City of Lauderhill  
City Commission Chambers at City Hall  
5581 W. Oakland Park Blvd.  
Lauderhill, FL, 33313  
Meeting Minutes - Final  
Monday, August 25, 2025  
6:00 PM  
City Commission Chambers  
City Commission Meeting  
LAUDERHILL CITY COMMISSION  
Mayor Denise D. Grant  
Vice Mayor Sarai "Ray" Martin  
Commissioner Richard Campbell  
Commissioner Melissa P. Dunn  
Commissioner John T. Hodgson  
Kennie Hobbs, City Manager  
Andrea M. Anderson, City Clerk  
Hans Ottinot, City Attorney  
I CALL TO ORDER  
Mayor Grant called to order the Regular City Commission Meeting at 6:01 PM.  
II ROLL CALL  
5 -  
Present:  
Commissioner Richard Campbell,Commissioner Melissa P. Dunn,Commissioner  
John T. Hodgson,Vice Mayor Sarai Martin, and Mayor Denise D. Grant  
ALSO PRESENT:  
Kennie Hobbs, Jr., City Manager  
Hans Ottinot, City Attorney  
Constance Stanley, Police Chief  
Andrea M. Anderson, City Clerk  
III  
COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC (AND CITY MANAGER RESPONSES TO  
THE PUBLIC, IF THE TIME PERMITS DURING THIS PORTION OF THE MEETING OF  
THE CITY COMMISSION)  
IV ADJOURNMENT (NO LATER THAN 6:30 PM)  
I CALL TO ORDER OF REGULAR MEETING  
II HOUSEKEEPING  
A motion was made by Mayor D. Grant, seconded by Commissioner M. Dunn, to  
ACCEPT the Final-Revised Version of the City Commission Meeting Agenda for  
August 25, 2025. The motion carried by the following vote:  
5 -  
Yes:  
Commissioner R. Campbell, Commissioner M. Dunn, Commissioner J. Hodgson,  
Vice Mayor S. Martin, and Mayor D. Grant  
0
Abstain:  
III PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG FOLLOWED BY GOOD AND WELFARE  
IV APPROVAL OF MINUTES  
V PROCLAMATIONS / COMMENDATIONS (10 MINUTES MAXIMUM)  
VI PRESENTATIONS (15 MINUTES MAXIMUM)  
A. A PRESENTATION BY CAMILLE WILLIAMS, FIRST PLACE WINNER OF THE LAUDERHILL RISING STARS  
TALENT SHOW (REQUESTED BY MAYOR DENISE D. GRANT).  
B.  
A PRESENTATION FROM THE LAUDERHILL STEEL ENSEMBLE (REQUESTED BY VICE MAYOR SARAI  
“RAY” MARTIN).  
VII QUASI-JUDICIAL MATTERS  
City Attorney Ottinot collectively swore in all persons wishing to speak on the  
following quasi-judicial matters.  
1.  
RESOLUTION NO. 25R-08-144:  
A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY  
FLORIDA, GRANTING  
ECM-BG2-LAUDERHILL, FL-1-UT, LLC, ON BEHALF OF BOCA GAS  
COMPANY HOLDINGS 2, LLC, SPECIAL EXCEPTION USE  
COMMISSION  
OF  
LAUDERHILL,  
A
DEVELOPMENT ORDER TO ALLOW IN THE GENERAL COMMERCIAL  
(CG) ZONING DISTRICT THE CONVEYANCE OF USE OF AN EXISTING  
SERVICE STATION WITH CONVENIENCE STORE AND CAR WASH  
USE ON A 0.91± ACRE SITE LEGALLY LOCATED AT 1901 N. STATE  
ROAD  
7,  
LAUDERHILL,  
FLORIDA  
AND  
MORE  
SPECIFICALLY  
DESCRIBED HEREIN; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS; AND PROVIDING  
FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.  
Senior Planner Molly Howson reviewed the subject resolution, as detailed in the  
backup, stating that the subject location was currently a Shell gas station, just  
north of the Wendy’s on the west side of 441. As the special exception use was  
granted only to the previous property owner, the new owner had to submit their  
own special exception use application.  
Commissioner Dunn noted that, in reading the backup, she wished to affirm  
certain elements of the development agreement, so the applicant could verbally  
acknowledge them. She knew there were a number of violations attached to  
the property, such as operating without a valid certificate of use (COU), thought  
that was now resolved.  
Syed Hassan, the applicant’s representative, answered yes; the subject  
resolution was to approve the applicant’s special exception use application, so  
they could receive a COU, so they could continue to operate the convenience  
store portion.  
Commissioner Dunn saw, too, in the backup that there was a possibility that the  
subject use would increase crime in the area; to mitigate this, staff placed  
certain conditions for approval in the development order.  
One condition was  
limiting hours of operation to 6:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m., as well as limiting the  
hours during which alcohol could be sold.  
Ms. Howson answered correct, and the time restrictions applied to Sundays;  
the hours of operation set forth in the conditions were consistent with the nearby  
U-Save to the west of the subject site, and located in a similar neighborhood.  
Mr. Hassan agreed to the hours of operation set forth in the staff conditions.  
Commissioner Dunn mentioned another condition was that the owner would not  
operate the carwash use on the subject site.  
Mr. Hassan affirmed the owner had no immediate plan to reopen, and after  
speaking with Ms. Howson, if in the future the applicant wished to activate the  
carwash use, there was a process through which the applicant had to go  
through.  
