Excuse me. Huh? >> Yeah. Yeah. I'm just asking for I didn't get a chance. Thank you. >> Okay. I don't know. Holy
Spirit. No, she didn't. I love this. I'm sure Thank you. Good evening everyone. We're going to start at 6:40. So just four more minutes. Yeah.
Okay, the time is uh 6:40 from what I can see here. Madame clerk, um can you do please call the role for our special city commission meeting for Monday, February 2nd, 2026? >> Commissioner Shernoff >> here. >> Commissioner Florimmon, >> Commissioner Jean
>> here. Commissioner Smith >> present. >> Commissioner Sue >> here. >> Vice Mayor Smuckler >> present. >> Mayor Michael Joseph >> I am here. >> You have quum sir. >> I pledge of allegiance. >> I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the
republic for which it stands. One nation indivisible with liberty and justice for all. >> All right. Madame Clerk, we are now to item number three on the agenda. Can you open it up for public comment? Thank you.
>> Yes. Good evening everyone. The mayor and commission of the city of North Miami Beach has opened the meeting for public comment at this time. There is a threeminut time limit for each speaker. Speaker, when you're called to the podium, please state your name or the name of the organization which you are
representing. The mayor and me the mayor and commission 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. And our first two signed speakers are
Natasha Irvin and then Dari Griffin. Mr. Mayor, for the record, Commissioner Foreman is here. Yeah. >> Good evening. >> Good evening, mayor and commission. My
name is Natasha Irvin and I am a commissioner in the city of Opalaka. >> Thank you. >> In 2022, I was voted in as the vice mayor for two years.
I ran my campaign on the slogan of standing up for the right, what's right. Standing up for what's right, which is what brought me here tonight. I would like to state a few facts.
It was reported that Darvin Williams recouped $1 million from a business for a delinquent water bill. Opaaka residents, I'm sorry. Opaaka records reflect a payment of 571,21154
was received during Darvis's tenure. According to our city records, he completed only six C projects. And when it comes to our 99 findings, Darvin Williams only completed eight of those
findings. I feel like I was his biggest supporter. When we started our search for a permanent city manager, our city became quite chaotic.
Once we got our three finalists, let's just say that our candidates weren't the best. We had issues with their backgrounds, even the background of Darvin Williams. Our human resource director resigned for fear of
repercussions and possible termination from her superior, Darvin Williams, because his background would disqualify him for the job. Nonetheless, we hired him anyway because
he appeared to be the best candidate. We knew his work, or so we thought. After giving Darvin Williams a contract, everything went all right. Darvin only got along with two of his
bosses, myself and one other commissioner. Darvin filed ethics complaints against his bosses, which were unfounded. He believed in playing us against each other. Divide and conquer is his mo.
Darvin terminated employees with without due process. He even terminated one employee while he was away fulfilling his duty as an Army reservist. >> 15 seconds.
He interfered in active police investigations. Darvin received a car allowance. Yet he continued to drive the city vehicles. Darvin despite being told by his bosses
he refused to work with the city attorney time. Sir, can I get a maybe another minute? >> One minute. One f one minute. That's fair. >> Okay. Thank you. Which prohibited her from effectively doing her job.
Furthermore, after a commission meeting, Darvin pursued her in a confrontational aggressive manner. After firing Darvin Williams, it was discovered that he opened 17 bank accounts in the city's name at Popular
Bank, a financial institution that we don't do business with. This was done without commission consent or knowledge. Where's the integrity, transparency, or accountability here? I'm only here tonight to try to keep the
city of North Miami Beach from going through the devastation that Opaaka endured and is still experiencing thanks to the wrath of Darvin Williams. And what you see there is all the 17 the names of the 17 accounts that was open
under his tenure. Thank you. >> Next speaker, >> Attorney Norman Powell. Good evening, mayor and commission. My name is Norman Powell, and as you are aware, I represent Darvin Williams in this process and that was limited to
preparing his agreement for your consideration. As I understand this meeting this evening, it is an a item that was advertised in your processes and it's very specific. You're here
tonight to consider a proposed agreement for Mr. Darvin Williams as to whether or not he should be your city manager. Your processes lasted months. You conducted interviews.
You heard from the public public. You heard from interested residents in that process over the last several months. What we're hearing here, and that's why I didn't get up right away, is issues that have nothing to do what has
been advertised this evening. If folks are going to come up here and disparage this man without any basis to do that, especially in a meeting that has been specifically advertised for a particular subject, it is completely untoward. And
I respectfully request that the city attorney appine as to whether or not this meeting being not noticed for consideration of an agreement should be expanded to include allegations
and issues that are not duly noticed for this meeting. Thank you. Next speaker. >> I would like to hear the city attorney's opinion. >> It's public comment. >> Well, I still want to hear his opinion. My opinion as to what the commission can
discuss may be a little different than as to public comment. Uh public comment I mean we allow free speech. >> Yeah. >> And someone who has a comment as to whether the city should enter into the agreement. This probably can be heard. I
will note that um the I want you to speak louder, city. >> I'm sorry. You're having trouble. Okay. It It's on. I >> thought I was close enough to it, but maybe not. >> Um, so you have free speech. People can comment. >> Okay.
>> As to whether you should. Now, if the commission starts going off on a tangent, I might say to you, you've already >> made the decision as to who you're hiring, and this is >> focused on the terms. But I always
hesitate to appine that the public's free speech um if it's remotely related. I agree that it is pretty remote, but I suppose one could say, well, that's a reason you shouldn't do a contract or
this term. I just will note that whatever happens, I was going to say this after, but um you'll note that the draft I prepared and I discussed at some length with Mr. pal, there's a big blank as to the amount of salary that being
above my pay grade. So certainly you have some discussion and some decisions to make. Um I might say something if you start to drift as a commission perhaps, but I if it's remotely on the topic, I think we
heer on the side of free speech with letting the public be heard good, bad or indifferent, right, wrong or otherwise. and somebody who wants to dispute it should have that right as well. >> All right. And just like you're saying that they have a right to speak, I also
have a right to ask the city attorney that question. So, thank you for your answer. >> Next speaker. Uh, good evening, Mayor Commission. My name is Daria Griffin. Um, I was a employee for the city of Opalaka for the past 15 years. It would have been my 17th year, but I was
abruptly fired by Mr. Williams um without any due diligence or um a trial or anything. Um let me Huh. >> I thought Mr. Fortuna say something. >> Oh no. >> Um I've been working for the parks and
wreck for 15 years like I stated. Um actually Mr. Williams promoted me to superintendent. 6 months later I was fired because I stood up for a staff member, one of my employees. Um, we had a pretty good relationship up
until that day. Uh, my coworker was fired, I believe May 25th, and a week later I was fired. Um, the reason was he said that I didn't um I didn't let the city know that I had
outside employment. That's that's what he said. Um, and then he proceeded to start an investigation. I was fired on the second, he started the investigation on a third. I got calls um
the the school that they say I was working at. They said the police there, they didn't get any answers. They said the chiefs of um the chief of police a few weeks later, they got never got any answers. They didn't tried to make it a criminal case against me. If you look at
my background, I have nothing in it. That was the first issue I had with the city and I was fired. Doesn't matter what I help people do. I got uh kids that scored 1680 on the SATs. Uh police officers, people that went to
the military, all in impoverished city of Opalaka. It didn't matter. So, um I just came to let you let y'all know my situation. And thank you. Thank you. Next speaker.
Next speaker, Zanya Ray and then Chris Roberts. Good evening, Sonia Ray, parks and recreation director for the city of Opalaka. On July the 3, I was called in the office at human resource. I was out
picking up supplies for the Fourth of July event and I was called to HR to tell me that I had to make a decision to either resign by Friday or I will be terminated. Don't know what happened in the midst
that it came to that point. Me and him had a meeting prior to Mr. Williams. We had a meeting because it was a someone came to me and said that the manager say I jump for one of the commissioners on the dis. I don't treat none of the commissioners
in the city of Opalaka different because I was taught when I first started working in government that when you choose to be favored to a commissioner the hands change so often to you will be one to be target. So I survived the city
opalaka for 37 years because I don't play politics. In the midst of that, I got up on 4th of July morning cuz we had a big event that was taking place in the city opaque for the 4th of July. I came into work when I
left that Tuesday. I was so sick to where I came back the next day to set up for the Fourth of July event. Got so sick to I end up going home. In the midst of me going home from being stressed out from all the stuff that was going on, I end up being hospitalized
and I end up in the hospital because of stress and they say all the stuff that was going on around me. I stayed out of work. They kept the doctor kept me out for like a month. When I came back, I was on pens and needles coming back to work cuz I didn't know if the day I was
going to have a job or I was going to be terminated. And then eventually another investigation rose against Mr. Darvin Williams. I don't have anything personal against him because I looked at him totally different cuz we had a relationship
prior to outside of the city, even when he was working for the city a long time ago. It just like things changed when he became the permanent city manager and I became one of the targets because of the relationship that was going on based off of disagreement between him and a
commissioner on the das palaka. Thank you. >> Next speaker >> Chris Roberts. Good afternoon, Chris Roberts. I just want I came today to express some
issues some explain some issues that have have came across with the city of Opa Laka with Darvin Williams approximately a year and four months ago. I st stand before the dis and said
that we were in a $5 million deficit. Darvin in turn turned around and said, "Oh no." A week later they were doing a budget doing the budget and it went from $5 million to $10 million. If the city
of North Miami Beach is in a $5 million deficit, why would you hire somebody that left our city in a $10 million deficit? He he's he's a liar. He's not transparent.
Um he does not have any in integrity. That's not the That's not Darvin Williams. Y'all might think so, but that's not Darvin Williams. I came and spoke in front of a commission meeting. And when I spoke in front of the commission meeting
10 days later, I was suspended for 30 days without pay. Okay, fine. I know loss. I'm fine with it. I stayed home for the 30 days, came back to work. When I came back to work,
filed a lawsuit against the city of Opalaka naming Darvin Williams because he violated the union contract at the city of Opalaka. He's going to talk a good game and the city of North Miami Beach in one year
from this day will come back and everybody on the D is going to say we should have left him where he was. He's a talker. He pray on um the weak. He's an opportunist. That's starving Williams. If y'all don't
know today, we're not here to tell y'all what to do in y'all in y'all house. This is y'all house. But we can tell y'all y'all will live to regret the day that y'all allow Darvin William to become the city manager of North Miami Beach. >> Thank you. Next speaker,
>> former commissioner Audrey Dominguez. And then Brian Dennis, are you okay? Cuz I heard that slap all the way here. >> I'll handle that later. >> Good evening, mayor and commission. My name is Audrey Dominguez, former
commissioner for the city of Opalaka. I'm addressing this body tonight regarding your nominee for city manager Darbon Williams. It is not my practice to address another municipal government regarding its personal decisions. I have
given consideration thought to appearing before you this evening and to do to share observations from my direct experience. Ultimately, I recognize that I am not a resident of this city and the final decision rest
with you. A city manager is entrusted to lead ethically, communicate professionally, and execute responsibilities with sound judgment. Mr. Williams accepted the role of
interim city manager April 2022 while maintaining ownership in a private company that requires significant government approvals for construction project within the city of Opalaka. In my view, this circumstance presented a
potential conflict of interest that warranted devestment at the time of his appointment. On May 25th, 2025, during the city commission meeting, I pulled an agenda item number four, which involved involvement contract to install a French
drain along Northwest 147th Street, an area associated with Wellspring Community Resources, Inc., Mr. Williams deferred the item. It was not until June 8th, 2022
following the appearance of the Miami Day County Ethics Commission before the city commission to address outside employment and potential conflict of interest that Mr. Mr. Williams resigned from his position with Wellspring
Resources, Inc. He resigned that same day that the commission on ethics went to the city of Opalaka. During his tenure, Mr. Williams required repeated reminders regarding appropriate communications and decorum when
addressing elected officials while serving in an executive role. Additionally, Mr. Williams pres presented himself as an attorney and repeatedly involved himself in matters customary handled by
the city attorney. As a result, a complaint was submitted to the Florida Bar and the guidance was provided regarding appropriate conduct and limitations. All matters referenced are reflected in official commission records and public
documentation. I'm not an advocate for for or against any candidate, but to provide context from my direct experience for your consideration and to highlight government consideration relevant to the role of city manager. Thank you.
