Palm Beach Gardens Results – Q1-NO; Q2-Yes; Q3-NO

The voters of Palm Beach Gardens, 28% of those registered, made their positions known. The turnout for the Primary/Special Election was certainly greater than we in PBGWatch expected. The results for all 3 questions were definitive. See the chart below. We will update the website with a more detailed analysis of the results by precinct when the information becomes available. Sarah Peters of the Palm Beach Post included comments from Mayor Marino and Sid Dinerstein in her article.

Legal action continues:

• “The questions are the subject of an unresolved lawsuit filed by Dinerstein days before the election alleging that city-produced flyers, robocalls and information on the city’s website wrongly advocated for the passage of the questions rather than educating the public”. There is a hearing on Friday, 8/31 on the lawsuit.
• Also unresolved is a second lawsuit by Mr. Dinerstein, currently in the 4th District Court of Appeals, regarding what was Question 3 in March – the ‘sit-out and run-again’ provision.

Summarizing:

• Palm Beach Gardens current and future council members can only serve for two-consecutive three year terms- unchanged – 65.5% NO
• Palm Beach Gardens City Managers must reside in the City, and must move there if not already a resident, within 1 year – unchanged – 70% NO
• Palm Beach Gardens Charter will be replaced by the one approved by the voters, meeting state statutes, removing outdated provisions and including other changes such as how vacancies are filled, definiton of a term, and other changes unrelated to statutes/updates. – 60% YES

Thanks to all the voters who did their research and voted on these issues.

Martino: Propaganda and Deception – Vote NO NO NO

The twin spigots of propaganda and deception surrounding the City Council of Palm Beach Gardens unrelenting march to change term limits to match the craving of the incumbents and developers while dwarfing the desires of 80% of the 2014 voters have again sparked controversy that has led to the Courthouse for resolution. The August 28, 2018 three question City Charter Referendum election has been legally challenged by a private citizen of Palm Beach Gardens.

The basis for the challenge, as I understand it to be, is misuse of public funds to pay for a public information campaign deceptively disguised as a solicitation campaign for votes to support approval to push for the passage of three City Charter questions. A local government cannot use public funds for vote solicitation.

In analyzing the three propaganda brochures sent to our homes and the City’s “information” materials on its website it is obvious that the City Council is using their appointed Charter Review Committee as a foil and their recommendations as a shield to justify these three City Charter questions. They are hiding the facts that their appointed appointed Citizens Charter Review Committee was less than representative of the entire City and had two City lobbyists from the business and development communities as members, one of whom is not a city resident. The City Council has not stipulated as information that recommendations from appointed committees are not mandates to the City Council or its constituents and that it is not a requirement, legal or otherwise, to present a ballot question on any or all of the Charter Committee recommendations.

The question than is why is a City Council that has yet to complete a single term in office so obsessed with these Charter change questions. More particularly, what inspires their obsession with changing the 2014 Term Limit Law that was passed by 80% of those 2014 voters who came to the polls to mandate term limits as then presented. Could it be because the advantage of the changes, particularly to the Term Limits, inure to their benefit and the desires of the developers whose monies are fueling a PAC that is allegedly sponsoring a campaign of confusion and deception concerning these Charter change questions? This same Political Action Committee is alleged to be in collusion and cooperation with the City and its hired Public Relations firm.

Under the developing circumstances the argument of being above personal considerations and purity on the part of the City Council members is difficult to accept. The points of order that the City Council may use to argue for underpinning their contention that it has presented an information campaign and not a political campaign for votes has been debated, exposed, and found to be wanting.

Please vote on August 28, 2018. My recommendation has not changed. Its vote NO, NO, and NO!

Martino: Vote NO, NO, and NO!

On Tuesday, August 28, 2018, Election Day, Vote NO to Charter Question #1! Vote NO to Charter Question #2! Vote NO to Charter Question #3! That’s how “TOGETHER WE CAN FIX OUR CHARTER”. The City Council has again sent “slick” campaign-style brochures to our homes deceptively asking for our vote to “fix” a charter that is not broken, particularly, in the areas they suggest.

NO to Question #1! It changes existing City Council members’ term limits of two consecutive 3-year terms that approximately 16,000 registered voters, or 80% of those that cast ballots, approved in 2014 to three consecutive 3-year terms. Why? How is that a “fix”? Council members need more time to do what? If you can’t do what in 6 years is it worth doing? These five Council members were very well aware of the existing Term Limit Law when they asked for the voters trust and have not even completed one 3-year term. And they want more time!