Commissioner Dunn asked about the applicant being open to implementing  
Crime  
Prevention  
Through  
Environmental  
Design  
(CPTED)  
measures  
recommended by the City’s police staff in order to make the area around and on  
the site safer.  
Mr. Hassan confirmed the applicant’s willingness to implement CPTED  
measures.  
Commissioner Campbell mentioned meeting one of the subject businesss  
partners, asking what the issue was regarding the carwash.  
Ms. Howson explained the carwash use on the subject site had been inoperable  
for many years; every once in a while the management would send an applicant  
that was an individual operator who wished to place a popup tent in the carwash  
structure to reinitiate the carwash. Staff believed the carwash was well sited,  
but if it were to be reestablished, it had to be done appropriately, with proper  
drainage, safety mechanisms, etc. accomplished through the permitting  
process. She was requesting that the applicant be allowed the ability to operate  
a carwash in the future if they chose, with one of the conditions being that they  
had to do a site plan modification before the DRC, and get a new site plan  
approval.  
In this way, the City could ensure the carwash use was  
environmentally sound for the surrounding neighborhood; in the northwest  
corner of the subject site, there was an existing drive-thru carwash.  
Commissioner Campbell noted the applicant was presented with the possibility  
of having a hand wash carwash.  
Ms. Howson stated city code was specific about what was and was not  
allowed; the code would allow for a portion of the carwash to be a hand wash,  
or a hand detailing station, but staff sought to prevent any inhibiting of traffic flow  
on the site, and preventing the carwash use becoming a hodgepodge of a  
number of tents.  
The subject resolution was only approving the convenience  
store use, and the possibility of a general carwash use without any specifics of  
what that would look like yet, whether hand wash, automated, or a combination.  
At present, the carwash area of the site was just an empty concrete shell; the  
City would not grant approval for someone putting up a tent in the space and  
running a popup carwash. She stressed that the subject application would only  
retain the applicant’s ability to reactivate the carwash use, but the additional  
condition was they had to go through required permitting processes, as she  
stated earlier. If the applicant wished to reopen the carwash, they need not  
come before the Commission again if the subject resolution were approved, just  
go through the requirements of the permitting process.  
A motion was made by Commissioner M. Dunn, seconded by Vice Mayor S.  
Martin, that this Resolution be approved. The motion carried by the following  
vote:  
5 -  
0
Yes:  
Commissioner R. Campbell, Commissioner M. Dunn, Commissioner J. Hodgson,  
Vice Mayor S. Martin, and Mayor D. Grant  
Abstain:  
VIII CONSENT AGENDA  
A motion was made by Commissioner R. Campbell, seconded by Vice Mayor S.  
Martin, that this Consent Agenda was approved. The motion carried by the  
following vote:  
5 -  
Yes:  
Commissioner R. Campbell, Commissioner M. Dunn, Commissioner J. Hodgson,  
Vice Mayor S. Martin, and Mayor D. Grant  
0
Abstain:  
2.  
RESOLUTION NO. 25R-08-145:  
A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY  
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAUDERHILL, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING  
SETTLEMENT IN RICHARD DALEY V. THE CITY OF LAUDERHILL IN  
BROWARD COUNTY CASE NUMBER CACE24-004211, IN THE  
AMOUNT OF $40,000.00 AS FULL SETTLEMENT FOR ANY AND ALL  
CLAIMS  
INCLUDING  
ATTORNEY’S  
FEES  
AND  
COSTS  
PLUS  
MEDIATION COSTS OF $750.00; PROVIDING THE CITY MANAGER  
AND CITY ATTORNEY WITH THE AUTHORITY TO DO ALL THINGS  
NECESSARY TO EFFECTUATE THIS RESOLUTION; AND PROVIDING  
FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE (REQUESTED BY CITY MANAGER,  
KENNIE HOBBS, JR.).  
This Resolution was approved on the Consent Agenda. (See Consideration of  
Consent Agenda for vote tally.)  
4.  
RESOLUTION NO. 25R-08-148:  
A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY  
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAUDERHILL APPROVING THE  
AWARD OF BID 2025-042–LIFT STATION NO. 5 TO SOUTHERN  
UNDERGROUND INDUSTRIES, INC. IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED  
$2,249,475;  
APPROVING  
PAYMENT  
FROM  
THE  
APPROPRIATE  
BUDGET CODE NUMBERS; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE  
DATE (REQUESTED BY CITY MANAGER KENNIE HOBBS, JR.).  
This Resolution was approved on the Consent Agenda. (See Consideration of  
Consent Agenda for vote tally.)  
5.  
RESOLUTION NO. 25R-08-149:  
A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY  
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAUDERHILL, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING  
SETTLEMENT OF CLAIMS BROUGHT BY JEAN LABISSIERE AGAINST  
THE CITY OF LAUDERHILL IN THE AMOUNT OF $60,000.00 AS  
PAYMENT FOR ANY AND ALL CLAIMS INCLUDING ATTORNEY’S  
FEES AND COSTS; PROVIDING THE CITY MANAGER AND CITY  
ATTORNEY WITH THE AUTHORITY TO DO ALL THINGS NECESSARY  
TO EFFECTUATE THIS RESOLUTION; AND PROVIDING FOR AN  
EFFECTIVE DATE (REQUESTED BY CITY MANAGER, KENNIE  
HOBBS, JR.).  