>> Thank Thank you. Next speaker. >> Madam clerk. >> Yes. >> The items that I just Brian Dennis the items that I just handed the clerk were pictures of Mr. Williams. Excuse me. >> State uh Brian Dennis address 2140 York
Street, Opal Laka, Florida. The the information that I just gave the clerk was pictures off Mr. Williams Facebook page with Commissioner Smuggler and the wife and apparently look a little too cozy for me and even though it was disclosed in the sunshine, I feel like that that she should have
been recused from the vote. But nevertheless, the other information that I gave you was from a concert promotion that happened in the Dominican Republic. Well, >> can you speak up to the mic? >> Well, concert goers lost >> please speak into the mic. >> Concert goers lost close to half a
million dollars under Mr. Williams. Now, the thing of it is in this article, what you will see is his alias name, Will Williams. Ladies and gentlemen, Mr. Mr. Williams, you I'm quite sure you all received the package from me that stated with the resolutions that was in there, especially the one with the
closing of 17 bank accounts. Mr. Williams went on CBS4 and said that he found the $17 million, but he opened up 17 bank accounts. So, I'm going to assume that the $17 million that he found was going to be a million dollar in each bank account that he
opened. There's a young man in our community that works for Shaquille O'D by the name of Tommy Johnson. We call him Scoop. I'm quite sure you all heard of an arrest that happened in 2024 about a shooting concerning a commissioner. Well, his brother, Mr. Anthony Mitchell and Mr. Tommy Johnson were arrested
under this sergeant that y'all see back here, Sergeant Bosque, and they were charged with shooting at this so-called commissioner. They were tested. Neither of them was found with gun residue on them. Here's the problem with Mr. Williams. Once you have an individual
like that, if you do not get along with him or he is trying to curry political favorables, you become in the line of fire, if you saw my video, you would also know that because I wouldn't sign a consulting agreement with Mr. Williams, I became the target. Ladies and gentlemen, the one thing I don't do in
the city of Opalaka is play games and nobody controls me. But if you this commission care anything about this city, what you would not do is put an individual in place to have you later regret the vote. My saying to you is
buyer beware. Why would you hire someone that isn't any good? And then when the commissioner Bass came over here and spoke to y'all, she told y'all a boldfaced lie.
A commissioner from our city came to a city to support this person. And when Mr. Williams was fired, she said that it would be blood on those hands who fired Mr. Williams. Let me explain something to you. You have to care about families.
You have to care about people. Mr. Williams didn't have any regard for those people or their families because Mr. Williams don't have no children. >> You are supposed to be the leaders of this great city. lead this city in the capacity in which
the voters voted for you and stop hiring trash that we threw away. >> Thank you. Next speaker, >> Mayor Hawk. Good evening, mayor, commissioners, and members of the public.
My name is Mora Hawk, a resident of this city. First, I want to welcome our new city manager. Okay. a majority of this commission vote for.
And as they vote for this appointment, I am sincerely hope this marks the beginning of a period of estability, professionalism, and respect for the people who serve
this city and the residents they work for. I wish the new city manager success and independence in carry out this important role.
I also feel compelled to speak about a little bit about what all of the people that have been here speaking. I understand there are so many different
opinions about a person but this look like a witch hunt. So much more can be say for some of our representative here in North Miami Beach.
However, I see that some of those face are still here tonight. So before throwing stones, do a through our search inside your soul, please.
Um my hope is that this commission together with a new ma may mayor will u manager will reccommit to transparent governance fairness and
respect for the staff for the residents and for one another. Thank you to you all. Next speaker. >> We do not have any other speakers. >> Okay. Thank you. Next item is resolution. Mr. City attorney. Can you
read it? Yes, >> sir. >> Move to introduce. >> Second. >> Second. >> Resolution to the mayor and city. Uh, I'm sorry. It's item R uh 2026-13.
Resolution number R 202613, I believe, was number three on the agenda. Uh, a resolution of the mayor and city commission of the city of North Miami Beach, Florida, appointing Darvin Williams to serve as the next city manager for the city of North Miami Beach, approving the employment agreement between Darvin Williams and
the city of North Miami Beach attached as exhibit A, authorizing the mayor or designate to do all things necessary to effectuate this resolution, providing for conflicts, providing for scriveners errors, providing for severability, and providing for an
effective date. Mr. Mayor, if I might before you move to consideration, uh, as you know, we've drafted a proposed agreement and sent that around to to everyone. There was a slight revision to it today and you have the revised one
sitting uh on your on your desks in front of you. Um, in terms of that site revision, it only talks about adding if the commission chose to add additional duties uh for the manager that are not
usual manager duties and are not specified in the agreement or the uh city charter. For instance, if you um decided at some point to pull the CRA inhouse and not have an executive director, have the manager do it, or if
you created a a charitable uh nonprofit foundation, which some cities do to accept donations and decided to designate the manager. If you did those non-managerial duties, you would uh negotiate some satisfactory mutually
satisfactory agreement. It's a very slight revision and it was at the request. I've had the opportunity to speak at some length with Norman Powell who is an attorney uh well known to me for quite a number of years with
considerable experience in the area of municipal law as well. Uh Mr. Powell had also submitted something to you. Um, we spoke. Uh, I will let him speak for himself, but I think that we don't have
serious major disagreements. There are some language differences. I tried to simplify some of these things in front of you. The big thing obviously that is that you must decide there's a blank uh where it says salary because that's just above my pay grade.
Uh, I had no suggestion. That's up to you. Um, additionally, I kind of arbitrarily chose a number for a car allowance that if if that's the
election, the commission has to elect whether it's going to be a car allowance or providing a vehicle to Mr. Williams. But in my conversations with Mr. pal. He indicated a strong preference for the commission to give a car allowance.
There's personal issues have to do with parking with at his residence and they have an older child with a vehicle and um he may want to explain the details. Bottom line is their request and I put to you in addition to filling in the
blank for uh the salary amount. You should elect which of those two options and there is a strong preference for you to elect car allowance from your new
manager. Um and I also said to Mr. Powell that the number I filled in for car I could have left that one blank as well but I wanted to give some guidance. Um there is no mileage or any of that
reimbursement thing. This is the number and it's intended to cover insurance, maintenance, repair, wear and tear, all those things on the personal vehicle though he is permitted to get gas at the
city uh gasoline station. So I told Mr. Powell if he has and I leave that to him any different number for the car allowance that that certainly is the privilege to ask you. I chose the number arbitrarily. I I
haven't done any particular calculation as to whether it's sufficient and I really don't think it's a matter about which you need legal advice. So I have no objection. You know it's it's left to you. Um, other than that, if there are
questions of me as to any point, I think Commissioner Smith had a a brief concern that uh she raised with me just before the well originally earlier today and showed me just before the meeting started. I'll let you get to that in the
ordinary course of things. I would have one last suggestion. Again, I'm happy to answer any questions. I I just want to say as a as a general guide, I drafted this agree. I've done a lot of
these over time. The agreement was drafted to protect the city and so it may differ in some regards because my principal concern is protecting the city. However, protecting the city does
not mean having a contract that is unreasonable for someone that you are choosing to be the person who leads the day-to-day operations of the city. Protecting the city also means having a contract that
is fair and reasonable to both sides and that protects the manager in a way that allows the manager to do their job for the city while still making sure that the city's protected. So, I've done my best to come up with something that
protects the city. It is fair to the city, but I believe it's also fair to and protects Mr. Williams. And the city should always act reasonably and fairly in its relations with its employees, its
vendors, its citizens, and everyone else. So my final suggestion is I would urge you at your discretion to allow Mr. Powell a few moments separate and apart from the public comment because this
agreement is a two-way street. We have to agree to it. Um, but the manager has to agree to it too. And everything I've done here is a suggestion to you as to what I think is reasonable and protects
you. But nothing here is sacred and anything you want to amend on the day is that's your privilege. Here you had a >> um Mr. B. >> Yes. Thank you, Mayor. Joseph. Um I think Mr. Geller did an excellent job in
meeting in the middle. Um there's everything that we discussed today and over the last couple of days in terms of what we had originally proposed and to where we are now. We're in full agreement. The one thing I do really want to emphasize and I think Mr. Geller also pointed that out is that Mr.
Williams's preference would be to just receive a car allowance instead of a city vehicle. That's his strong preference for personal reasons. Um, in addition to that, we proposed the base salary of 285, which we surveyed similar cities, your sister
cities, your neighboring cities and cities in Broward and Dade. And that was what our proposed request is. As Mr. Geller pointed out, it's blank. It's still up to you all to in your discretion to determine what that base salary is. But I will state it very
clearly. Everything other than the blank is accepted to because it's been a product of the last few days going back and forth and meeting in the middle. So you're really only exercises down to two boxes to check today, which is one, what's the base salary going to be? And
two, whether or not you're going to go in the direction of a a car allowance or simply a city vehicle. And those are the two items that are that are open. So, Mayor, thank you for the opportunity. >> Mr. Pal, the final package that the
attorneys gave to us tonight, how is that different from the red line one? >> Uh, there's a couple of there's a few differences and um again getting back to stating our conversation. We went through each of our proposed requests
and Mr. Geller explained why he felt that some of them were not appropriate and we met in the middle. So for example, one I I can go through them in in turn. Um we one of the first things we had wanted was to have a period of time that if there was a new
commissioner or mayor elected, we wanted a similar provision as was included in your past manager's contract that there would been a cooling cooling off period if you will that the manager would not be terminated for 45 days. Mr. together explained and I I I I
can understand it that having that type of cooling off period in a contract would lend itself to basically stagnation of the government. You you you'd have a new commission, a new mayor that may not want the current manager and that's not good for anyone. So the
compromise was simply to say look um we're going to go ahead and allow you to have the statutory severance and if there is a fore cause termination you'll have a truncated severance. I think it's up 8 weeks and we were fine with that. So, we basically got rid of that request. The other request was very
simple, but um maybe didn't read simply. We just simply wanted to ensure that on an annual basis that Mr. Williams' um base um salary would be um increased based upon the CPU index. You know, the um promaggated by the federal
government. Mr. Geller and I discussed that today. The city routinely increases its non um contract employees based on a similar formula. So whatever the city does for its non-contract employees, it'll apply to the manager, which we're
fine with. Also, um the other um red line provision that we changed and I believe it's still in here is that um we wanted to limit the period of time that if the manager decided to terminate the contract, we reduced it from 45 to 30
days. So that right which is pretty much dimminimous. Um the other key item um that we wanted and I'm glad that it's there. Mr. U Williams wants to if it's fits within the schedule to be able to
um take um classes to be able to be uh proficient in Creole and Spanish. So that was also there that if that's um educational um endeavor is part of his time and he can accomplish at the city just like other staff would be able to
go to college to um improve their um value to the city. He would have that same um opportunity, >> right? Um so those are the highlights. I mean those are the main things. We got rid of the CPU which is unwieldy. We got rid of the reimbursement for mileage um which is just going to be a flat car
allowance. So, as I said, the only boxes that we have left to check this evening is the base salary and whether or not you all will um consider a city vehicle or simply a car allowance. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Can I move forward? Can I can I can I
>> Thank you, Commissioner Char. For all intents and purposes, I'm chairing the meeting. Can Can you allow me to chair the meeting, please? Okay. Um before we go into discussion, um Thank you, Mr. P. >> Yes. No, that's unless you have >> Oh, I thought you had a question. I'm sorry. >> No, no, no, no. I mean, um I was I mean,
since you're up here, what was the salary? What was the previous salary in Opal Aqua? >> Uh Mr. Williams, what was your previous sala? >> 190. >> 190. >> And the current ass that you have right now? >> 285. >> 285, >> right? >> Oh, thank you. You can have a seat. Thank you.