NO to Question #2! It is a consortium of changes some of which are minor but others that could obviate City employee rights. It is an unhealthy menu of confusion dressed up to appear as a “fix”.

NO to Question #3! It is farcical to suggest that this question will “fix the City Manager contract process”. There is no contract process to “fix” per se and annual reviews of the City Manager are routine. It simply is another attempt to eliminate residency requirements for the City Manager. Leaving the residency requirement in the Charter is not a detriment but offers clarity to the people and to the employee under consideration

In case you did not know it is against the law for the City Council to solicit votes. They are allowed to authorize and/or provide basic election information to the public and nothing more. The City is spending over $100,000 to “educate” the electorate on why our City Charter needs a “fix”. None of that $100,000 expenditure was approved at a regular advertised Council meeting to my knowledge. The City’s contract vendor who is creating this “fix” illusion has been linked with a Political Action Committee, a PAC, which has reportedly received $13,750 mostly from City developers and landowners. An employee of this same City contract vendor is listed as the Treasurer of this PAC. Volunteers for this PAC were passing out City sponsored election guides and erecting misleading election signs encouraging a Yes vote on the Charter questions. Yet the City, the contract vendor, and the PAC, incredibly claim no affiliation and/or coordination exists between them. Further, we should recall that the Courts threw out two of four similar Charter questions in March 2018. One of the surviving March questions is before the Fourth District Court of Appeals for adjudication. How can we be sure that these new questions have judicial validity?

Before voting on these “fix” questions please consider the above. However, the real and basic questions to consider are why this “fix” now, and who benefits from this “fix”. It appears to me that the current City Council members would be big beneficiaries. They get to keep collecting their approximately $30,000 part-time salaries for 9 years which equals $270,000 which does not include their yearly automatic raises. They also would continue to receive their approximately $30,000 benefit package which is another $270,000 for a total of $540,000. If they sit-out 3 years and get elected again that gravy train keeps on rolling for another 9 years and they bank another $540,000 salary and benefit package. How does 18 years and $1,080,000 comport with term limits? It doesn’t! And the current City Council members can continue with their perceived power while carousing with and satisfying the developers and landowners who contribute large sums to their campaigns, as exampled above.

I see no benefit or “fix” for the people whose home rule rights are guaranteed in the City Charter. Rather those home rule rights would be diminished and some would disappear.

Preserve Your Home Rule Rights; Vote NO, NO, and NO on Tuesday, August 28, 2018.

Misleading Signage Says Vote YES – Keep Term Limits

Palm Beach Gardens voters may be confused by signs paid for by the Political Committee “Voters in Control“, on their way to the polls…. how can Vote Yes mean Keep Term Limits?

The City already has term limits passed in 2014 by over 16,000 voters, about 80% of the vote – for 2 3-year terms.

Voting YES would CHANGE  term limits by adding a 3rd term.

A NO vote KEEPS term limits the way the voters passed them!!!!!

So who is Voters in Control?

A look at the FEC campaign treasurer reports listed on the City’s website shows that the Treasurer is Kim Lee Bove.  Interestingly enough Kim Lee Bove is Director of Operations at Cornerstone Solutions, LLC – which is the same company that the City hired to ‘market’ the proposed charter changes.

One can review the listed donors in the March and April 2018 reports – the fairly short list includes mostly developers with business before the city. Why would they want council people to serve longer or not have term limits at all?  We can think of lots of reasons…..

Who benefits by misleading the voter?  You decide.

There is nothing wrong with donating to a PAC or having one – but their signage is highly misleading and we think that the voters should know.

Police Life-Saving Action and 12% Salary Increase Bookends Council Meeting

The August 2nd Council Meeting began with an update by Sherri Pla (the City’s Head PGA Professional) on the Junior Ryder Cup Challenge Trip to Scotland. Also covered during Announcements and Presentations were the Florida Law Enforcement Traffic Safety Award (where the Gardens won first place in the category for departments with 101-200 officers) and American Heart Association’s Mission Life Gold Plus Award to Fire/Rescue for the 4th year in a row. Throughout the beginning of the meeting the exclamations of a young child could be heard. Thus Mayor Marino segued to an early City Manager Report.

Quick action by Officer Robert Ayala saved the life of young Lucia Graham while Officer Rafael Guadalupe called for Fire/Rescue and comforted her mother. See Gardens Cops who Saved Choking Baby…. for details and watch the segment of the Council Meeting recounting the event and honoring of these two officers here.