This Resolution was approved on the Consent Agenda. (See Consideration of  
Consent Agenda for vote tally.)  
6.  
RESOLUTION NO. 25R-08-150:  
A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY  
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAUDERHILL, FLORIDA, APPROVING  
A LIST OF QUALIFIED VENDORS IN RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR  
PROPOSAL  
OUT-OF-SCHOOL  
(RFP)  
NO.  
2025-038 -  
YOUTH  
PROVIDING  
RECREATION  
FOR THE  
AND  
CITY  
PROGRAMMING;  
MANAGER AND CITY ATTORNEY TO DO ALL THINGS NECESSARY TO  
EFFECTUATE THIS RESOLUTION; AND PROVIDING FOR AN  
EFFECTIVE DATE (REQUESTED BY CITY MANAGER KENNIE HOBBS,  
JR.).  
This Resolution was approved on the Consent Agenda. (See Consideration of  
Consent Agenda for vote tally.)  
7.  
RESOLUTION NO. 25-08-151:  
A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY  
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAUDERHILL, FLORIDA, APPROVING  
THE MUNICIPAL TRAFFIC CONTROL AND PUBLIC SAFETY  
INGRESS/EGRESS AGREEMENT WITH CRICKET CLUB TOWNHOMES  
ASSOCIATION LOCATED AT 4001 NW 11 PLACE FOR LOCAL  
TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT; PROVIDING THE CITY MANAGER WITH  
THE AUTHORITY TO DO ALL THINGS NECESSARY TO EFFECTUATE  
THIS RESOLUTION;  
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE  
(REQUESTED BY CITY MANAGER KENNIE HOBBS, JR.).  
This Resolution was approved on the Consent Agenda. (See Consideration of  
Consent Agenda for vote tally.)  
8.  
RESOLUTION NO. 25-08-152:  
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAUDERHILL, FLORIDA, WAIVING  
COMPETITIVE BIDDING REQUIREMENTS TO AUTHORIZE AN  
AGREEMENT WITH MATHENY MOTOR TRUCK COMPANY FOR THE  
PURCHASE ONE (1) 2025 FREIGHTLINER CHASSIS E-ONE  
NON-WALK IN, NON-TRANSPORT RESCUE REMOUNT BASED ON A  
A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY  
PIGGYBACK  
COOPERATIVE  
OF  
THE  
PURCHASING  
FLORIDA  
SHERIFFS  
ASSOCIATION  
NO.  
PROGRAM  
CONTRACT  
FSA25-VEF19.0; AUTHORIZING PAYMENT IN AN AMOUNT OF  
APPROXIMATELY $231,357.00 FROM THE APPROPRIATE BUDGET  
CODE NUMBER; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE  
AN AGREEMENT WITH MATHENY MOTOR COMPANY, ATTACHED  
HERETO; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE (REQUESTED  
BY CITY MANAGER KENNIE HOBBS, JR.).  
This Resolution was approved on the Consent Agenda. (See Consideration of  
Consent Agenda for vote tally.)  
9.  
RESOLUTION NO. 25R-08-153:  
A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY  
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAUDERHILL, FLORIDA, APPROVING  
AN AGREEMENT WITH REKOR RECOGNITION SYSTEMS, INC. TO  
PROVIDE LICENSE PLATE READER SERVICES AND EQUIPMENT TO  
THE CITY IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $239,768.00; APPROVING  
PAYMENT FROM THE APPROPRIATE BUDGET CODE NUMBERS;  
AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE (REQUESTED BY CITY  
MANAGER KENNIE HOBBS, JR.).  
This Resolution was approved on the Consent Agenda. (See Consideration of  
Consent Agenda for vote tally.)  
10.  
RESOLUTION NO. 25R-08-154:  
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAUDERHILL AWARDING REQUEST  
FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) NO.2025-025 “OPERATION OF GOLF  
A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY  
PROGRAMS” TO FORE LIFE, INC.; PROVIDING FOR THE CITY  
MANAGER AND CITY ATTORNEY TO DO ALL THINGS NECESSARY TO  
EFFECTUATE  
THIS  
RESOLUTION;  
AND  
PROVIDING  
FOR  
AN  
EFFECTIVE DATE (REQUESTED BY CITY MANAGER KENNIE HOBBS,  
JR.).  
This Resolution was approved on the Consent Agenda. (See Consideration of  
Consent Agenda for vote tally.)  
12.  
RESOLUTION  
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAUDERHILL, FLORIDA, APPROVING  
THE RENEWAL CONTRACT WITH AMERIFLEX TO PROVIDE  
ADMINISTRATION OF THE CITY OF LAUDERHILL’S MEDICAL  
FLEXIBLE SPENDING ACCOUNT AND DEPENDENT CARE  
SPENDING ACCOUNT UNDER SECTION 125 FLEXIBLE BENEFIT  
PROGRAM FOR ALL CITY EMPLOYEES AT “NO CHARGE” FOR  
NO.25R-08-158:  
A
RESOLUTION  
OF  
THE  
CITY  
A
ONE YEAR TERM BEGINNING OCTOBER 1, 2025 AND ENDING  
SEPTEMBER 30, 2026; PROVIDING AUTHORIZATION FOR THE CITY  
MANAGER AND CITY ATTORNEY TO DO ALL THINGS NECESSARY TO  
EFECTUATE  
THIS  
RESOLUTION;  
AND  
PROVIDING  
FOR  
AN  
EFFECTIVE DATE (REQUESTED BY CITY MANAGER, KENNIE  
HOBBS, JR.).  
