[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6345861,"mediaKeyId","2248071-8d180918a85822c6b9816235abb9c6ff","parentId",2248071,"title","Board hears referendum cost estimates; votes to ask City Commission about timing and submission format","audioSeconds",617,"startMs",3456000,"endMs",4073000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2248071-8d180918a85822c6b9816235abb9c6ff&start=3456&end=4073","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2248071-8d180918a85822c6b9816235abb9c6ff/thumbnail_3456000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6345861/Fort-Lauderdale/Broward-County/Florida/Board-hears-referendum-cost-estimates-votes-to-ask-City-Commission-about-timing-and-submission-format","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6345861-1354dacd359707f087570216561048ad/orig.mp4?Expires=1771165797&Signature=Ca9TVSGa4FPGaeLswFGQWeQYDmu~O7ELun1wIjoHReBCvUsFYq6sNC-~rsO8dOjM2NvvL2senEs0EcVapGjfjlAI8hQNlDrZ~Z-X92B11gUZfcaNEYivs64NtcOOzC3nvM-J47YyydSGpqMlRRroE36B5xQYm7YA4NZGQ9xI8ErNfmaa8nCyOUO6y3eDEujrmrM1MljONDU-d3RHcHR~Bpmc1mZ6UsrQykb5qjM1~lMSO55CUTTa~dA0CFT7wZeGr~ZOCI8r7QkD9~Y4wO7twDNDhUk4O7CbdbLC9SSxVBGOgdLrHGBgTn9Qo2HiV6vcZF5GbQ4GTcHRIVzGRtiKtA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","City of Fort Lauderdale, FL","date","2025-02-07T11:37:25Z","article","City staff presented cost estimates for holding a referendum on charter changes and the Charter Review Board voted to ask the City Commission whether it has a timeline and whether it prefers the board’s work presented all at once or in increments.

Cassandra (staff) summarized four timing options and their estimated costs: adding referendum questions to a November general election held with a presidential contest (estimated at about $92,340 for the city with one additional ballot page; costs rise to about $112,000 with a second page and $131,000 with a third), holding a March municipal election in a year without a presidential contest (estimated about $315,980), using an August primary (not typically used for municipal referenda), or a standalone mail ballot (costs not specified in detail in the presentation). Cassandra explained the Supervisor of Elections’ per-ballot price assumptions: approximately $0.70 per ballot plus roughly $0.15 for each additional ballot page, multiplied by the number of registered voters.

Nut Graf: The cost estimates and timing options matter because they influence how the board coordinates its review schedule with the City Commission and with the Supervisor of Elections; different timings change both cost and likely turnout.

After the cost presentation the board voted on a motion directing staff to send a written communication to the City Commission asking two questions: (1) whether the commission is working toward a specific deadline for the board’s work, and (2) whether the commission prefers to receive the board’s work all at once or in increments as sections are completed. The motion passed on a recorded voice vote. Chair Stern, Mr. Weiss and Miss Kelli Quinn were recorded as voting “yes.”

Ending: Board members asked staff to include the question in the meeting minutes and to coordinate the board’s calendar with any timeline the commission provides. The board said it will expect a commission response at the commission’s next meeting and will revisit election-timing considerations at its next Charter Review Board session.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Charter Revision Board Meeting 02.06.2025","oneSentenceSummary","A city staff presentation estimated referendum costs across four timing options, and the board approved a motion to ask the City Commission whether it has a deadline and whether it prefers the board submit its work all at once or in increments.","taxTitle","Fort Lauderdale, Broward County, Florida","taxId",4849,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6345864,"Charter Review Board reviews recommended changes on sale and long-term use of city property",1155,1893000,3048000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2248071-8d180918a85822c6b9816235abb9c6ff&start=1893&end=3048","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2248071-8d180918a85822c6b9816235abb9c6ff/thumbnail_1893000.jpg","/articles/6345864/Fort-Lauderdale/Broward-County/Florida/Charter-Review-Board-reviews-recommended-changes-on-sale-and-long-term-use-of-city-property","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6345864-754938c06600bd4a89864171a5e92ea4/orig.mp4?Expires=1771165797&Signature=RU2wlsR9XnggpjUh4AUgSdrYi-BytolEA4lom6ej27wpmtErm4rqKah7KkFuGErjUHd4ZPKXdRm6Wo5UN1-~WxqP-5RNgjpxs~EZ8xOIimUXci-Nik47UygLenTN8QhiDAIShxQ2eTA96YdGZjaLg08slzsPnRoWpm~EbqzaPuFleUbt40naW0lCkUwegvW6WqI~Pg~5q5VnjT-ehT8K1qGhHCT0G7pdM4kflgi66QEmryAWBnI9I1mXkOyIB2XokiYukNiz4tqB31hvmPfCGwJB~xX64duLaGALSrmLtHe23XCdCGsXXInUuQQ948yJFX~pw-8bkiUC2dEv3t-g-w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Fort Lauderdale Charter Review Board reviewed proposed revisions to several sections of the city charter related to city property, leases and parks, with members describing tighter controls on long-term private use and new voting thresholds for certain transactions.