>> Uh okay. Before I open up, I'm going to open up um for commission discussion. I have a statement I'm going to read. It's brief. Uh it's germanine to the topic. you'll see uh at hand. Um just it relates to the whole process of us getting here. At least from my
standpoint. I don't know how you guys what your what your thought process is, but at least I would allow you guys to as I've done for other commissioners on here to have an opportunity to read their statements. Okay. >> Thank you. All right. Good evening everyone.
I was elected to North Miami Beach to um to lead this city for toward a brighter future grounded in transparency and accountability and renewed in trust in our public institutions. For a city that has endured repeated
public corruption scandals that promise complete uh repeated uh corruption scandals, that promise matters. For that reason, I must speak plainly about the proposed election that's before us, which is Mr. Mr. Darvin Williams.
Based on the information now before us, this election represents a steep backward for our city that is exhausted by instability and reputational harm. Serious questions for me remain on whether a thorough background review was
done and the credential please please hold your statements. Thank you. A thorough background was done and credential verification were completed prior to advancing this particular contract. leaders and residents not just from O Opalaka but city of North Maya
Beach reached out to me directly expressing their frustration and the warning signs that were not taken seriously about Mr. Jarvin Williams and his termination from the city of OK Opalaka and the barring of of future for considerations at that same city that
alone should have required heightened scrutiny. More concerning, North Miami Beach has received a formal ethics complaint from citizens from Opalaka alleging that while serving as city manager, Mr. Williams abused his public
position to advance development in which he had potential personal interest and directing millions of dollars in public resources to that to that project. These allegations are documented, detailed, and unresolved. The responsible course of action is not
to rush past these issues, but to pause and fully understand the legal, financial, or reputational liability that city that our city could possibly assume. I'm I'm only therefore only asking that we do a more thorough background because there's a lot of stuff that's coming out
recently. I've I don't know if you've gotten calls. I've gotten plenty of calls from people from just not just Miami Day County, but places all over the state saying that this is a mistake. I know that some of them showed up here, but I received calls and I just asked
that we should take a pause on this and really doing a full background check because when I first the first time that you know we got some type of background was less than 3 weeks ago after we shortlisted four individuals for this position. And
one person, Mr. Darvin Williams waited till the last possible moment to because and I and I and I and this can be proven by documentation that was received by HR and the and the and the city attorney that we could possibly get sued if we release his background
or anybody's background in that sense. And I think that's unfair because I thought like whatever documentation or or do u or um anything I bring to light to somebody's, you know, character and being our manager should be open to the public. It's transparent. We're supposed to be transparent, but we were told by
staff that we received a pre-suit letter, a pre-suit letter saying that if you do this, we will the likelihood of us getting sued by Mr. Williams is pretty high to that degree. That was told by me by staff and HR. The other issue I have
is that it was it was delayed in getting the fingerprints done by Mr. Williams. He waited till the last possible moment to get those u to do those background to to to submit himself to to um to fingerprinting. And I could understand
why he was waiting for so long. I don't know what the issue was, but he did. And the reports were still oncoming up up until this point. There's certain things that even our own background check didn't even come up with, but now are coming into light. And the last concerning thing I had is that when I did have my my interview, Mr. I asked
him a simple question that I asked every person that applied and was shortlisted for this position. Do you meet the minimum qualifications? He stated no, he does not. Those cons though that admission was very telling
for me even back then. This is prior before I even got the initial background check. But I'm going to I'm going to wrap this up because I want to just state it for the record before I move on because this relates to my decision-m. It's also deeply troubling to the
efforts to exercise my own due diligence as mayor and this matter have been met with hostility rather than reason debate. Following the prior commission meeting, I reported an incident to the city of North Miami Beach Police Department involving a former city commissioner, Barbara Kramer. As I
exited the chamber, Miss Kramer made statements that took that I took as a threat to my life. That nature of those statements caused me to stop, turn around out of concern for my safety. Video footage and eyewitness accounts are consistent with my report and the
matter and the matters currently being under review by law enforcement and the state attorney's office. >> Is this gerine to our meeting? >> Yes, it is because it goes to my it goes to the the fact of how I was treated just because I had a disagreement with the body as a whole. So let me finish please.
Threats and intimidation or attempts to coersse elected officials have no place in civic life. Disagreements over a policy must not devolve into personal menace. I will not be deterred from doing what is right because of fear or intimidation.
At the same time, I'm deeply troubled by the message of being that's being sent to the public as we have a former convicted mayor, Anthony Dalippo, as a as this um showing up and
misleading this city commission when he showed up to city events and being treated as an honored guest. That is unacceptable. I'm going to work on moving something to to come before us to make sure that doesn't happen again. Mr. Dalippo
defraed this city and our community. He he remains free to attend as a member of the public or as a right that every citizen even if there even if they live in the town of Davyy but there were no there should be no special recognition,
no ceremonial status. We we're not here to rewrite history. The residents of the city of North Miami Beach expect better from their government. They expect leadership that protects its interests, not insiders ability to profit on their backs. Our centennial year should not
mark a turning point, not to should mark a turning point, not to to return to the patterns that damage the city's credibility in the first place. North Miami Beach deserves that that restore trust, not leadership that opens up old wounds. Thank you so very
much, commissioner, for allowing me to read that into the record. Like I said, I've allowed you allowed several of you an opportunity to do such when it came to your personal privilege. That being said, I studied it into the record. Commissioner Chernoff, the the floor is yours in regards to this particular
contract. Thank you. >> Turn off. >> I'm very displeased with what what happened here this evening so far. um all that the other public officials should have come to us when we were interviewing, not now. Now is the time
to move forward with the contract before us and hire the new manager. We took a vote as a commission to move forward and I hope that's what we're going to do. Um my concern was obviously with I had the red line copy so my questions were on
the red line which you cleared up a lot of it in the other contract. So the two issues are the car allowance and the salary. I personally believe that when Mr. Williams took the first put the application in like when Marlene or
anybody else put it in Rasha I think the salary was 250 when we went out second time it became 300 so somewhere in between 300 and two and 250 is 275 that's where I think we should go and as
far as the car allowance I think $1,000 that includes everything except for the gas that you get from the city is fine with me. Thank you, >> Commissioner Sue. >> Recognizing you, please. Thank you.
>> Thank you so much. All right. Um, so I have a couple of uh items that I would like to to bring in front of my colleagues. I know you you all here have negotiated several contracts and um I trust that I would like to put in something to see what you think about
them. So um apart from the minor you know um type typographical errors which I trust that the attorney will review and um correct them as they are um into the correct
words and spelling. Um I have I agree with uh Commissioner Chernoff about the 275. Um I initially well when I spoke to Mr. Williams. I believe that I meant $1,000
was flat. Um I don't know if we have any other outside city cars that are um coming to our gas pump. I kind of want to keep it, you know, like not breaking the mold. If it's all city car, city of North Miami Beach, I think like it's uh
it's already um inclusive of that. Um there was um several things I wanted to add, but I'm going to go through all the benefits first. So the fire uh the severance package 15 and 20 I agree with. Um I believe that I do like that
caveat that the that Mr. Powell, Attorney Powell put in about the 45 days and you know a supermajority vote. I think that that is it it is stagnant but if he is really something we don't want I believe that five voting him out is
possible. Um car allowance done. Um, city phone, no no city phone, no no phone allowance of $150. The language tuition, I spoke with Mr. Williams. He agreed on a two-year cap. We're not paying this every year. 25 $100 per
year, two years. He asked for the second year to freshen up his Spanish. And I believe that our big Hispanic population would really appreciate that our city manager does speak Spanish. and um and him learning to learn Creole is also a
wonderful outreach. So I agree to that, but I would like to cap that at 2 years. Um the PTO's and sick leaves are aligned with the MMA surveys that have been done according to all the city managers in our in our state and in our county. Um I
believe that the retirement match 18, I have no change on that. Um should he come under the CRA? Um, this one I think he mentioned that you know it's up to our discretion at the time, but I believe that if it's it's good to set a
clear expectation whether we're going to do it or not, whether we change our mind in the future, I think we can, you know, probably um discuss that. But I was thinking of like any any project manager for any normal construction, the project
manager usually takes 15% of the project that they're managing. So if we hire Mr. Old or somebody else or whoever it is, um whatever their project is for per the year, he would get 15% of that and not
his salary. Um health insurance is for him alone, no dependence. And within 10 days of the contract, I would love that our commission get together, workshop with the manager about how we are going to give his merit raise. That means we
have we can set together. We set benchmarks, set a direction. The commission gets to talk about the direction that we want to see our city move in. We would discuss them together and then come out with a set of benchmarks that he must meet and it
would be broken down quarterly. So that's one of my other my input there about um how we can give the merit raise. Now going back to the race, the Mr. Mr. Powell stated that he thinks
that you know we could follow the CPU of the federal. The federal is always higher than Florida. I would like to use a CPI for Florida and I don't know how the non-unions negotiate that. Is it federal, Mr. Attorney or HR?
You don't know. Mr. Newman, >> do we normally use a CPI for US or federal >> or the manager? >> Do you have the answer? >> No. >> No as in you don't know or no as in we
don't use I'm not clear. >> We don't use it. >> Okay. >> Yes, sir. Can you repeat? >> He said we currently don't use the CPI from the uh Colola. >> Correct. I thought we have do we normally have a
cola increase for non-union employees? >> Whatever uh the union is getting it's based on whatever the agreement was from their contract whatever that agreement >> I'm saying non-union employees because I think in the contract that Mr. Pal and Mr. Geller >> so so traditionally we it's a me too. So
whatever the union um cola is getting then the un the non-bargaining uh are receiving as well. I see. And is that >> it's not it's not to my knowledge. I couldn't answer the question you first asked me, which is do we use federal or state or something? But to my knowledge,
it's not required in any document. It's just a number that when the manager and staff compile the budget, they include some percentage
cost of living increase for those people not covered by a union contract. I think there are some frankly pretty underpaid city attorney, city employees that get the um uh that
they're just not members of a union. They get a cost of living. And then we have a group of what you might call uh executives. That includes people like department heads and and other uh executive level employees. And my understanding is there's just an
agreement as to what cost of living will be given for the year not mandated by following a particular index. And what I did in reddrafting for simplicity among other things was just to say that
whatever that percentage is the manager would get the same percentage that all the other non-union employees get and that would be cost of living. And it does provide that the commission could in the case of the manager uh raise or
lower that cost of living if it felt it necessary. But the rule was what everybody gets the manager gets too. And that eliminated about two pages of contract. >> But he couldn't. >> No, that's not in my draft. But again,
that's only the cost of living. There is a provision that says which I is a very typical provision that says that you can never decrease the manager's compensation other than by agreement.