This Resolution was approved on the Consent Agenda. (See Consideration of  
Consent Agenda for vote tally.)  
13.  
RESOLUTION  
NO.25R-08-159:  
A
RESOLUTION  
OF  
THE  
CITY  
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAUDERHILL, FLORIDA, APPROVING  
THE RENEWAL OF THE CIGNA DENTAL INSURANCE PLANS AT NO  
RATE INCREASE FOR THE PERIOD BEGINNING OCTOBER 1, 2025  
AND ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2026, TO INCLUDE DHMO AND PPO  
COVERAGE PLANS; APPROVING PAYMENT OF $267,350 FROM THE  
APPROPRIATE BUDGET CODE NUMBERS; PROVIDING FOR AN  
EFFECTIVE DATE (REQUESTED BY CITY MANAGER, KENNIE  
HOBBS, JR.).  
This Resolution was approved on the Consent Agenda. (See Consideration of  
Consent Agenda for vote tally.)  
14.  
RESOLUTION  
NO.25R-08-160:  
A
RESOLUTION  
OF  
THE  
CITY  
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAUDERHILL, FLORIDA, APPROVING  
THE RENEWAL OF THE HUMANA VISION INSURANCE PLANS AT NO  
RATE INCREASE FOR THE PERIOD BEGINNING OCTOBER 1, 2025  
AND ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2026; APPROVING PAYMENT OF  
$45,000 FROM THE APPROPRIATE BUDGET CODE NUMBERS; AND  
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE (REQUESTED BY CITY  
MANAGER, KENNIE HOBBS, JR.).  
This Resolution was approved on the Consent Agenda. (See Consideration of  
Consent Agenda for vote tally.)  
IX RESOLUTIONS (IF NOT ON CONSENT AGENDA)  
3.  
RESOLUTION NO. 25R-08-147:  
A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY  
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAUDERHILL, FLORIDA, CALLING FOR  
A SPECIAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON MARCH 10, 2026, FOR THE  
QUALIFIED ELECTORS OF THE CITY OF LAUDERHILL FOR  
A
GENERAL BOND REFERENDUM; PROVIDING FOR THE OFFICIAL  
BALLOT; PROVIDING FOR BOND PROCEDURES; AND APPROVING  
THE  
MUNICIPAL  
ELECTIONS  
AGREEMENT  
BETWEEN  
THE  
BROWARD COUNTY SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS AND THE CITY OF  
LAUDERHILL; PROVIDING THE CITY MANAGER AND CITY ATTORNEY  
WITH THE AUTHORITY TO DO ALL THINGS NECESSARY TO  
EFFECTUATE  
THIS  
RESOLUTION;  
AND  
PROVIDING  
FOR  
AN  
EFFECTIVE DATE (REQUESTED BY CITY MANAGER, KENNIE  
HOBBS, JR.).  
Attachments:  
Commissioner Dunn recalled when the subject matter was discussed in  
a
workshop, it was said there would be additional conversations as to whether or  
not this was something residents might wish to do, which would be determined  
via survey responses.  
City Manager Kennie Hobbs thought that at the workshop there was  
a
Commission consensus for staff to proceed; he recalled the workshop  
conversation being around the date of the actual election being either March or  
November. It had been over a year that staff conducted conversations with the  
community going back to June 2024; based on the surveys conducted, the  
feedback was positive for those who took it. He said the plan now was to  
proceed with an educational campaign, and there was still one last opportunity  
in January 2026, as the Commission had to vote on the actual questions to  
move forward on. Ultimately, a discussion would come before the Commission  
as to the actual questions that would be reflected on the election ballot.  
Commissioner Dunn expressed concern that about a year ago her position on  
the bond would have been favorable, particularly as she knew there were things  
the City wished to do that were not necessarily affordable. It would be the  
continuation of a debt, not the addition of a debt.  
She said, however,  
considering what was taking place in the national economy, and that the City of  
Lauderhill was ninth in the State for SNAP benefits, and with a tremendous  
increase in the number of foreclosures, she was uncomfortable adding more  
debt to the City’s finances. Her preference was for the City to conclude its  
current bonds, then see what happens in the future, as there were numerous  
predictions of a recession.  
Mayor Grant believed that in the most recent conversation with staff, most of the  
Commission was in favor of moving the matter of the subject resolution  
forward, with the exception of Vice Mayor Martin who expressed some  
concerns. Additionally, staff’s presentation would include further information on  
the general obligation (GO) bond, and why it was important to move forward  
with the approval of the resolution.  
City Manager Hobbs commented, again, based on conversations with the  
stakeholders, including the residents and the Commission, staff determined it  
was important to offer the subject opportunity for the City to make  
improvements that would, traditionally, take longer to make.  
The City had a  
Five-Year, and Ten-Year Capital Improvement Program (CIP), and in order to  
fund those activities, the GO bond was a mechanism that allowed the City to  
make such improvements in a timely manner.  
He noted that with regard to  
when the election took place, March versus November, that conversation  
already took place, and in the City’s communication with the public, some  
opposition was expressed about doing the election in March rather than  
November.  