The last item on the Agenda was Resolution 45, 2018 approving and ratifying an agreement with the Police Benevolent Association granting an immediate 12% increase across the board and bringing the City to 2nd in salary only to Boca Raton among the local municipalities. This was presented to the Council as a ‘Fait Accompli’ and it was interesting that none on the Council even questioned the agreement nor addressed the implication on future labor negotiations. The only comments addressed impact on the budget, and then only as a done deal.  See details from the Palm Beach Post here.

All resolutions passed 5:0 including Adoption of 2018-2019 Fees and Charges, the Annual Community Development Block Grant Action Plan, and the first of many to come presentations before the Council on Avenir. City Attorney Lohman also gave an update on the Rustic Lakes Annexation lawsuit, where Rustic Lakes has 20 days to respond to the latest ruling against their suit.

There will be two Fiscal Year 2018-2019 Budget Hearings on September 6th and 20th.

Please vote on the three Charter Amendments on the ballot on August 28th!

Next City Council Mtg on August 2nd at 7pm

• Purchase Award – Life Insurance, AD&D, and Long-Term Disability  – 3 year contract with option to renew for 3 years – openly bid with estimated annual amount $112K
• Purchase Award – Group Health Insurance Plan (Self-Funded) – Stop Loss Insurance Coverage – annual renewal – but representing a 35.5% increase over last year’s rate, for $579K
• Purchase Award – Group Health Insurance Plan (Self-Funded) – taking option to renew for 3 years, no additional options to renew – $1.045 Million for the 3 years.
• Purchase Award – Property Maintenance Services for Code Compliance – openly competed – 5 year contract total $100K
• Purchase Award – Police SWAT Support Vehicle Unit – Piggyback/Access Contract – $123K
• Purchase Award – Modifications to Johnson Dairy Road (Amendment No. l) – piggyback/access contract – $108K

City Manager Report:  Nothing listed

Public Hearings and Resolutions: 

• Resolution 37, 2018 –  Adopting the Fiscal Year 2018/2019 Fees and Charges Schedule. This schedule includes recommended changes from departments to ensure that fees charged are sufficient to cover the costs of providing services.
• Resolution 38, 2018 – A City-initiated application to submit the One-Year Annual Action Plan to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2018. The City must submit an Annual Action Plan and application for grant funds that confirm the projects on which the current year’s grant allocation is proposed to be spent during the upcoming year. The City is eligible to receive approximately $221,943 for Fiscal Year (FY) 2018.
• Resolution 44, 2018 – A request from Avenir Holdings, LLC for approval of an amendment to the Avenir PCD to make modifications to the approved parcel configurations, internal roadway network, development standards and conditions of approval. 
• Resolution 47, 2018 – Approves an lnterlocal Agreement (Agreement) between the City and Palm Beach County to annex portions of the Northlake Boulevard Right-of-Way (ROW) adjacent to the City’s Municipal Boundary west of the City’s Sandhill Crane Golf Club. This Agreement will authorize the City to provide traffic enforcement and lifesafety services along the entire section of  Northlake Boulevard from Grapeview Boulevard at the western boundary of the Avenir PCD to the eastern boundary of Carleton Oaks.
• Resolution 45, 2018 – Aware that several employees are considering leaving the City’s Police Department to join another law enforcement agency, on June 22, 2018, staff requested meeting with the PBA to address this salary issue as quickly as possible. The City and PBA representatives met on July 3, 2018, specifically to open Article 32, Salaries, in the current collective bargaining agreement. During this meeting, the parties successfully reached a Tentative Agreement on a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to amend the Salaries Article, to provide all bargaining unit members a 12 percent salary increase effective the first full pay period following ratification, and to increase the salary ranges for each bargaining unit position. As a result, upon approval and ratification, all bargaining unit members will receive the 6 percent wage increase scheduled for October 1, 2018, under the current  contract, plus an additional 6 percent wage increase for a total of 12 percent, starting August 6, 2018, which will be reflected in their paychecks dated August 24, 2018. These salary increases are projected to cost approximately $1,665,000 in FY 2018-2019, and an additional $277,443 in the current year’s Police Department Budget. Because this MOU amends salaries for the last year of the existing contract, there would not be an additional wage increase for FY 2018-2019.

Items for Council Action/Discussion:   

• None listed

Check the agenda to see if any additional items have been added before the meeting here.