You can't reduce their salary because that's basically tantamount to um a forced resignation uh or a constructive termination which are fairly equivalent terms. However, you can decrease the amount of the increase
for cost of living. That's not decreasing the manager's compensation. That's decreasing the increase. >> It's not in my draft. It was that the minimum cost of living increase per year. I took it out and just said we
give employees that are not union employees. There is a a number that the city applies for all of the non-union employees as to what their cost of living would increase would be and I just said manager gets that too. You
don't have to do a separate calculation and involve indexes. Whatever you're giving the others, you give the manager. But you do have the right to say that cola, that cost of living adjustment, you you could raise it or lower it just
for the manager if you decided to. Why you would, I can't begin to think, but you can decrease it because it's an increase. You can't decrease base compensation because that's constructive termination.
Okay. Um, Commissioner Smith, are you are you okay? Are you clear? No, I want to continue. So, is that a >> question? >> Thank you. Thank you so much. All right. So, um,
now I actually was was going to put in a cap of the cola, but I was also going to put in a minimum. That means that um if there were a 1% minimum increase, I would also put in a cap because in 2
years out of the past 10 years, um the COLA actually went up to 8%. And I believe an 8% increase would be a pretty fierce increase. Although it may not happen, it could happen again. Uh I wanted to see if there's a cap on that
one. And also um I want to explain some more about the raise. So I have proposed to Mr. Williams that I would like to ask my colleagues for their opinion if we do a apart from the COLA we do a 3% raise
every year depending on the matrix of the workshop that we're going to create together. I'm not sure if there's any questions about that because I really would like your opinion on that if we can discuss together the direction of the city. we have benchmarks to to mark
off for the for the manager so that he could actually have a guided direction on what he could what he is going to execute during his tenure. Um I'll leave that. Should I ask you now or should I anybody?
>> Yeah. Okay. Got it. Okay. And um I would like to ask the chair if um it's okay for me to go into the verbiage of the law the the the clauses with the attorneys. >> It's your time commissioners. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Go on.
>> All right. So um in in section one I see that um given Florida public records and sunshine laws. I want to cl I want clarity that the employment communication to this agreement itself
are subject to disclosure. Um an amendment that I'm proposing is to say employee acknowledges that this agreement and employment related communications may be subject to Florida's public records and sunshine laws and that nothing herein shall be
interpreted to limit the city's legal disclosure obligations. Um, Mr. Attorney, you heard. What do you think? >> The sunshine law is in our constitution. >> Yes. >> It applies to
almost everything. The legislature in the last few years has been carving out more and more exceptions. Um, frankly, as a free speech advocate and a supporter of the First Amendment
Foundation, I was known in my time there for opposing most of those exemptions, but by and large, they passed. First Amendment Foundation noting. >> Can I ask Mr. Pal's opinion as well? >> Sorry, ma'am. Go ahead.
>> Thank you. >> Yeah, I concur. I mean, the sunshine law applies to all everything, all the communications, >> so there's no need to add it. No, there's none. >> Okay. Anyway, I stated it for the record. The second thing that I wanted to add was in section two. Um, nothing
in this agreement shall be construed to limit the authority of future commission to govern, reorganize, or set policy in accordance with law. >> This is an agreement for the manager. The manager has areas of responsibility
under our charter, >> but so does the commission. Nothing here is intended. There there is nothing about an employment agreement with the manager that changes the the basic manager commission form of government
that's set forth in our charter. So again, um I don't see the need for that. It's it you're not there's nothing in here that takes the power of the commission and gives it to the city manager.
>> So in in section two is the term of the agreement, right? And then um what I'm seeing is that there is a protection for for Mr. Williams and I just wanted to put in a clause to protect the city. I'm I'm just um standing up for what I think
like if it's good for Mr. Williams, we could also add something for us >> and uh protect the city. That's what I'm >> commissioner. It says in the second line of 2.1, Williams acknowledges that employment with the city is on an at
will basis and that Williams serves at the pleasure of the city uh city commission. Nothing in this agreement shall prevent, limit, or otherwise interfere with the right of the city commission to terminate Williams with or without cause or notice subject only to
the provisions in section four, which are severance and in accordance with the city charter. And I think that's a sufficient protection of the rights of the city and the rights of the city commission. That's that's why it's there. >> Okay. And now, so we go on to section
4.2. constructive termination. So, this part is where I think that um we don't know what the direction of the city is going to be like if we're going to in the future maybe lose our property taxes or whatever it is or budget adjustments and
trying to cure our deficit. I'd like to make sure that constructive termination shall not include lawful policy decisions, organization restructuring. Wait, hold on. I'm reading the right section. I want to make sure that the decreasing
of the salary of the of the city manager is not strictly just as a decrease because it will be seen as a constructive termination. I want to make sure that we leave some space for us to reduce his salary should it be needed
when the budget is not met at the point that we need to do what we need to do. Um I think this one is also protecting the the public funds and the resources that we have. I want to give us that space. So um so the purpose of the
agreement cause shall include Wait, is that the one? Sorry. I I have this written all over the place, so I'm I apologize. I can give you what I what I summarize and then share with you both. >> Yeah, it's it is a typical agreement
provision. It's not universal. It's not in everyone, but I've seen it most often. If you decrease the salary of the manager, that's an typically an attempt to force
a resignation. Um, you can decide not to grant any increase. You even have the right, the way I wrote it, to say the manager alone won't get a cost of living, much less a merit adjustment. You have that right. But decreasing the
amount you pay, uh, look, There's nothing if if they eliminate property taxes completely and leave the city in a position where I mean everybody I hope is writing their legislators and telling
them don't do that. But if that were to happen and you can barely figure out how to police the streets or pick up the garbage, there's nothing that says that the city manager, if he's here and is seeing eye to eye and working hard and
feels that there is a need for him to take the hit along with everyone else. Certainly he can agree with the commission that on a one-year on a two-year basis that perhaps there will
be some kind of a reduction. Although like most of us people are not they typically don't get their salaries cut. People make kitchen table decisions based on the income they
have maybe not the income they foresee. people take obligations based on that and and salary reductions. Sometimes people get laid off, but salary reductions are very unusual. If the city
manager out of dedication to the city said, "I'll take this $20,000 a year pulled from the air pay cut for a year or two years. If the city returns to fiscal health, I hope perhaps
that can be res restored to me. But you cannot and should not compel someone to honor a contract that they are losing what they've agreed to
and going down. if you do that. I mean, they don't have a right to demand that you keep paying them. But you have to recognize that breaching the basis of this contract is the same
as terminating someone and they should have the rights. All they get is a little bit of severance. It's not that much money that the severance comes to. It's exactly what's prescribed by state law. But to say you can reduce the salary without
their consent, I mean they can agree to anything. >> No, that's what I I'm not I'm not exactly saying that. >> Well, I'm saying that language you're proposing. I will I I'm trying to find where I wrote that down, but I will I'm trying to say that there are certain
circumstances that will allow the commission or the city to reduce the pay to the city manager unal >> not unilaterally. It will be agreed on that >> anything that's agreed on you can do. It's called a noation. There is a provision for an amendment to the
contract and anything that's done by agreement is covered in section 19.9. >> Right. Okay. >> And Commissioner S, the exact conversation you just had with the city attorney, Mr. Geller and I had this afternoon. Um, and it was the same
answer that to the extent that there and I use the the same example. What happens to property taxes and the city needs to address um budget cutting? And the short answer is if the manager decides through agreement with the
commission to take less of a salary, there'd be a novation to the agreement, an amendment to it. >> Got it. Thank you. >> Add something. >> We had this when I was a commissioner. Darcy Seagull was the first one to say,
"Let me give up something." And she gave because the city was in real deficit. They even stopped feeding us. There was no money. I was here. So I would think the manager who is in charge of the budget and
watching what's going on would be the first one to maybe say across the board 5% or whatever needs to be done. The manager should be the first one to see it that we have a real financial problem.
I I it just it so happens the experience has already been in North Miami Beach. >> As long as it's mutual, Commissioner Smith, it's fine. The only I thing here is you can say to somebody no raises or
you can terminate them. But if you if you start reducing this salary, not agreement. It's the idea. >> You and I are talking about two different things. It wasn't even mutual. It was a volunteer from the staff first. wasn't an ask. It wasn't
>> and that's fine. Anything that's done that the employee agrees to is not an issue. The idea is that it can be done by the commission unilaterally. >> That's why I brought it up. >> Yes, ma'am. >> And I'm I'm trying to agree with you.
I'm sorry if I'm doing it. >> I'm trying I'm badly, but I'm trying to agree with your point. Well, I mean, the closing comment is unfortunately if the city is in that position, you wouldn't be alone. There'd
be a bunch of cities throughout the entire state of Florida facing the same issue and a bunch of city managers and staff looking at presumably the same scenario, looking at how to um make ends meet if the U property taxes are taken
away. >> Thank you. So I I just want to make sure that I am communicating to you and to Mr. Geller and to my colleagues that I want to be fair with Mr. Williams. At the same time, I also want to protect the public trust. I also want to protect
our city resources and I want to make sure that it's transparent and and minimize any legal or financial exposure to the city. Well, that's all for me for now. Thank you so much, Mr. Chair. Commissioner,
>> thank you so much. Um, I wanted to start off by asking Mr. Williams to kind of speak to some of the comments that were made. I think one of the one of the important parts about this process is that we start on a clean slate, but also
that, you know, past practice, you know, those things are important for us to hear because we we we want to make sure that we made the right choice. So, if you would, if the chair would allow a few minutes for Mr. Williams to speak to some of the comments that were made
earlier. >> Absolutely, Commissioner. Um, please let me know what your concerns are and I shall address them. Um, so I've gone through this process um, with those of you that I've met with and to
intentionally not maligning the names of anyone especially to promote myself. Um it is not my goal to align anyone. Now um
as you can imagine there are several sides to a story. Um, I'll speak to the ones that I find most egregious, and that is that I stole $10 million or any million dollars or $1 million.
Um, obviously I would not be here if that were the case. Uh this city of Opaaka is under state financial oversight uh with the governor's office and has been for some time. Before I started in the city
of Opalaka, the city was required and the commission was required to have weekly meetings with the governor's office and the governor's office came down to the city of Opalaka on quarterly basis.
myself and that administration ran those finances so well that the governor ceased those meetings only on a discretionary basis. They were no longer required. That's a fact. Um so the notion that I stole any money uh
that I misappropriate any money that um I mishandled any any funds is patently false. Uh, I'd also like to speak to the 17 accounts and speak to that directly. Um, the city of Opalaka put out a
banking services RFP and we received no responses. So, my administration went out into the marketplace to seek vendors that would be willing to put in submit RFPs for the city of Opalaka.
One vendor said, "We only give RFPs, submit RFPs for cities that are our clients." So, I said to the director of finance, "Find out what he needs in order for us to get a submission for this RFP for
banking services." They required for us to be their clients to open up accounts. Not. I said and I asked the finance director, does that mean transferring any monies? She said no. I called the president of
the bank, does this mean that we have to transfer any money into those accounts? No. It will submit to our policies and procedures. If the bank's the accounts are open, we would consider you a client even if you have no money. So, we opened up the
we opened up the account. the um bank submitted their RFP and won and and won the RFP. When um the RFP was to be approved by the commission, it was taken off the agenda by the city
attorney. Um and before I left, that was those services were never closed. At the time um that I separated from the city of Opalaka, there were three attempts to terminate me. Each time as
some of the people that came forward here um and a host of residents came to say why are you terminating Mr. Williams? Happened the first time the the agenda item was removed. Second time uh again uh it was duly noticed. uh
residents came out, business owners came out. Why are you looking to terminate Mr. Williams? Um the person that sponsored the item refused to remove it from the agenda. However, the item failed. The third time um it was noticed on a
Tuesday at 5:30m for a special commission meeting at Wednesday on a 5:30 p.m. And though some people came, not the large number of people that come when it's a commission meeting for this special commission meeting. And again,
the question was asked, why are you terminating Mr. Williams? And it was said to the residents, "We will share with you at a later date while we are terminating Mr. Williams." And the commission was escorted by police uh out
of the out of the building. Um it wasn't until after I had departed the city of Opaaka, it was then determined that Mr. Williams opened up bank accounts which were known to staff and commission for the purposes of this RFP.