That opposition had to do with a misconception that there was  
added cost to do the election in March rather than November. Since then, City  
Clerk Anderson spoke with the Supervisor of Elections, and it was determined  
that for a March election the City would incur no additional cost.  
Mr. Hobbs  
indicated that the City issued two GO bonds in the past 20 years, and with  
those the City was able to make great improvements throughout the local  
community, including to various community centers, public facilities, streets,  
roads, and public safety improvements throughout the community.  
He  
mentioned the camera and license plate reader (LPR) systems the City  
currently enjoyed were all funded through a GO bond, so staff felt this was the  
best way for the City to proceed with making more improvements that benefited  
all Lauderhill residents.  
Mayor Grant sought additional information on the efforts staff made for  
community meetings, and outreach; that is, how many meetings were held, and  
the how many persons were surveyed.  
City Manager Hobbs said he did not have the survey numbers at hand, but with  
regard to the community meetings, traditionally they were held at City Hall, but  
under the new administration, the decision was made to go out into the  
community and hold the public meeting at the various homeowners’ Association  
(HOA) meetings, along with holding other general community meetings.  
He  
said city staff met with all HOAs throughout the City, as well as some of the  
smaller associations, including condominium associations; in all, 12 community  
meetings were held from November through July.  
Prior to that time, an  
additional four community meetings were held, and input from the community  
was received at those 16 meetings to be considered along with the City’s  
Five-Year Plan. He noted the items that would come before the Commission in  
March 2026 were those from the community.  
Additional education campaigns  
would take place, along with more community meetings between now and the  
2026 March election.  
Mayor Grant questioned how, other than survey responses, did staff grade  
support.  
City Manager Hobbs responded that it was based on the general responses  
during the community meetings, as everyone at the meetings did not take the  
survey, whether via paper, or online. Staff asked for a show of support while  
they were at the meetings, and HOA presidents, and boards were asked to  
communicate the information to their residents, and provide any feedback to city  
staff.  
He said, based on the numbers they saw, and the feedback from  
residents at the meetings, approval seemed to be about 80 percent; again, of  
most concern was the added cost, and staff ensured that the City had the ability  
to maintain and lower its debt moving forward, as was done over the years with  
other GO bonds.  
Mayor Grant asked about any increase in taxes, as this was another concern  
expressed by residents.  
City Manager Hobbs noted the City lowered its millage rate both on its operating  
debt, as well as its voted debt, or debt millage. The City had no control over the  
millage rates of other Broward taxing authorities, and their millage rates  
increased over time, and the impact of those increases on residents’ tax bill  
varied. However, the City’s ability to lower residents’ taxes was found in the  
lowering of the millage rate, as was done for the current fiscal year, and the plan  
was to do the same in the upcoming fiscal year for both the operating and debt  
millage rates. He noted, in relation to the subject GO bond, if the issuance of  
the subject debt were approved, staff still planned for the City to have the ability  
to continue to drop the debt millage, while still accessing the $65 million to  
complete the needed projects throughout the City.  
Mayor Grant sought clarification on the impact if the subject resolution failed to  
pass at the present meeting.  
City Manager Hobbs responded that there were a number of projects the  
community was waiting on for a number of years that the City could not move  
forward on in the near future.  
The one that stood out most was the  
improvements planned for the St. George/Broward Estates community center,  
including a pool, field improvements; other community center renovations/new  
construction, and park improvements in various areas of the City, such as on  
the east side off NW 21st Street; there were public safety improvements  
included, such as LPRs, and other additional resources for police department.  
Commissioner Campbell recalled extensive discussions on the subject matter,  
with a variety of opinions expressed; the final decision was that Lauderhill voters  
should make the decision.  
This was the reality of Lauderhills system of  
government and democracy, elected officials had the opportunity to inform and  
educate Lauderhill voters on their individual perspectives; ultimately, the  
decision rested with Lauderhill voters.  
Vice Mayor Martin commented that some of his expressed concerns were  
related to how the GO bond dollars would be spent, so if the decision was for  
the City to take on more debt, it should be done smartly. As the projects were  
not finalized, and some questions needed to be answered, he was willing to  
support the proposed resolution, so the process could continue forward.  
Commissioner Hodgson supported holding a March election.  
Mayor Grant agreed with Commissioner Dunn in relation to concerns felt by all  
residents, and the City Commission and staff were very aware of residents’  
concerns, particularly in light of the state of the country and what was taking  
place.  
She felt sure all organizations would be impacted in some manner,  
whether now or in the future, so the City was preparing itself to be responsive to  
residents’ needs as much as possible. Some monies that were budgeted were  
repurposed to provide more social services to the local Lauderhill community to  
counter certain issues, such as food insecurity, etc. The City Commission and  
administration wished to ensure that Lauderhill residents were properly served,  
though the present item before the Commission was not to address this matter,  
rather it was to allow local residents to determine whether or not they wanted to  
vote for the GO bond, as the present vote was not to approve the GO bond, or a  
vote to increase taxes, etc. The vote was whether to place to question of the  
City’s doing a GO bond on the March 2026 election ballot; not doing so did a  
disservice to all the work staff put into the 14 plus meetings with the community,  
as well as to the 80 percent residents who signaled they supported the City  
doing another GO bond; a great part of City governments job was to be a voice  
for the Lauderhill community.  
smart, and intelligent as to how city dollars were spent and in determining the  
local community’s needs. Thus, she supported the subject item, as it gave  
Mayor Grant agreed the City needed to mindful,  
residents the democratic right to decide via their vote on a new GO bond.  