August 28 Ballot has 3 PB Gardens Referendum Questions

Whether one has a partisan or non-partisan ballot when you vote by mail, early voting or on the Primary Election Day on 8/28, there will be 3 questions pertaining to the Palm Beach Gardens City Charter at the end of your ballot. Please get familiar with the questions and VOTE.

The City has once again come out with an updated flashy website entitled Fix Our Charter. Here, however is a link to the unenhanced Elections Page which includes images of the sample ballot questions, Notice of Elections (as to be published in the Palm Beach Post in upcoming weeks) and a link to Exhibit A, Ordinance 8, 2018 – which is referenced in Question 2 and is the existing Charter annotated with the proposed changes in Question 2.

Here are the 3 questions as they appear in the Notice of Election:

---

CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS REFERENDUM QUESTION NO. 1

SHALL THE PALM BEACH GARDENS CHARTER BE AMENDED TO CHANGE FROM THE EXISTING TERM LIMIT WHICH PROHIBITS A COUNCIL MEMBER FROM BEING ELECTED TO MORE THAN TWO CONSECUTIVE FULL TERMS TO A TERM LIMIT THAT PROHIBITS A COUNCIL MEMBER FROM SERVING FOR MORE THAN THREE CONSECUTIVE FULL TERMS AND MAKING THE CHANGE APPLY TO ALL SITTING COUNCIL MEMBERS?

SHALL THE ABOVE DESCRIBED QUESTION NO. 1 BE ADOPTED?

YES

NO

CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS REFERENDUM QUESTION NO. 2

SHALL THE CITY CHARTER BE AMENDED TO REMOVE PROVISIONS THAT ARE OUTDATED, UNNECESSARY OR CONFLICT WITH STATE LAW INCLUDING MUNICIPALITY, CITY CLERK, AND CITY TREASURER SPECIFIC POWERS/DUTIES; OATH OF OFFICE; MERIT SYSTEM; PROCEDURE REMOVING COUNCILMEN, QUALIFICATION OF ELECTORS, COUNCIL MEETING AND PROCEDURE, AND OTHER PROVISIONS; REVISE COUNCIL-MANAGER RELATIONSHIP; CHANGE FILLING OF VACANCIES; LIMIT INITIATIVE/REFERENDUM; DEFINE “FULL TERM”; REMOVE COUNCIL CONFIRMATION OF EMPLOYEES AND OTHER CHANGES; AS PROVIDED IN EXHIBIT A, ORDINANCE 8?

SHALL THE ABOVE DESCRIBED QUESTION NO. 2 BE ADOPTED?

YES

NO

CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS REFERENDUM QUESTION NO. 3

SHALL THE PALM BEACH GARDENS CHARTER BE AMENDED TO REMOVE THE REQUIREMENT THAT THE CITY MANAGER BE A RESIDENT WITHIN ONE YEAR OF APPOINTMENT AND INSTEAD PROVIDE THAT ANY RESIDENCY REQUIREMENT FOR THE CITY MANAGER BE DETERMINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL IN THE CITY MANAGER’S EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT?

SHALL THE ABOVE DESCRIBED QUESTION NO. 3 BE ADOPTED?

YES

NO

---

Points to consider:

• See our position on Question 1  entitled  Vote NO on PBG Q1 – Two 3-Year Terms Are Enough!
• Question 2 is a complete rewrite of the City Charter – which is its Constitution.   The wording of the question now reflects all the areas of the charter which are modified and/or deleted.  Now is a good time to refresh yourself on the charter itself and read the proposed charter with all modifications annotated.  Not all of the changes are a result of state statute.  The proposed charter retains the requirement for future charter reviews on a 5-year cycle.
• Question 3 – City Manager Residence  – the current charter requires that the City Manager become a resident of the City within 1 year.  A YES vote on this question will remove the requirement and make City residence a contract negotiation – which means a City Manager in theory could be hired without ever having to live in the city and leaves the decision up to the then seated Council.  Proponents argue that a most qualified candidate for the position shouldn’t be rejected just because they live outside the city boundaries and shouldn’t be forced to move, depending on house, family or other situations.  Opponents argue that the City Manager should live in the area they manage and be impacted by the same decisions they impose on others, as well as be in the city during emergencies (eg hurricanes).

 

Vote NO on PBG Q1 – Two 3-Year Terms Are Enough!

The Palm Beach Gardens City Council – none of whom have yet served a single term, are asking you to expand the definition of term limits to mean 3 consecutive 3-year terms (9 years), rather than the 2 consecutive 3-year terms (6 years) to which they are currently limited. Over 16000 residents, 80% of those voting, approved the existing 2 3-year term limits in 2014.