Um, and as you heard uh, Mr. Dennis tried to say, well, I, you know, he had a surplus of $17 million. It was 17 accounts. Uh, I believe he believes he says uh, he was going to put $1 million in each account. So, let's think about
that. Uh the accounts are still were still the city of Opalaka, not Darvin Williams. These were not Darvin Williams accounts. These were city accounts that were under the purview of the finance director and subject to oversight by the
governor's office. They have never made a statement that any of those accounts ever had a single penny in them. and they could not until the city of Opalaka commission approved the RFP and that
bank became the official bank for the city of Opalaka. Um I will say this um there's I'm glad that I have not sought to disparage any of my former bosses or any of my
former employees. Um um because the truth is I care deeply about them and I still care about them. Uh a few of them said we had a great relationship with Mr. Williams and that was true. Um so it was not easy and it
was not at my direction. Um I was presented with information from the from the HR director supported by then assistant city manager. This is going on. What is your intention to do? We have documentation that this person,
this person, this person has been getting paid without uh clocking in. >> If you can you can stop there because I don't want to get into any employment, you know, issues. But my my the main reason why I wanted you to speak to it is because what we're here to do is to
protect the city of North Miami Beach. This has to be about us as a collective, yourself, us as a commission. And I really wanted to highlight that because we're here tonight obviously to talk through a contract, but this has to be about moving our city forward and
understanding that whatever baggage, whatever extra things are going on, because we've all gotten phone calls and like I've said to you before, let's make this about the city of North Miami Beach. It's employees who are committed to moving the city forward and not about any individual. Be it the mayor, any
commissioner that's up here, yourself. It has to be about the city. And that's why we're here to protect the city but also to move it forward. So thank you for your comments. Mr. May just had one minute. Thank you Mr. Williams. >> Thank you. >> So the the three or four things that I wanted to highlight from the contract I
don't know if Mr. Attorney if you can if who's taking notes for us to >> commissioner I just had one question for Mr. Just because those to your thought did but before you open up those 17 accounts did he get approval from the commission? Our policies and procedures only require
approval from the commission to move monies. >> So you didn't so the >> It was not required and no. >> So you didn't get permission. >> It was not required and no. >> What? You didn't get permission to open? >> It was not required and no.
>> Okay. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um yes. So the first thing is with the contribution for retirement, um what's the typical contribution usually for employees? >> Um I've seen 18 for executive level
employees before. Uh I have not done the survey myself. There is a survey. So when you say typical I've seen that number. Um I did that was a request. I didn't object to it. I've I've seen the number so I went along with it. But it's
it's subject to your discretion upon review. I think that survey is uh been submitted to you. Um, so I wasn't alarmed by the number. >> Oh, okay. >> I I hesitate to use words like >> typical when I'm not sure.
>> Understood. And I know I know Commissioner Sue mentioned this for the $1,000 um car is there since since gas uh I would say can that include gas because coming to the city with your personal vehicle I think it's a little a stretch.
I'm not sure what the typical um protocol is usually, but I would suggest that the $1,000 includes gas as well. Uh as it relates to the educational um the the educational credit, I want to learn Spanish,
so I definitely want want to take that out if possible. um you know you have your salary that you can you know work through your own professional development if the city doesn't have a line item for their executive to do so and also the performative measures there
there can be some sort of benchmarking or performative measure that the commission is able to establish that we can also hold hold him accountable to. So those would be the things for me that could get clarity on >> commissioner um talking about those last couple for
instance the professional development also talking about the gas and uh the performance measures as I said I've given you a contract I've negotiated made some changes these
are suggestions the format if you're going to approve this tonight, which is what's on the agenda. The way if if you raise an issue where I have
some legal objection why I think it should not be done, as was the case with one or two of the points Commissioner Sue made that I did not think as a matter of law that it was necessary. But if you want
to uh I'll talk to one of Commissioner Sue's a two-year cap on the professional development. I have no >> opinion >> as well. My suggestion is please let me
finish before you continue. My suggestion is who's taking notes on what we're assuming so that we can >> answer that >> right? >> There are no notes. They're not a matter of this is not something that >> as staff that we decide these are this
is a suggested contract. >> If there's a matter that you say you want to change and I have a legal issue okay >> I'll bring it up but all the others this is how what you said you want to take out the professional development not cap
you want to take it out or you want to insert performance measure. So, who's making the edit? >> The way to do that is >> one issue at a time, >> okay? >> You would make when everybody has been
heard from, you would make a motion to amend paragraph so and so and delete, add, or change. If I can help you with the
language to clarify it, I'll do that. But the things you amend, if you vote to make an amendment, I will note that at the appropriate paragraph
and in the final contract, I'll change it. But if it's only as to the item, you do one at a time. Move to amend paragraph so and so. And whatever your determination, anything you adopt, this is just suggestions from us. It's your
decision. Mr. Smoker, >> Vice Mayor Smucker, apologies. Thanks. Sorry. >> Well, first I want to start by saying that Commissioner Chernoff, you were right about um no one calling us. um the the people that spoke here today, the
commission the the former commissioners and the commissioners and um in fact the the employees I'm easily accessible. They can call our our city line. They
could send emails. Nobody um has called us before. In fact, um I have access to a lot of the commissioners, right? I I see them. I see so many commissioners from so many cities in all the events I go to and anybody can get my phone
number if they really wanted to and honestly no one has actually called me saying anything negative about Mr. Williams at all. I've had people calling me in support of Mr. Williams and I'm talking about other
elected officials. And um to the point that the mayor said about the uh finger printing that it was the last well somebody had to be last, right? Someone I like when the buffet line opens. I always say somebody has to
be first and I go and get the food first. So Mr. Williams was last. And so what if he was last? It was done, right? Was the fingerprinting done? Right. Was was there anything missing because he was last? Okay. So, it doesn't matter
who was first or who was last. And I just want to say to the employees that I am so sorry that someone has put someone all the I'm I'm sorry that you
had to listen to this. I don't want you to believe any of this. I want you to believe in your future manager and I want you to feel comfortable and I want you to feel safe and I don't want you to be worried that he's going to fire any of you. If Mr. Williams fired someone,
I'm sure that it was because they deserved it. Otherwise, um otherwise I think that they would have been able to go to the union or to whatever system Opaaka had and have gotten their jobs back. I I know of an
employee in Miami Beach that was um fired and he got his job back because a different position, but he was able to keep uh his employment with the city there because of the union. So, again, if if they really wanted their
job back, if they really deserved their job back, then they would have gotten it back. And um I'm not going to I already discussed my points of view with the with the incoming manager
about the contract a while ago and and Commissioner Sue, next time you have verbiage questions, please do it like >> Oh, okay. All right. I'll let it slide this one time. Okay. Okay.
And um I don't know. I think um we we need to be careful, right? Because um you know, a lot of people like to throw stones at glass houses, but don't realize that
they don't um they're not Mr. or Mrs. I'm not going to say Mr. or Mrs. But they are not the perfect person themselves. So be careful what you wish for. That's all I'm going to say. Commissioner Fmont. >> Um, thank you, Mr. Mayor.
All right. So, um, we're here to discuss this contract, so I'm going to stick to that, uh, as it relates to, um, the comments that I've heard earlier from Commissioner Turnoff and Commission Commissioner Sue. She talked about
basically merit increases and colas and things of that sort and then talked about perhaps if the economy or we had budgetary constraints that we would then look at um you know reducing the salary. I I think the way we address all of that
is by starting at a particular point that makes more sense um than 280. Right. Um Mr. Williams when he applied initially for the position it was advertised at 250. Correct. So, um he applied knowing that that was the salary
at that point. Now that it's advertised afterwards at up to 300,000, um he's still part of that conversation, right? But requests 280. I think that there should be um some conversation as to um perhaps we can go above the 250
that we initially uh talked about with the initial search. Um, but 275 to me is still, you said 275. Yeah, that's still to me a little uh high. And um, so I'm proposing 260. Uh, and then
those increases, merit increases or bonuses, we can look at a structure perhaps to address that, but my proposal is 260. Uh in addition to that um on in section 19.9 it talks about non an uh executive director type of work for uh any
foundation that we would um have as part of the city. I believe we voted on something not long ago um if if some of our staff can remind us um as it relates to city employees. Um, does that require a foundation or a
nonprofit to be formed? Because we we voted on that prior to this agreement. And if that can be grandfathered, that would be something as well that I would like to suggest. Are you are you guys familiar with what I'm referencing? I I believe um Miss Monesty might be. Good afternoon. You all did approve the
employee assistance trust fund. Um we were sort of just waiting for direction uh with a new manager to come in before we established that. But the trust fund itself would that require that is that that's a nonprofit correct? >> Yes. >> Okay. So if Mr. Williams
>> not what's contemplated commissioner apologize for provide some clarity. >> There are cities that have established nonprofit charitable foundations
to receive taxdeductible gifts from people who want to assist. employee assistant trust fund uh may be a nonprofit, but it's a very narrow scope of activity. Um but some cities and I I
>> So just to be clear, um um M Mr. City Attorney, are you saying and and I'm assuming that if if um Mr. Powell, Attorney Powell can on the record agree that the employee assistance trust fund does not qualify as the charitable
convers um charitable organization that is referenced in this contract. >> That is my opinion. >> And is that his as well? >> Um we would I think Mr. Geller was alluding to what some cities have like City of Myar there's a cultural arts center that has its own separate board
and foundation and obviously it has activities for fundraising and running a whole different um set of activities that are not necessarily core managerial responsibilities. >> Got it. Okay, >> that that's that's what we're looking at. Okay, >> for the record again, the employee
assistant trust fund may be nonprofit, but it is a very narrow focused singlepurpose just to provide some assistance. It is not what is contemplated in 19.9 as written and I think the language of it
is clear enough to to that is >> the duties are not duties and responsibilities are not so divorced from the things that a city manager normally does. Helping the employees
is something that a city manager typically does. So not just for the record although there is a record but also in my opinion. >> Got it. >> That is excluded. >> Okay. Thank you so much. So um aside from that I I agree with the um
with the car allowance that it should remain uh uh for everything associated and uh with the with um with you know his transportation or vehicle. So, um, as far as city fuel, that that should
not be something that is included. >> If I can just I'm sorry that I'm interrupting you, but if I may just for a moment ask a question about that. Um, I don't know the correct legal term, but is there some type of um I don't know,
maybe like a hold harmless or something so that if in in his >> like in in his as he's using the vehicle for city business, if there is an accident that we can't be
>> I I had that as one of my comments that he would have to require that the insurance would make sure if he was in an accident. Commissioner Smith is completely accurate there. >> Okay. So, when when we get point can we can we answer that when we get to her because she's going to bring that up. >> That was under my questions. >> She's going to bring it up.