Mayor Grant opened the discussion to the public.  
Mae Smith stated in the previous week she called Mayor Grant, a call on which  
Mr. Hobbs was on, and though they did not speak on her reason for calling, they  
discussed the ballot question for a new GO bond being placed on the March  
2026 ballot rather than the November 2026 ballot. She asked Mayor Grant the  
reason for the rush to place the question on the March versus November ballot,  
as many years ago the City voted to hold municipal elections in November only  
to save money. The question was why the City would hold an election in March  
2026 without anything else going on, and how it was that the City did not have to  
pay anything for that election; she preferred to see something in writing from the  
Supervisor of Elections clearly stating this. Mr. Hobbs reaffirmed that holding a  
March election would not cost the Lauderhill taxpayers, and he promised to  
send her this information in writing. She explained that her statements were not  
based on her being an employee of the Property Appraiser, but they were based  
on information on the subject matter in Lauderhill.  
There were too many  
uncertainties to rush to put the subject matter on a March 2026 ballot, as it was  
likely that many Lauderhill voters would not turn out to vote in that election. Ms.  
Smith wished to know which of the City’s existing GO bonds would be paid off,  
and by how much, asking if some of the funds being used to pay off or down  
existing GO bonds could be used, instead, to pay for improvements around the  
City. She asked for a copy of the entire bond, asking Mr. Hobbs to confirm that  
the City’s millage rate would continue to decrease, with no increases in taxes,  
as he stated in the phone call. Regarding the pool at St. George Park, she was  
the former HOA president at the time some 20 years ago when the pool was  
promised to their community by the City. When Mr. Hobbs attended their HOA  
meeting, he stated it would cost eight or nine million dollars, and when he  
presented the bond, he stated that St. George had $8 million allocated, and that  
included the cost of the pool, so some clarity was needed as to the real costs of  
everything it was said their community would receive via GO bond funding.  
Mayor Grant added that the City Clerk’s Office could provide information to  
show that the City’s holding a March election would be at no additional cost to  
the City.  
City Clerk Anderson explained there was a cost associated with any ballot  
question, regardless of whether the election was in March or November, as the  
Supervisor of Elections charged for questions; there was no cost for election  
candidates in November elections.  
There were no candidates in the march  
2026 election, so whatever the City would pay the Supervisor of elections for the  
GO bond ballot question in November 2026 was the same amount that would  
be paid in a March 2026 election.  
City Manager Hobbs said he had the information, as stated by City Clerk  
Anderson, in writing from the Supervisor of Election, and he would forward that  
to Ms. Smith as soon as possible. He affirmed that in the course of 2026, the  
City would spend the same amount on municipal elections whether they took  
place in November 2026 only, or they took place in both March and November  
2026. Regarding the issue of the pool for St. George Park, as he stated before,  
the request for the pool from the community was made post the GO bond  
project allocations; the City took out two GO bonds, one in 2005, and one in  
2016, and the request for the pool from the St. George community came after  
the 2016 GO bond when the projects for that bond were already identified, and  
funding allocated. He said the City then canvassed the community, and based  
on the interest expressed by residents, the City acquired the church property  
that sat behind St. George Park, where the City would build a pool for the  
community at some point in the future. Again, the funding for the pool was  
never allocated in the 2016 GO bond, but he did state to the community that if  
funds could be found, the pool would be built; the pool for St. George Park was  
one of the projects named in the GO bond the City proposed going out for in  
2026. He said that as there were already developed plans for the pool project at  
St. George Park for which bids were already received, it would be one of the  
first projects the City would be able to move forward on. Mr. Hobbs clarified that  
the $8-million dollar GO bond allocation was not just for the pool, as there were  
additional improvements that were slated for St. George; for example, there  
would be a field renovation, including added lights, a field stand, and additional  
parking.  
He said the proposed GO bond for $65 million would fund  
improvements in all areas within Lauderhill.  
Mayor Grant sought confirmation that if the subject resolution were approved,  
the GO bond question would be voted on at the March 10, 2026, election.  
City Manager Hobbs answered yes; a two third’s vote, not a simple majority,  
was required in order for the City to proceed with the GO bond, noting the past  
two GO bonds’ ballot questions passed overwhelmingly.  
A motion was made by Commissioner R. Campbell, seconded by Commissioner  
J. Hodgson, that this Resolution be approved. The motion carried by the  
following vote:  
4 -  
Yes:  
Commissioner R. Campbell, Commissioner J. Hodgson, Vice Mayor S. Martin, and  
Mayor D. Grant  
1 - Commissioner M. Dunn  
No:  
0
Abstain:  
11.  
RESOLUTION NO. 25R-08-156: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF  
LAUDERHILL, FLORIDA, APPROVING THE RENEWAL OF THE CIGNA  
GROUP HEALTH INSURANCE PLAN FOR THE REMAINING FOUR (4)  
YEARS OF THE ORIGINAL FIVE (5) YEAR TERM, WHICH BEGAN ON  
OCTOBER 1, 2024 AND ENDS ON SEPTEMBER 30, 2029, TO  
INCLUDE OPEN ACCESS PLUS (OAP) IN AN EXCLUSIVE PROVIDER  
ORGANIZATION  
(EPO)  
AND  
OAP  
PLUS  
COVERAGE  
PLANS;  
APPROVING PAYMENT OF $9,656,464, FROM THE APPROPRIATE  
BUDGET CODE NUMBERS; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE  
DATE (REQUESTED BY CITY MANAGER, KENNIE HOBBS, JR.).  
