make sure it's a simultaneous ending. We're I know we have to try. >> You have to see what they >> can I can I get us present to the actual dates for a second? >> Okay. Okay. So,
>> November Wait, hold on. November 21st, >> are you saying >> is the 30-day mark after the 21st? That's hitting on Yeah, that's Thanksgiving. >> So, so Okay. So, I want to I want to see if I want I want Commissioner Hanukkah.
>> Commissioner Sue. Commissioner Sue. Okay. Now, Commissioner Sue wants to amend your motion. I believe Commission uh Commissioner Chernoff, I second it. So, she has a suggestion. Do you accept that? >> That's C. Can you repeat your your
suggestion, Commissioner Sue? >> No, my suggestion is if you do 30 days from the 21st of October, you're hitting on 21st of November. I'm I don't have the Let me look at the calendar right now. >> It's a Friday. It's a Friday. November
21st is a Friday. >> Yes. >> Then we have Thanksgiving the following week, >> right? >> So what's the significance of >> most people are not going to be around >> ends? So So what so what is the suggest? >> Hold on. Hang on. And then Hanukkah. >> It doesn't matter where it ends. That's
the deadline. >> That's the deadline. >> They're going to get their application in before the holiday. >> They'll make sure it's in before the holiday. What Commissioner Sue is saying, what Commissioner Sue I think is saying is that then we have Thanksgiving
and holidays and stuff and we're not going to meet because it is hard to get seven people to meet and then when we're going to meet in January. >> No. So we're setting a deadline. >> You can evaluate >> and we are not doing anything over the
holidays. >> Okay. So right now I want us to land this plane. Please release this issue. >> There's a motion. >> There's a motion and a second, right? I second. Commissioner, >> I have no idea what the motion what the second is because you guys have just
gone round and round. >> Commissioner uh um city attorney, can you can you >> The motion by Commissioner Chernoff, seconded by the mayor is to put a closing date for the ads you're now instructing HR to run of 45 days from
today. That's the motion. Nothing more. Nothing about executive search, nothing about when you will evaluate the resumes. It simply is >> to put in the ad the closing date by
which résumés would be due is 45 days from today. >> Which is when? At the end of November. So >> it's 21st of November. >> 21st of November. I'm fine with that. >> Is 45 days from now. Commissioner Sue, >> is that correct? You counted it.
>> All right. So now that is 20 but 45 days but what I'm trying to say is we're setting a deadline >> but that day we according to the attorney means we can vote to extend it. >> No we're not correct Mr. Attorney.
>> No we're not talking about that now. We're just I just want to on the particular motion that was restated by the city attorney. Madame clerk, can you >> and let me just say, mayor, commissioner Sue, this commission retains the right to decide what to do from time to time
by majority vote like it always has. Period. >> Can I ask that motion that we amended to include that that as of now that would also be the deadline for the head hunter to submit all names?
>> Commissioner to do anything. You don't know what you don't need to. You don't know what their proposal is going to be. >> Understand? But as long as we're reprocessing this whole thing and making it different, let's do it the right way. >> So So right now, wait, wait. Right now, >> I'd like to add something. >> Wait, hang on. Please, please. No, it
wasn't second. It was second. >> Wait, we have Okay, >> I second her motion, >> but we have a motion and a Okay. >> Okay, but I'm allowed to comment on those motion. >> They can make an amendment. >> Do you have Okay, so now >> I don't accept it. >> He doesn't accept it. >> So So bring it forward.
>> Okay. So I I just want to I just want to say that I I did it in my calendar and I actually got November 20th which is one of those um second optional committee miss commission meeting. So is it something that we would bring forward
that day? No ma'am because if that's the deadline to submit then HR has to somebody submits the last day HR needs to make sure they meet the minimum qualifications and then the resumes need to be distributed to all of
you and then you need to meet them. >> Okay, I got it. >> You need to see >> I got it. I got it. I got it. >> So city clerk, >> now that you have the motion as stated, >> can you please do the roll call? Commissioner Floriman.
>> No. What happened to my amendment? Did we >> It wasn't It wasn't accepted. >> You didn't accept You didn't accept our amendment. >> I didn't You did not. >> No. >> Did you? He did not. Thank god he's wearing pink and he looks cute. >> Oh my god. >> He did not accept him.
>> If there's a motion to amend to state that it's also the deadline for any possible head hunter proceedings, that motion to amend has to be voted. if there if it's seconded. >> But it wasn't that's what I'm saying. Like we had a we actually had a motion
and and a second. We called the vote and it was going back and forth. Do you understand that? That's what was going on. So, Madam Clerk, can you please do the roll call, please? >> Commissioner Florimmon. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Smith. >> I'm giving you a half yes and a half no.
>> Oh, wait. We can't do that. We can't do >> Oh, well, as long as we're changing the rules of the process. I was going to change the rules of the vote. I'm here to do that, but if I have to, I'll have to vote yes. >> Commissioner Smuckler, >> no.
>> Commissioner Sue, >> yes. >> Commissioner Shernoff, >> yes. >> Vice Mayor Jean, >> no. >> Mayor Michael Joseph, >> yes. >> Okay, >> passes. >> It passes.
>> So now I want to get a motion to adjourn, please. >> So moved. I weren't Weren't we supposed to weren't we supposed to cut these up? >> No, we didn't. No, we we we >> just remember saying >> is that a vote on the amendment?
>> No. No. >> No, that was a No, no, that was a completion. All right. So, I have a motion to adjourn. Do I have >> Wait, did we address all four things? >> Yes, we No, we did not. >> We voted on all four. We don't vote on all four. We voted >> we voted on all four, but then we were
going to go over each one of the four to make sure we understood. No, we >> No, we didn't. I agree. >> Yeah, we did say that. If you reread that's what I was >> That's not what we No, we voted. >> Okay, then Commissioner Schmuckler and I have not heard the meeting correctly
because we're both >> All right. To be No, no. To be clear, we >> I confer with you. Yes. To be clear, we voted on four aspects of how we're going to open it, what we're going to do in that process, and and what's going to happen on the 21st collectively. That was a it was a it was a it was a
>> that was only three things. >> No, it was no, I mean, there was other aspects of it and salary. >> So, that's what we voted on. That's what we voted on. >> But are we going to v vote on having the salary be voted with increments or just put it out? >> We said up to that amount. We said up to that amount.
>> No, but we said we would bring them up. That's That's why I think some of you may have voted yes on all four, but I can't. >> No, we said before the motion was accepted that you wanted to break it up into four and then it never got broken up. >> When you say when you say we're capping
it at 300, everybody's going to want 300. >> Well, not necessarily true because even commission Well, even Commissioner Smith said somebody submitted for a dollar under the >> they're not going to do a goodly after they heard 300. So, okay, to be clear, we I know we voted when we voted on. I
have a motion and and a second to adjurnn. All in favor say I. I. Any oppose? >> What the heck? No. >> I oppose.