>> He's not done. >> No, I'm not. No, I'm not. >> All right. So, um yeah. So, aside from that, the the the vehicle um allowance is what it is without the fuel. Um 260 to me is a is a great starting point for
a conversation. 275 is too high. 280 definitely. Um, and that was it. Thank you so much, >> M. Smith. >> Thank you so much. Well, I'll start with that. That I also I was understanding that the
$1,000 was complete, including his he buys his own gas because if he's going to have his car, he'll drive here and back that and around the city, but also who knows. Um, and that way it'll be very clear. $1,000. That's what it
covers. But I also wanted to require there be insurance that does I mean just going to the grocery store that protects us as because we pay him an aotment. I don't know if there's any such thing or
what we should add to the contract. The answer, as best I can answer it, commissioner, is when as part of having a car allowance, it's intended to cover everything. We should certainly at least attempt
to find out if in his insurance, as is sometimes the case, the city can be named as an additional insured. But I'm not sure that that kind of coverage would be available for a private individual having private insurance.
They may be unwilling to extend that. As a former personal injury lawyer, um, as your neighbor could tell you, if you have a sufficiently large accident, you sue everyone. We get sued all the time
on things where our actual liability is very small. Having the vehicle not be in the city's name, having the vehicle be a private vehicle certainly goes a long
way towards protecting us. It does not mean we can't or won't be sued, but you know, if the testimony shows that the manager was on city duty, doing city business, involved driving in the city
for city purposes, someone could attempt to name, well, they could name us. Uh, it's kind of an uphill struggle for them. I think we could resist it and we get sued on non meritorious claims all
the time. We will ask to see if there's a coverage that could name us as an additional insured. But even if we don't get that an individual driving their own car to say that the city we have no control
over them it's not our vehicle which is the theory of these the dangerous instrumentality if you own it. Yes or you're responsible we'll ask it. We may not be able to get it. I think it's a relatively weak claim. I can't tell you it could never
succeed, but we we would certainly defend vigorously when we're not an owner lei or otherwise in control of the vehicle and we don't direct that employee or any employee if they're
using their personal vehicle to we don't direct them to use their personal vehicle. We don't say you can't take an Uber to go wherever you're going. So, I would defend it vigorously if it's if the suit is brought. Uh but I can't tell
you there's a guarantee. We will ask if it's possible to be named as an additional insurance. >> Okay. Thank you. Um a couple more questions I had. >> One you raised before the >> Yes. Well, the one I raised before you
and that was the credit card or being reimbursed for receipts that had to be business purchases that he had to do to be or any manager had to do. Unfortunately, the
past does come into play here in my thinking that who's going to check when he hands in that receipt? Who's going to check when he hands in the credit card? That that was city business. >> There is an answer to that.
>> Well, and and what I thought rethinking my question was finance is departments are one that checks that which is what you explained to me privately. Since that prior issue,
the city has adopted a very detailed and thorough, I think they call them pecards, policy in writing, which was an issue that had been raised in a state audit.
And that policy applies to any use of a city credit card and any reimbursement. It does not exempt the manager from following the policy. It's frankly a reason why I don't have one of those cards because I don't want to have to go
through that red tape. Uh if I have a city expense, which is very unusual, but if I did, I would use my own funds and seek reimbursement through the PECARD policy. But I don't want to have a city card. The manager must have that. But
under the policy all uses and certainly our very excellent retiring undefeated interim manager could tell you more about it. Um, but we have a very detailed PECARD
policy that we've adopted that requires reim receipts and reimbursement and everything must be submitted before anyone receives any reimbursement or approval for use of a city credit card.
It it can be denied if you don't provide all of the appropriate paperwork and the finance department goes through those things. Yes, that was one of my questions. I just I wanted to see how how tight we could make that. But I
recognize also whoever's checking it works for the managers. So, you know, it's a ying and a yang. It's a ying and a yang. And um I want to discuss the 8week severance if you're fired with cause.
>> The reason for that? Well, before you give me an explanation, and you were very attorneyike, when you explain to me how much we get sued, everybody that's going to be fired with cause, their reputation, their future
business, their future employment. So, they're going to sue, which makes sense because we've had a year and a half of attorneys and we had a settlement. But I said, "What if
somebody murders somebody and you said they're innocent until proven guilty?" So, is there no way? I mean, it just seems to me a little bizarre that if the camera was on the gun and the guy was
holding it that was the manager, we still pay him the eight weeks. I I I just want you to address that because it it all adds up and it makes sense and there was conversation it would be four weeks and there was conversation 6 weeks and it's 8 weeks. I
think that becomes a very moot point as much as it is to make sure the city's protected. That's what we're here to do. Make sure the city is protected. >> Yes, ma'am. And the theory is this. the closer
the amount for termination without cause is to the amount for termination with cause the goal by shrinking that gap is less to protect the employee frankly although severance is what protects them
that's why I don't think we want to have a situation where a majority of the commission wants to do something and is told you can't set the direction of the city whether it's 45 days or 90 days or 60 days that you that would interfere
with your power and authority. The protection the tradeoff as Mr. Powell and I talked about is you protect the employee by giving them severance during the first year. It's only 15 weeks. it rises to what's permitted under state
law only after successful completion of that first year when you go to 20 weeks. I I eliminated this ridiculous they had an 18 weeks in between like that's going to make a difference like two weeks is what we're talking about. The goal is
less to see someone receive the pay for termination with cause. The goal, the policy goal is to have terminations be without cause, without ranker, without
accusations, without ugliness. Even if someone is accused of a terrible crime, I've seen ones where they say conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude,
which is a very questionable term that evolves over time. Anyway, conviction takes a year. Having that provision, which I've seen in contracts, does no protection for the city. On the other
hand, the laundry list that comes down to, you know, almost if you look at somebody crosseyed, if if you're attacked and defend yourself, is that insubordination? If you simply defend yourself, if if you have a hundred things on the list of what you're
supposed to do and you do a hundred things and you do them all right, but you don't get to number 101, is that nonfeasants, malfeasants, misfeasants, and nonfeasants? Can you say you didn't follow a direction when it was number
101 and you worked maybe day and night to get the first hundred? Those are excuses and they they lead to the misstep of saying we're going to save some money if we just do it with cause
instead of without. We'll save a little bit of money. 90 I won't say 100% 99 and a half% if you terminate someone with cause you're going to get sued. >> I think the answer here is very
specific. It's to protect the public. >> Yes, ma'am. >> And that's what we're here to do. >> 100%. >> I um I also want to talk about 19.9. >> You know, it's too vague. It's too vague. I I I don't like the clause at
all that we could pay extra money if they do something extra. If we do something extra, let's vote on it at the time. I just It's too vague. It's too But that's extra. But that's extra. It can lead to interpretation that who in whose
eyes is it extra? You know, we had a commissioner wanted to put in we had a mayor manager wanted to put in his contract that if he goes to the snowfest, he wants to be paid extra. Well, then don't come. I mean, if you're the manager and you don't want to see
how the money is spent and you don't want to see how many people attend for the money and how well the staff put it together, cuz it's not just to see to criticize them, it's to come and praise what an amazing job they do. So, I just
feel I Yes. If we had a manager that was CRA many years while I was a commissioner, they did not get paid extra, but it wasn't a good idea anyway. So, I don't know that's going to happen. But that 199 I I tell you, I don't like it at all. I
don't like the openness of it. I don't like the interpretation of it. Um, let me just say that, >> Commissioner, if I might. Um, that was a late addition. Um, >> I just don't want >> it was intended
for things that were not core manager duties. It was not my original draft. with your permission because it was the result of a conversation. It does say that whatever would be done would be by mutual agreement. It cannot be, you
know, no amount or anything is compelled, but with your permission, may I ask Mr. Powell to to speak to that issue? It was a request and I'm trying to come up with something that is of mutual agreement. May I defer with the
chair's permission to Mr. Powell to speak to that issue? >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> Thank you to the chair, Mr. Mayor Joseph. Um I I I I'm trying to appreciate your concern. um and the
vakeness the the language can be I guess tightened up by simply stating that the the intent of this provision is to compensate the manager for anything outside the normal core responsibilities
of a a city manager. Now as Mr. got to point it out. There may be instances where you all decide to go in a direction that is outside of that core responsibilities. So at that time
you all have the complete discretion as to determine whether or not you want to compensate the manager. So I'm trying to articulate here what would make it more specific for you. um is maybe you can help me. What would make
you feel more comfortable in this paragraph? >> I think the most comfortable thing for me is 19.9 has to be removed. >> You know, I understand >> in addition to 19.9 the first two sentences were in the original. >> Okay. That anything has to be an
amendment in writing. >> Yes. Yes. Thank you. So, >> um I understand um I might be wrong that Mr. >> um I I mean I don't know if Mr. Williams was built a building. There are people that have come up and said he was in middle of construction of a building.
But let's say he goes out cuz we're doing a huge project and he starts to oversee it like a general contractor would only because they needed that extra. Somebody didn't show up. It comes to interpretation. Does he get paid extra for that? because for the last two
weeks he's been on site every every I mean I know a little bit about construction so I'm using that as an example that it might be a poor example but I I just think we've never had it it's no need for it if there's something extra where he feels gets that he shouldn't be doing it he can always say
that how did that come under my umbrella but for us to think extra compensation how much is there anything politically involved in it with the commission at the time to vote yes or no. I just think it it it
doesn't belong in employment agreement. He he's here to be the manager and that's what his duty would be. I I can't see any way unless you spell out every single thing he would get paid for and
how much. I mean, it's just it doesn't add up for me. I appreciate you though. I appreciate you. No, I'm I'm I'm I'm struggling to meet you in the middle because I hear what you're saying and I think your concern is valid as a as a commissioner. What I'm trying to
articulate here is that if the commission decides to engage in an area that it's normally not, >> but what why would we I if that comes to be then we would have to vote on it and
we'd have to vote does it give >> that's what it says and then that's what this is stating. >> But I I I just don't see it. I don't see why it should be in there as an as a possibility that extra compensation can come to a man. You know what happens Mr.
Powell? I've only and it happened here. You took it out. Thank you very much. But it did happen when the manager stood in front of us and said a month a month I said no no
family insurance. We give you insurance like all of our charter officers and you pay for your family like all of right >> the employees stood in front of us. It was a deal killer.
So the family insurance was an part of the contract and you know what it was a part of this contract too cuz people take the contract and they copy the contract >> right >> and then Mr. Williams and I spoke. He know I know
he his family's grown. He has two wonderful children he's proud of, I'm sure. But it was removed. I I just don't like things that are ambiguous in a contract that will be used in the next contract.
And we're paying a salary, which I'm going to get to for a second, but and I don't want to take a lot of time with this, but that's in my opinion. My opinion is this is very slippery slope to c to have a manager that has a
possibility. I know we have to vote on it, but extra compensation for a duty that might be under his preview, but he doesn't see it that way and it becomes controversial. Why even start a conver a contract that could lead into
controversy? May I ask a question about that? I was going to say if I may commissioner so if I'm understanding you correctly wild case scenario the city decides to to use the example before set up a cultural arts foundation right let's say
just for argument sake and there's a discussion amongst the commission to do that and there's going to be a passage of that resolution at that time if your then city manager who's subject to this contract says well commissioners you do
realize that that foundation is going to require me to do additional work and services outside what was contemplated by the city manager's contract. Would you have an issue at that time discussing additional
compensation for that work? Would you think that that would make sense? >> I don't think that then he should be the one to do it. I don't He gets a salary, he's the manager. I think like everything else we have we hire
consultants, we hire outside people for help. I I >> Oh, so so I understand what you're saying now. Now it's you. So what you're saying is that if the city decides to do something outside the scope of this management contract, you don't think that that's an area that you should
expect your city manager. >> I I want if there's such a thing, I want it specifically in the contract what it would be. I don't want an unknown that's going to come down and all of a sudden we're we have a we we need to pay $10,000 more or 20,000 more and for how
long and it's extended. It was supposed to only be for 6 weeks and now it's 10 weeks. It's too ambiguous. Just >> so so if I'm just to put a bow on it to understand your comment, if the city decides to do something like that, it would be your vote or your opinion that
that's not something you'd be wanting your manager to do anyway. >> You're telling me I have a vote and I get how it works. I understand you. >> The truth of the matter is why even start and what can happen politically? I've seen it too many times.