A form of the question was to be on the ballot in March and was pulled by the judge reviewing the language. It has since been rewritten to at least inform the voter that term limits already exist and what the change would be. But the City’s ‘Fix Our Charter’ website does not inform you about the landslide nature of the election in 2014. It does state that:

“In the March 2018 Municipal Election, Palm Beach Gardens voters approved two amendments to the City Charter. These amendments improved ** local elections by ensuring the candidate with the plurality (highest number) of votes wins the election and that any Council member who is termed out must wait a three-year period before running again for City Council.”

What they also didn’t tell you (nor sadly did the Palm Beach Post) – was that the results of March’s question 3, allowing term-limited council members to run again, is being appealed in the courts. The issue will not be resolved prior to the August 28 elections, and the March election results stand: term-limited council members can run again after sitting out a term (3 years)

IF QUESTION 1 PASSES, A COUNCIL MEMBER, ONCE REACHING THEIR FIRST TERM LIMIT (9 years in office) CAN RE-RUN AND BE IN OFFICE IF RE-ELECTED FOR 18 YEARS OR MORE.

Please consider why you voted for term-limits in 2014 and keep the two 3-year term limits intact – VOTE NO On August 28!

---

CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS REFERENDUM QUESTION NO. 1

SHALL THE PALM BEACH GARDENS CHARTER BE AMENDED TO CHANGE FROM THE EXISTING TERM LIMIT, WHICH PROHIBITS A COUNCIL MEMBER FROM BEING ELECTED TO MORE THAN TWO CONSECUTIVE FULL TERMS TO A TERM LIMIT THAT PROHIBITS A COUNCIL MEMBER FROM SERVING FOR MORE THAN THREE CONSECUTIVE FULL TERMS AND MAKING THE CHANGE APPLY TO ALL SITTING COUNCIL MEMBERS?

SHALL THE ABOVE DESCRIBED QUESTION NO. 1 BE ADOPTED?

---

(** the City is making an editorial comment on the results of the March 2018 election)

Palm Beach Gardens Looking to the Future, and in the News

Optimally timed to coincide with his annual evaluation, City Manager Ferris had a comprehensive City Manager Report including an update on a subset of the $54.5 million in Capital Improvement Projects (covering key projects in the City’s budget as well as those funded by the Sales Tax Surtax), a set of news clips from WPTV (click here to watch them) covering a variety of subjects – baseball tournaments, electric cars for Fire/Rescue, free smoke alarms), and an update on the ability for those needing to call 911 to do so by texting when unable to make a phone call. There are definite limitatons to texting including no location provided. Please see this article for more on the ability.

Each of the Council, towards the end of the meeting, gave Mr. Ferris a glowing evaluation with the concensus being that they hoped he stayed as long as he wishes.

The Council also came to agreement on Resolution 26, 2018 – Firearm Legislation – after spending another 30 minutes discussing changes initiated by Council Member Litt to the current draft. They passed the resolution 5:0. Prior to their discussion, resident Paula Magnuson gave heartfelt and patriotic support for the Second Amendment. Mayor Marino once again demonstrated that some are indeed ‘more equal’ than others, by encouraging the members of Moms Demand Action to applaud the passage of the resolution while at the same time exclaiming that they should understand why she sent them emails telling them why they can’t applaud. (The rules, time and again, clearly seem to apply only to those with whom the Council disagrees.)

City Attorney Lohman gave an update on the Rustic Lakes legal challenge to the Annexation which occured in March, 2018. See Rural Rustic Lakes Just Annexed Sues...  Mr. Lohman explained various techicalities and missed deadlines by Rustic Lakes.  Council Member Litt inquired into the status of the appeal of Question 3 from the March 2018 referendum. Mr. Lohman said that he filed for an extension and the City must reply by August 22, after which Mr. Dinerstein has an opportunity to repond. He also expected that another lawsuit would be filed on an emergency basis right before the August 28th referendum.

Another item first brought up at last month’s Council Meeting was the Security Agreement with the School Board of Palm Beach County. Resolution 42, 2018, passed 5:0, allows the Mayor and City Clerk to execute an agreement for the City’s police to provide security at the Palm Beach Gardens elementary schools – where the police providing the security would be paid overtime and do so on their time off, complying with their maximum hours allowed. Council Member Lane recommended that, if feasible, all public schools within the City be covered in the same manner. Staff’s response is that it could be evaluated at a future time, and cost and man-power would definitely be an issue.