The board discussed proposed edits to charter sections 8.01, 8.02, 8.04, 8.09 and 8.21, which the board’s report recommends for revision. The changes summarized by the presenter would:

- Move procedures for sale of personal property into ordinance authority rather than embedding bidding and publication requirements in the charter (proposed change to 8.01).
- Require that sales of property to public bodies or allowing public bodies to make improvements have a “paramount public purpose,” defined in the proposal as activities essential to the health, morals, protection or welfare of the city, and require findings adopted by the city commission (proposed change to 8.02).
- Require that sales of improved or unimproved real property be governed by ordinance and require a resolution finding the sale is in the city’s best interest adopted by the affirmative vote of at least four commissioners (8.04).
- Limit leases, licenses, concessions and facility-use agreements for non-public use to not more than 50 years (including renewals or extensions). Agreements longer than one year would require a resolution adopted by at least four commissioners and a fair-market-value analysis and an evaluation of the private party’s qualifications prepared by an independent consultant hired by the city and paid for by the private party; agreements longer than 10 years would require additional business-viability reporting (8.09).
- Treat land zoned parks, recreation and open space differently: sales or transfers would be subject to approval in a referendum at a special election; leases, licenses or use agreements for more than one year on park-zoned land would require a unanimous vote of the city commission (8.21).

Nut Graf: The proposed revisions aim to shift operational details out of the charter and create higher procedural safeguards — such as supermajority votes, independent market analyses and referendum requirements for parkland — for transactions that could affect public lands or long-term public access.

Board members said the revisions were the product of multiple meetings and research spanning cases and prior practice dating back to earlier charter amendments. Members discussed that some charter language had not been substantially revised since 1984 and that the board sought to close perceived loopholes that had enabled very long agreements under prior practice.

Ending: The board’s presenter said the summary was intended to brief newer members; the board did not adopt charter language during the meeting and agreed to continue review at future meetings and to forward its draft recommendations to the city commission for consideration.","Board members reviewed proposed amendments to several charter sections that would limit private, long-term use of city property, require supermajority commission votes, and tighten procedures for leases and transfers of park land.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6345868,"Charter review board plans public education campaign using SpotlightFTL, surveys and civic partners",936,768000,1704000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2248071-8d180918a85822c6b9816235abb9c6ff&start=768&end=1704","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2248071-8d180918a85822c6b9816235abb9c6ff/thumbnail_768000.jpg","/articles/6345868/Fort-Lauderdale/Broward-County/Florida/Charter-review-board-plans-public-education-campaign-using-SpotlightFTL-surveys-and-civic-partners","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6345868-6bdfeeec6b012436cf1fbb97a5d8ae8d/orig.mp4?Expires=1771165798&Signature=DA2BHfpwueHUeXhuIVL48BsuRAAsrVPk4gh7FaMgW-GV4MJDcTMK7MjAj3-4hylSRIVrxqAOr4S2mMX2tX8Tiagb9cQlZd2-AZ~s2szb7xFDjgnOrH-rg9SuU~EGvIagUJDHc8YASTT3~RWg~IZlc7QMHl3bieBuIe2A3ArR0o~MvHiC6V9VsOAJla9d6SUKHDIntMr7nsjFt85ycAM8HXX9OXdtist63lY4Zia4N8NK0peVUjiDRBpNsIrXvbtRqincKbyo7FM~Gw3dtGZDkLcKZ~ewEhe9PQCLqkPvwJY3~8qIrzdrXxsMeNI6pwS2PLygG0F5rpr-7r-iGoeA-g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Fort Lauderdale Charter Review Board heard a presentation on public outreach planning at its meeting, with Ashley Dussard, the city’s director for strategic communications, describing a program that centers on a dedicated SpotlightFTL webpage and a short public survey to guide the board’s work.

Dussard said the communications plan will explain “what the charter is, why they should be interested in what is in it, and, how it impacts them.” She told the board the plan would include a dedicated web page (similar to the city’s SpotlightFTL project pages), a survey, flyers posted at city facilities with QR codes, social and media outreach, email distribution through city and partner lists, and inserts on the back of water bills.

Nut Graf: The board signaled a priority on educating residents about how Fort Lauderdale’s charter and form of government work before asking voters to act. Members emphasized clear, plain-language explanations (for example, contrasting the current city manager form of government with a strong-mayor option), and using existing civic channels — neighborhood associations, the Chamber of Commerce, the Riverwalk and the Downtown Development Authority — to reach a broad audience.

Board members asked staff to keep the outreach materials simple and focused. Chair Stern and members said the communications should state clearly whether the board is only collecting opinions or proposing specific charter changes for a future ballot. Mary Palagun and other members urged using existing neighborhood newsletters (including Imperial Point News) and civic association networks to distribute content. Dussard said staff can provide graphics and content for partner outlets and will track engagement metrics — email opens, social reach and survey responses — to report back to the board.

The board discussed outreach to schools and the education advisory board as a way to increase civic awareness among younger residents. Members suggested coordinating with the city’s education advisory board, which has liaisons to the school district, to explore civics lessons or materials that could be distributed in high schools that offer pre-law or civics coursework.

Ending: Dussard said she will draft plain-language messaging for the board to review and email the draft to members in advance of the next meeting. The board agreed to put the outreach plan on the next agenda for formal review and to keep the SpotlightFTL page as the central, dynamic repository for materials and metrics.","City communications director outlined a multi-pronged outreach plan for the Charter Review Board that centers on a dedicated SpotlightFTL page, neighborhood outreach, civic partners, water-bill inserts and school-based civics engagement.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Board hears referendum cost estimates; votes to ask City Commission about timing and submission format

Charter Review Board reviews recommended changes on sale and long-term use of city property

Charter review board plans public education campaign using SpotlightFTL, surveys and civic partners