I he's going to be a manager and as the manager managed the city, >> right? >> Do we need to put more under his umbrella? We need a good strong manager. Which brings me to my point. So, let's let let my other commissioners discuss it what they think.
>> That's how I feel. >> I agree with you because it's it's like they're saying when you get a job interview or job listing and it says task to be determined. Right. Right. And it's kind of the reverse of that you you know so I agree with Commissioner Smith. That's not something that I'm
comfortable it being in there. >> Can I ask a question please? Right. >> So >> let's just say we took this claw this part that part off and um and we have a CRA director right now. So that's actually non-issue. But in the event
that we were not to have a CRA director and if we chose to have the manager oversee it at that point, we could decide if we wanted to give him additional money, >> right? I think that's what I'm understanding,
>> right? That's what Okay, that's what he's saying. You could we could take it out and we could vote on individual things as they come up. I I'm also saying when the CRA director makes how much how much Jay would probably know. How much does he make now?
I don't know. But let's let's say it's it's $200,000 a year. >> So whatever he makes, we had the CRA director was the manager. There was no extra compensation. But if he becomes that, we're going to give them another
120,000. No, we're going to hire a separate CRA director. I just think it's too ambiguous. I think we would do it on a case-toase basis and I don't think that should be it. We didn't get a chance to discuss it cuz that just came to me. I'm sorry I didn't get a chance
and um it just came a few hours ago. >> And I think and I'm sorry to interrupt. I think that um our former former manager um Sori or Jadelle I think either one or both of them were actually getting >> um additional money.
>> I wasn't here then though. I was here a former former that didn't uh the last thing that I um >> just before you go on just I just spoke to Mr. D. We don't have any issues striking that that provision. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. >> That kind of on that matter.
>> Yeah. >> Based on Mr. Pal's comment there. >> We will revert to the prior draft >> of the agreement. So far there have been no amendments. >> So you don't want an amendment from us. You're going to take care of it. Mr. Pal,
>> it'll be stricken. It'll it'll read just >> just revert to the prior draft on 19.9 just the first two sentences. All the other things you're bringing up, if anybody wants to make amendments, we'll do those. But by agreement since the issue is not really
>> a today issue. It's a prospective possibly right down the road and may not occur based on mayor just for your >> but I promise >> they just agreed to they just agreed to delete the addition to 19.9 and if the
situation ever arises you can deal with it as the commission seems right. And I thank you both and I thank you Mr. But I I do guarantee you would have been in the next contract. So I thank you both. I I'm I'm thanking >> By the way, Commissioner Smith, I took
out a lot of stuff that was in that old contract that didn't make sense to me and I didn't like, not just, you know, health insurance for the whole family, but you know, retention bonuses if you survive, whether it was annual or
whether it was a one time. You don't see that in this. There's a there's other things I could show you in there. I don't just take it. We looked at it. We read it. And if we didn't need it, it's out. >> That's why you're the attorney. Thank you. So, um, let me just address the
language issue. $2,500 a year for two years. You know, it just always fascinated me. when you get a salary, whatever it is, if you want to do extra,
which is what Commissioner Jean said, you know, you have a salary to pay for that. Now, we pay and we rightfully should for management to travel to national management conventions, state conventions,
local conventions. It's in there. and for them to get all the periodicals they need, all the information they need. And we should cuz that's to make the better manager. I'm ying and yang on this. I'm not yes and I'm not know because I think
the public will benefit if they have a manager that speaks their language. So it just seems odd to me. That's all that of your own initiative that you want to do it. I'm thrilled and
the fact that we're doing that just whatever whatever my the majority wants I I think that I think the benefit I don't think I know the benefit for the public especially the communities where
they're communicating on the radio and they we don't we have to have somebody interpret us what are they saying so I think I think it's a wonderful thing and I'm glad you're going to do it. Um maybe we could get a group rate and we could
all go. I like to learn. So we could get a group rate and we could all go. Um as far as the salary goes, it's interesting. My neighbors have called me. People have called me about the salary. What's the salary? I think I right from the beginning. Mr.
Williams knew, everybody knew my stand. I like to start it somewhere where we have room in three months or five months or six months to give a big a nice bonus. Look what he's doing for us rather than start it where there's not
room to do anything for the year. You have to wait a year to say we appreciate what you're doing. So I I don't know the number. I mean, I I knew the 290 wasn't what I had in mind, and I knew 285
wasn't what I had in mind, but I mean, I just think that we should reconsider out of the box and show the public that we want to give him a bonus, right? Three months later, four months later,
he's already proven why he was hired. Um, you know, again, whatever the commission says, um, I I just I have to tell you, Mr. Williams, and to the public and to the employees is very
disappointing. Uh, yes, I agree that everybody should have the right to speak, and we had a lot of people come and speak in your favor. Tonight, we had people come to say some things that were negative. But you know what?
this commission already voted to hire you. That that was the majority vote. And so, and I I did not vote that way, but I stand behind it because the same way
with the mayor. Uh if you look at every tape, I've been telling people all day long, I give him such respect because you know why? The public voted him to be the mayor. He is our mayor. Well, I can only tell you that
I hope once he's sworn in, people will stand and hold that ladder so he can climb up it. Don't come with every criticism. Come with every idea.
And let's show this North Miami Beach can be turned around. can be turned around. A lot depends on whether I run or not because I want to see a successful city under all of our direction. Not a
person, not a resident, not under all of our direction. So, I wish you the best and I think we'll have something that'll be acceptable. Um that you can come in with pride and and start to work. And I
I also before the night's over would like to know how we're going to do the contract and the swearing in because is tomorrow your last day or today? >> Tomorrow? >> Tomorrow. So tomorrow we have to have >> Commissioner Let me address that first.
Um there's nothing the the we typically have some kind of an event when commissioners are sworn in when when new people are sworn in. No, we could have an event later later a ceremony that is family of swearing in. I mean there we
always do when any employee there is final a final complete thorough background check. It's always hiring subject to to that. But that that can be initiated just like taking a bond. You have to get a bond in place. But those
things don't prevent someone from commencing on their duties. I mean, if you if there was a feeling that you needed one more day to get something final together, I'm sure that Mr.
Platin, as agreeable as he's been would give you. >> I I think we've I think we Mr. Plin Mr. Plin put him on the spot. My point, Commissioner, is just that those formalities, if you approve a contract, the
formalities of getting any amendments you make uh done in writing and getting it signed, those are not what is essential to someone commencing the performance of their duties. You can
follow not only with a public event in a week or 10 days or whatever it is, but you can order when the assumption of of authority is. You could say noon tomorrow. I mean, whatever you want to do, you you have that authority.
Formalities of it, you know, raising your right hand and taking the oath in front of the clerk can be public, but does not need to be. There is an oath that needs to be signed and you raise your hand, but those are not things that
need to delay you. I have a very quick comment unusually about what you said about uh raising it >> about which >> the word is quick. >> Yes, ma'am. Um I I you use the word bonus. I took bonus out of here. You
have a salary. You pay the individual a salary. Don't have the word bonus. If you wanted to start it lower but move it up, um the suggestion is a typical quote
probation period is 6 months. Now there are some things in this contract that only kick in after a year like it goes from 15 to 20 weeks in severance without cause but you could pick there's nothing that would prevent I don't talk the
numbers numbers are strictly you good idea that's nothing that would prevent you from saying right now the salary is this in six months the salary goes to level number two and then This provides
colas begin when our colas start the fiscal year. That's not quite a year but close to it. Your motion whatever it is and what could be bifurcated. You could say this number now and then in six
months it goes to this number. The gentleman is not here in six months. That's a tragedy for the city. But that's the last thing we need. But you know if you want to be sure you could do >> this number now this number in 6 months
>> cola kicks in for everybody October 1st and when you decide that maybe a further raise you don't have to say now you could say you'll be considered for a further raise on your anniversary. It
doesn't have to be in the contract to do that. and and that would if that's your direction that's a way to accomplish. Mr. Mayor, may I >> Yes. Thank you. >> Okay. So, I I think that a good place to start is the salary, right? Because we
talked about there were two spaces to fill. So, can we have that discussion um and determine >> much quicker? >> Which one is that? >> Just saying you give a car allowance, you can come back. >> Okay. Yeah. I mean, but those are the two points, right? So, do I have to move
for the car allowance? And then someone has to second and then >> we don't have a motion on the table. >> That's what he's asking. Make a motion. >> Yeah, he's going to make a motion. >> Okay. So, I move to um to have a car allowance versus a uh vehicle uh in the contract >> and then include
>> Are you going to include gas or no? >> No, the the car allowance is all encompassing. So the motion is to allow a car allowance but strike >> the provision that said that with a car allowance >> he's entitled to fill up with gas at the
city >> uh gas station. >> That's not what we said. >> I said no to strike that. >> Oh, okay. Okay. >> The mo your motion is to have car allow to elect Yes. car allowance except to strike the thing that said fill up with gas also at the city.
>> Right. So the thousand car allowance. So I moved And you want to set the amount as well. >> I thought it was a,000. >> Thousand. >> Well, I mean that's in the draft, but your motion should be said. >> Then the motion, if I can repeat it, Mr. Mayor is by Commissioner Flormont to
elect to give a car allowance instead of use of a city car to strike the language which is in the nature of an amendment but it fits within this motion to strike the thing that says you can also get gas at the city gas pump and to fix the
amount at $1,000 per month. That's the motion. >> I second. Um all in favor I >> I oppose. Next. >> Commissioner >> I had proposed 260. So I don't know if what what the rest of the commission
wants to >> um commission commissioner firm. I want to second that motion but I wanted to ask about the probationary period >> um opportunity there. >> Say it again. >> Would we be able to would we be able to make a suggestion for a pro probationary
period for potential increase? But what I'm saying is if we were to put a a probationary period, would we have to put in metrics to what would >> No, ma'am. You don't have to. Now, >> that's a far cry from saying you can't.
you have great discretion but when I mention probationary period you don't it is my humble opinion as my daughter would say IM ho that you don't want to undermine
the authority of your manager by having him declared to be a probationary manager you simply have >> worded like that. >> It I that's what I'm saying is you don't want to use that language. What you can
do is simply say as Commissioner Smith's suggestion and I tried to say how you do it. You could say an initial salary of this and at six months
a different salary and thereafter increas I mean you don't even really need to address you could say on the on the anniversary but you don't need to you have the authority any member of this commission can make a motion to
increase the salary at any time you think it's justified >> in the contract Just like you're saying >> it well the first thing can be initial salary of so and so and to your point and that increases at 6 months that presumes the person is here in 6 months
and thereafter >> at a year for instance the severance increases and some other kinds of things. So it would be sufficient in the nature of probationary to say initial
salary of X and at 6 months salary increases automatically to Y and then you don't need to say anything beyond that. You may but you don't have to. When did the nonbargaining
um employees get their next raise? I'm saying increase at six months and then there's a colar anniversary but your discretion is unet
Mr. Mayor, if I may. >> Yes. >> In my talk with Mr. Williams, he enlightened me on the salaries that the cities around us, North Miami, what did they pay? Sunny Isles, what did they pay? Miami Gardens, what did they pay?
Aventur what did they pay their manager and that's why they proposed a salary don't think that the manager came in and thought I have an opportunity here no but the
problem is North Miami is an entitlement city >> Aventura has more money than they can print >> sunny Isles has more money than they can print. >> Oh yeah, >> Miami Gardens.