The tentative maximum millage rate for the 2018/2019 Fiscal Year Budget was set at flat operational millage of 5.55, and a decrease in the debt service millage for a total millage of 5.6003 which is down from the current millage of 5.6678. The rates can be lowered during the budget hearings but not raised. The first Public Hearing will be on September 6, 2018 at 7pm. Resolution 31, 2018 passed 5:0 with no discussion.

Nick Uhren, Executive Director of the Palm Beach Transportation Planning Agency, explained who the TPA is, it’s transition from Metropolitan Planning Agency (MPO) and the two related Resolutions 39, 2018 and Resolution 40, 2018 before the Council, which passed 5:0. Mayor Marino currently serves as TPA Board Vice-Chair; County Commissioner Valeche serves as Chairman. A subset of the municipalities in the Councy are participants on the board, and those cities are agreeing to pay per capita member dues to the agency starting in 2019 and into the future. In addition, the Council approved an interlocal agreement for administrative services for the TPA. For background on the TPA see this PB Post article on the decision to transition from under the County to an independent agency, Clerk Bock’s assessment of pros/cons of the move and a link to the TPA website). The TPA has in impact on all things transportation related and thus impacts everyone in the City.

Public Comment was made by resident Paula Magnuson, as President of her HOA, about a dumpster on an adjacent community which was not meeting code.

The Palm Beach Gardens Police Explorers were recognized for their first place finish in regional competition, and the Gardens Spirit Team presented a $500 check to the Florida Guardian Ad Litem Program.  Congratulations to both!  Electric Cars and the Fire/Rescue Mobile Training Facility were on display outside the building prior to the meeting.

Next City Council Mtg on Thursday, July 12th

The next City Council meeting will be on Thursday, July 12th at 7pm in City Hall. 

Highlights: setting of the maximum millage rate for 2018/2019 budget; security agreement with the PBC schoolboard; city manager evaluation; gun control resolution; city manager update on capital improvement projects

• RECOGNITION OF THE PALM BEACH GARDENS POLICE EXPLORERS COMPETITION
• GARDENS SPIRIT TEAM “JEANS FOR MEANS” CHECK PRESENTATION- FLORIDA GUARDIAN AD LITEM PROGRAM.

• Purchase award for Irrigation Maintenance Services – openly competed, 5-year contract with no option to renew – $263K

City Manager Report:  

• UPDATE ON CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS.
• EMERGENCY TEXT MESSAGING TO 911 CALL CENTERS.

Public Hearings and Resolutions: 

• Resolution 36, 2018:  A request by GK, LLC requesting approval to allow the existing gas station canopy to be illuminated and to allow additional signage in order to rebrand the Northlake Sunoco Gas Station to a BP Gas Station. The gas station is located at the northwest corner of Northlake Boulevard and 1-95. 
• Resolution 31, 2018: The City is required to file with the County Property Appraiser and Tax Collector a proposed millage rate that will be sent out on the Notice of Proposed Taxes in August. The proposed operating millage rate is 5.55, and debt service is .0503, for a total millage of 5.6003, which is less than the current year total rate of 5.6678.  Once the tentative millage is filed with the County, these rates can be lowered at the budget hearings, but they cannot be increased.  The detailed proposed line-item budget will be distributed to Council and the Budget Oversight Review Board under separate cover.
• Resolution 39, 2018:   Authorizing payment of per capita member dues to the Palm Beach Transportation Planning Agency commencing in fiscal year 2019.
• Resolution 40, 2018:  Approving an lnterlocal Agreement with the Palm Beach Metropolitan Planning Organization, doing business as the Palm Beach Transportation Planning Agency (the “TPA”), to provide advance funding to the TPA for the TPA’s access, use, withdrawal, deposit, and reimbursement through federal, state, or local grants during the initial term of this Agreement and any renewal terms. 
• Resolution 42, 2018:   Security Agreement between The School Board of Palm Beach County, Florida, and the City of Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, acting under the 2016 Palm Beach County Law Enforcement Agencies Combined Operational Assistance and Voluntary Cooperation Mutual Aid Agreement (“Mutual Aid Agreement”), to provide municipal police officers on non-charter public school campuses. 

Items for Council Action/Discussion:   

• City Manager Evaluation
• Resolution 26, 2018:  Calling on the State of Florida and Federal Government to implement sensible gun control legislation, enhance mental health programs, and increase school security measures in order to help prevent future gun violence and mass casualties. 

Check the agenda to see if any additional items have been added before the meeting here.

« Previous Page — Next Page »