Human Resources Director/Risk Manager CiCi Krempler stated the subject  
resolution was the annual renewal for the City’s health insurance for all city  
employees. Historically, the City had Humana as its provider for over 30 years,  
and the City now transitioned to Cigna for fiscal year 2024/2025, and as was  
expected, there were a few hiccups when one switched to a new carrier.  
Overall, she thought the city employees fared well with the change, as her staff  
and she, and Cigna handled any issues or concerns that arose; they, typically,  
were related to pharmaceutical issues, such as prescriptions, etc. The reason  
the City changed from Humana to Cigna was due to the former insurer moving  
out of the group insurance business, though they continued providing Medicaid  
and Medicare services, nor was it legal for Humana to indicate which  
prescriptions they did or did not cover. She said that in choosing Cigna, the City  
was able to get an apples to apples service comparison, but the formularies  
related to prescriptions was something the City and Cigna continued to work on.  
Ms. Krempler remarked that in upcoming years, the City would do what it could  
to accommodate employees who saw  
prescriptions.  
a drastic change in terms of their  
Mike Gelin, Gelin Benefits Group, stated the agreement signed with Cigna in  
2024 was a five-year agreement; what was unique about the plan was there  
was a two-year agreement with a rate hike of ten percent regardless of what the  
renewal called for. Based on the claims information, the rate increase should  
have been 25 percent due to high utilization. He said, thus far, the City paid  
$6.7 million in premiums to Cigna, while Cigna paid out $6.4 million in claims, a  
loss ratio of 96 percent; the target loss ratio for insurance companies was 85  
percent, so they made some type of profit; the City avoided paying $3.4 million  
in costs.  
Mayor Grant asked what the sourcing process was in the selection process, as  
there were numerous insurance providers; that is, why was Cigna selected.  
Ms. Krempler explained the City sent out a request for proposal (RFP), and  
Cigna was found to provide as much coverage as the City had with Humana, as  
due to the many years of them serving as the City’s healthcare carrier, they had  
done much to accommodate the City’s health insurance needs. If one were to  
compare the City’s benefits to that of other cities, one would see that the Citys  
was much richer, and that was based on the excellent working relationship the  
City fostered with Humana over those years.  
Though it was a five-year  
contract, the City could go out to bid if that was the recommendation of the City  
Commission, along with other grounds to take such steps. She felt it was not a  
good look for the City to go out to bid after a year into a five-year contract,  
though Cigna would not prevent the City from taking such a step.  
Mayor Grant wished to know the percentage of employees who complained  
about Cigna.  
Ms. Krempler responded that the resolution of most of those complaints was  
undertaken by the Gelin Group, and those her staff handled amounted to less  
than ten percent. There were three employees who saw the same doctors for  
over 15 to 20 years, and, unfortunately, those doctors’ services were not  
covered by Cigna; the Gelin Group tried to negotiate with those providers to  
have then accept the contract with the City, so they could accept Cigna  
insurance, and they declined to do so, which was within their right.  
Mayor Grant believed dental insurance coverage also caused a number of  
issues.  
Ms. Krempler replied that the issues with dental insurance under Cigna was  
minor; it was a matter of how some providers coded various types of visits, but  
in terms of services and what was expected, she knew of few issues with the  
dental portion.  
Mayor Grant believed more employee education was needed regarding HMO  
and PPO providers; how such trainings were communicated to employees  
needed to be done in a manner than motivated employees to participate, as  
when issues arose, it could be challenging for Ms. Krempler and her staff to  
resolve.  
Employees needed to be more educated to have  
a
better  
understanding of expectations; she personally found it somewhat challenging  
visiting the dentist to have some work done, and despite having insurance  
paying $1,000.00 out of pocket, something that did not occur with Humana.  
Until she had this experience, she did not really understand the difference  
between HMO and PPO coverage.  
increasing each year.  
She hoped not to see insurance rates  
Ms. Krempler assured the Commission her staff and she would their best to  
manage the City’s claims experience by hosting proactive events, such as  
health fairs, as they were helpful in letting employees know that the more  
preventative visits made, the better it would be for the Citys claims experience.  
There was no real guarantee that next year there would be no increase, as the  
trend was to see some increase each year, but city staff was working with the  
Gelin Group to come up with some initiatives to counteract projected increases.  
Mayor Grant questioned if the City was prepared for the Citys healthcare  
insurance to increase annually, in light of the current economic environment and  
employee salaries not likely to increase at all or by much.  
City Manager Hobbs replied, as Ms. Krempler mentioned, his office recently met  
with Ms. Krempler, her staff, and the Gelin Group to discuss measures the City  
could take to mitigate some of the claims, as this was the most significant  
decider in relation to increases. There were contractual obligations the City had  
with its collective bargaining agreements that spelled out what portion of those  
increases, if any, would be bourn by city employees, so from the Citys  
perspective, it was important that the City did what it could from a proactive  
standpoint to bring down the claims. He restated the effort the City was making  
to educate city employees on the benefits of preventative care, doing annual  
visits, so any issues could be detected earlier, and the cost to treat them would  
be lower, than if they ignored them, only to have them become a bigger health  
problem, and costing more to treat.  