>> I think North Miami. >> So here we are. We're not a rich city and that's the difference. So this discussion about where to start and where to go. We want to make sure that the manager's
happy and stays, but we also know that we are not the same caliber as those around us. So that's what's leading my conversation to see what can be maybe and I think that's a a good idea
to have a base salary now and in six months to get an automatic increase >> turn off >> and I'm going to speak against that because here's here's the reason why we're in a very tentative place right
now and in November, we're going to be in a more tentative place because it's going to be elections. So the 43 could change, the 52 could change, whatever the pay the man what you want to pay him and let him do the
job. November can come and we won't have them anymore. They could be voted out. It's that simple. So if you make the bonus come in a year from now or somewhere like that, >> it doesn't happen.
>> But I disagree with it. I think you should pay them what you want to pay. >> Four months. >> And and don't forget whatever you set up, the next one's going to get more. >> That's the way the contracts work. The next one's going to get more. >> But we offered it. We offered 300.
Up to 300. We changed our parameters of getting attracting people by the mayor's suggestion was to go to 300. >> Yep. >> Up to 300. >> Up to 300. Right. I think I prefaced my comment about the salary um because Mr.
Williams had initially applied when it was at 250. >> So that's the reason why I prefaced with that statement. >> Okay. >> In addition to that, I didn't say 250. I said 260. >> Yeah. In addition to that, if we decide that's what we want to um have the
conversation about, Mr. Williams can say no, he's not amanable to that. And they can make a counter and we can come to a conclusion. Thank you. >> So, >> so, so we're at what? >> So, there was a motion and there was a second. >> So, wait, we're at 260.
>> We're at 260 for the motion and second to make that offer. an increase to an increase to 275 in 6 months. >> But before we vote on it, let them counter. >> Let me I'm just trying to understand what's the purpose. What would be the
purpose of saying now we're going to set your base salary at 260 or 250 just for argument sake and in 6 months we're just going to raise it to 275. In 6 months if
he's not doing a good job you're just going to fire him. Correct. >> I want to I want to answer that too. >> No, I'm just because I'm just trying to figure out what is the >> is it rhetorical or is it that you want to respond? >> Right. I'm trying to understand what's the thinking in just saying let's because I've never to be honest with you I've never seen this in a manager's
contract before you to Mr. Turnoff's point when you hire a manager you basically set the base salary on an annual basis you look at it in terms of performance and you decide to to raise the um raise the salary so >> Mr. Mr. Pow, if I may.
>> Um, my motion was very clear. It was the salary, >> right? >> So, that was the motion, right? >> The motion was seconded, >> right? >> So, that's all we're discussing. I if there's another conversation about 6 months from now or anything like that wasn't my motion, >> right? >> So, my motion was specific to the
salary. So if there's a counter discuss that >> I understand that Commissioner Floron but >> part of the discussion leading to the motion was also pollinated with conversations about down the road raising the salary. So I
was just trying to get an understanding as to the folks that are saying okay let's go ahead and start here and then 6 months from now raise the salary. I just didn't understand what was the objective in doing that. What's the purpose? >> Could I just Mr. Mayor, could I just
answer that >> commissioner >> through the through the chair? >> Um, again, it's based on history. In my case, it's based on history. As you say, the salary is based on performance, but we haven't seen the performance. I'd like a couple months to see the
performance because we hired people big salaries and then the performance didn't match what the city needed. So that's I'm I'm basing that concept that the attorney brought up as a good concept. It'll give us a chance to see performance for a couple months.
>> So essentially we're not >> and like you said if the performance isn't good he's going to be terminated. If performance is good then he's going to have his salary raised. >> So we're so if if your motion you know passes
then this is academic. I understand your comment commissioner for a month, but to the extent that >> it doesn't then we're back to the same conversation and I just don't want to get up and interrupt you all again. To the extent that you all don't want to use the word probationary period, you
know, if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, you're you're creating a probationary period by saying that. So, you know, I don't know whether or not that's the that's the orientation you want to have with the new manager going in with staff.
>> So, how do we how do we go about >> Well, so do we have a motion in the second? >> I also want to say that, Mr. Mayor, that there is a total value of the contract as well, right? So the base salary is one, but we're not even adding all of the other provisions that we're also agreeing to tonight. So I think the
greater question is not just the base, but also the total value that we're considering here. So I think that's a fair uh concession that we can all make. >> Should we find out? >> So we have that motion, but shouldn't
they counter it before we vote on it? Are they are they not are they choosing not to >> Commissioner Joe? You were what were you going to say? >> No, what I want to say is it is up to us and I think that's the fluidity of this moment is that we're able to make you know concession where we can.
>> I appreciate the offer but we asked in writing for a base salary. Um and now the commission is having a discussion. one of you all um Commissioner Flormont has came back with a counter which is 60 and you all have to vote on that. So you
know we we've we've made our ass if you're saying well Commissioner Flormont would you respectfully amend your motion to 270? I don't suspect you're going to do that. Correct. >> Well, are you saying that 270 is where
you're is where you're located? Is that what you're saying? >> No. The commissioner Gene asked if we had a counter, right? >> No, what I'm saying is the value the value is there. I think Commissioner Furmont mentioned if you have a counter. What I'm saying is that the value of the contract supersedes 260.
>> Correct. Correct. Right. Right. So maybe I misunderstood. I thought you were asking, well, now we're at 260. Do you all have a response to the motion for 260? I thought that's what you were asking me. >> No, I am ask I asked that. I asked if
you have a counter to the 260. >> Right. We I we believe and I discussed it with briefly with Mr. um Williams that he didn't have a problem with the 270 that was being proposed earlier discussed earlier by at least two of the commissioners. >> May I ask a question please?
>> You may commission. >> Thank you. I wanted to ask HR uh what the total value of the contract would be if you can kindly like add up roughly what we have or I mean Mr. city manager. Would you mind if I ask through the HR?
>> Also, is it is it still is the bargaining getting their um their increase for one the non-bargaining? >> So, two questions here. Um I don't think Jacob was involved in this contract agreement. So, he does know anything
about it. He'd have to get it, read it to come up with that answer. I don't think that it's a quick >> I don't believe that's a a quick fix to just tabulate. he'd have to read through all the uh uh he wasn't involved. >> Right. And also when when I'm sorry to to interrupt, but when we've hired
managers in the past, we've never said you're getting 250 plus+ plus. It's 250. Yeah. Done. >> No, I get it. No, I I just wanted to get present to what the actual numbers are. >> No, understood. I I just wanted to make clear that u Jacob was not part of the
contract or going back and forth. So he he does not >> who's copied on it. It doesn't mean he's uh up to up to you're up to speed on it. This is between you all and and and the manager. Second part was the the um
non-bargaining merit increases. Uh it's budgeted for amount but uh there's no process on how that's going to be done. So we'll be coming back to you on on merit increases for non-bargaining. We did put some money in the budget. >> So was that scheduled for this fiscal
year? Meaning prior to the next, right? >> So te technically the manager would also be getting another raise based on that date. >> It would be >> right. The so the so merit has nothing to do with what you guys were talking about now. It was just the cola which
was is October 1st. Um, >> no. What I'm saying the non-bargaining is scheduled to get a raise within this fiscal year. Would that include the manager as well? Cuz I know it's contingent upon >> No, no, no. That that's not part of the that
>> separate separate that separate from all uh the uh charter officers. >> Gotcha. >> So, we have a motion on the table. Can we can you repeat the motion, Madam Clair? >> The motion was for a salary of $260,000
uh for the incoming manager and seconded by Commissioner John. >> So, we're not inclusive of any probationary language, right? Just that. Okay. >> Yeah, that was >> it was simple. So, >> the truth is we could give him a raise in two months. We can just come to the meeting and give him a raise.
>> So, I'm fine with that. If you like that number, if you don't like the number, no, >> I'm good with the motion. >> All in favor say I. >> I. >> Any oppose? Nay. >> I >> show hands.
>> Mr. Mayor, can you show hands at the >> All right, let's do a roll call. Commissioner Turnoff, >> no. >> Commissioner Sue, >> no. >> Commissioner Jean, >> yes. >> Commissioner um Smuggler. >> Vice Mayor Smuckler, sorry. >> No. Commissioner Flormon. >> Yes.
>> Commissioner Smith. >> I'm going to follow my resident's question as ask and I'm going to say yes. >> And I'll say yes. Next item. Next issue. >> Move to approve a salary of 275. >> Excuse me. >> It passes 260.
>> It didn't pass. >> Commission. >> Oh, I'm sorry. >> Yes. of 260,000. >> So I have >> no >> should I repeat it >> for >> mayor? >> Yeah, go ahead. >> Commissioner Shernoff was a no.
Commissioner Furry was a yes. Commissioner Jean is a yes. Commissioner Smith is a yes. Commissioner Sue is a no. Vice Mayor Smuckler is a no. Mayor Michael Joseph is a yes. There are four yeses. Three. Sorry. >> Commissioner Smith, you you were a yes on the motion. >> I'm a yes.
>> Okay. I'm doing what the what my constituents called and told me to do, which they said 250, but I'm I'm bumping it up. >> Mayor, you have addressed the two outstanding issues. You said salary and >> now they need to address the allowance.
>> So now you is there a motion to approve the contract as amended? >> I make the motion. >> So So I have a motion. Move to approve resolution number R 2026-13. Madame Clerk, do a roll call, please. >> Commissioner Froman,
>> yes. >> Commissioner Jean, >> yes. >> Commissioner Smith, >> yes. >> Commissioner Sue, >> yes. >> That was a yes. >> Yes. >> Okay. Commissioner Shernoff, >> yes. >> Vice Mayor Smuggler, >> yes.
>> Mayor Michael Joseph, >> next item on the agenda is a German. Do I have a motion to wait? Can we swear him in? I'd like to in inform my colleagues that one of our board members who was on the code enforcement and the beautifification Fran Raa died over the
weekend. >> Oh wow. >> Wow. Right. And and and we also um an employee Lorie Helton passed away. She was a former employee. >> No, we No, I I did I did that at the last commission meeting. This is a >> Oh, okay. Sorry. We adjourned. Let's ask
our new city manager if he's accepting that contract. Yes, ma'am. >> Well, no, he has to there's a there's he's he's going to finish up the terms, but that's supposed to be offered and it's ceremonial. I >> I have a question for the record should be accepted there. >> So, is it accepted? >> Yes, it is. And I believe the resolution
permits Mr. Geller to make the changes. Um >> changes are minimal actually, >> right? Yeah. There's two terms. >> So, when is his start date? >> Tomorrow. >> Tomorrow. >> Tomorrow. When you fix it, you want to say tomorrow. You want to set a time or a date or just what you want to do?
tomorrow 9:00 a.m. >> Can we Can we fix a contract tonight and have him sign it tonight? Right here, right now? >> I I just tomorrow. He And that wouldn't even be proper legal from a standpoint. So, >> and that that would be >> Can we swear him in tonight?
>> Uh, no. No, but contract tomorrow. >> No, he didn't sign the contract. That's what I'm saying. >> I thought you said that it was all >> You have to go through the pro You have to go through the process. Like, >> which is the process? meaning that he has >> need to have an oath prepared. We need to have him sign the I would suggest
that you >> for what it's worth that you say that uh it takes effect at 9:00 a.m. with swearing in at noon. >> All in favor say I. >> I do I have a motion to adjourn. >> Second. All in favor say I.
>> I just want to say thank you Andy. Um, >> I would like to put on the record as the attorney that Mr. Platkin should deserve a round of applause for an outstanding job. Thank you, sir.
>> Thank you. Do it when the camera's off. Thank you. >> Let the work begin.