The City was also working with the  
insurance company to devise healthcare incentives.  
Mr. Gelin added that there were about 53 city employees who had large claims,  
one incurring in excess of $25,000.00; the 53 individuals, employees, spouses  
and children, accounted for $3.4 million of the $6.4 million in claims Cigna paid  
out. Generally, in group insurance, 80 percent of the claims came from about  
20 percent of the population, and the best way to reduce that number was to  
ensure 100 percent of the population did an annual physical and blood work, so  
they knew their numbers, their status, and they could get treated for whatever  
conditions were diagnosed.  
Commissioner Dunn mentioned when the machine to test her blood sugar  
broke, and she ended up going to emergency room and was hospitalized for  
days after her blood sugar measured 531; Cigna, however, denied coverage for  
one of the days she was in hospital.  
Additionally, her doctor called in her  
medication, submitted paperwork to Cigna showing its effectiveness, yet Cigna  
denied covering her medication, though she was fortunate that while in the ER  
she received insulin. She later got her medication earlier in the present day,  
and this was because her doctor called Cigna, and advocated several times, as  
did Ms. Krempler, so she wondered, if she had to go through so much to get  
treated, how many other employees were having similar experiences. She  
understood from Ms. Krempler that the formulary from Human could not be  
transferred to Cigna, but it was important for the City to take care of its people,  
and they were depending on an insurance company that would cover their  
healthcare. She was puzzled how Cigna could deny one of several days of a  
hospital stay, and though Ms. Krempler later discovered this was due to a  
coding error, what would have been the outcome if there was no Ms. Krempler  
to call for help, or she did not have a doctor willing to advocate three times on  
her behalf with Cigna.  
Cigna also denied her doctor’s prescribing her a  
continuous glucose monitor, resulting in her having to pay out of pocket $240.00  
to get something that could save her life. Commissioner Dunn said this was a  
problem and with Humana this was never an issue, and as it was being said  
other employees were having issues, the question became what was Cigna  
going to do to prevent such occurrences.  
Mr. Gelin affirmed Commissioner Dunn’s experience was a serious problem,  
and it was a problem experienced by patients nationwide, not just with Cigna,  
but all insurance carriers. Humana left group insurance due to their inability to  
compete with such insurers as Atena, Cigna, and United Healthcare;  
unfortunately, healthcare insurance was a for-profit business, and the frustration  
many Americans experienced culminated in the United CEO being shot and  
killed. He noted of the 500 City employees on the plan, there were about 30  
complaints, which was not a high number, and it was not unusual when there  
was a switch in insurance carriers, particular when the former company had  
been the carrier for 30 years.  
addressed, some of which were Humana claims that were not paid,\ or  
processed correctly. Mr. Gelin said all insurance companies had different  
Each of the abovementioned complaints were  
prescription drug lists, each deciding which drugs would be on their list versus  
another; there was a city employee who paid $5.00 for a drug under Humana  
that was $2,000.00 under Cigna.  
As Ms. Krempler mentioned, Lauderhill had  
one of the richest plans in Broward County, with extremely low copayments for  
office visits, extremely rich benefits, no deductibles, so city employees paid very  
little out of pocket compared to those of other cities.  
Cigna enjoyed their  
relationship with Lauderhill, and they wanted to make it a long-term relationship,  
so airing such issues was a positive for Ms. Krempler and he to report back to  
Cigna to let them know that if they were not addressed satisfactorily, the  
relationship might not be a long-term one.  
Commissioner Dunn mentioned hearing from city employees about needing a  
diagnostic mammogram and their request was denied; hearing about the  
astronomical increase in medication costs due to the switching of carriers; she  
felt sure Cigna was aware of the issues among city employees. The question  
was what was going to be the strategy, or the plan to ensure these things were  
not only addressed, but did not recur.  
Mr. Gelin commented that whenever an issue arose, it was addressed, so there  
were no unresolved issues at present, as once a complaint was filed with  
Cigna, it was addressed. There were a number of mammogram issues where  
there should have been no payment, but the city employee was asked to pay,  
and those were resolved. He said some of the solution was Cigna educating  
the doctors on the richness of the Lauderhill plan, so the city employees were  
not to be billed for those services. With regard to prescriptions, every year they  
received a list from insurance carriers notifying them of medications that were  
no longer on their list, and the number of group employees who would be  
affected by the increase in prescription costs; this was an ongoing issue. Many  
of the drugs advertised in the media, where patients were encouraged to ask  
their doctor to prescribe them were very costly, and they had no generic  
alternative. Mr. Gelin noted that as part of the strategy, they evaluated other  
plans for the coming fiscal year and it was determined that if the City moved to  
any additional plan, the ten-percent rate cap would have been lost, making the  
City subject to the $3 million rate increase.  
Commissioner Dunn wish to confirm that though individual issues were  
addressed, there was no systematic solution to ensure that the next time  
someone was hospitalized, or someone needed a diagnostic mammogram that  
they would not be cost coverage.  
Ms. Krempler explained that her staff and she prided themselves in making sure  
the utmost customer services to city employees; anyone from the City could  
call her at any time regarding an issue with their health insurance and the  
resolution was dealt with on  
a one-on-one level; this was something city  
employees were very aware of. Her staff and she would continue to deliver that  
same high level of individual customer service whenever an issue arose, and  
the next time there was a meeting to discuss health insurance coverage, a  
representative from Cigna would be present to answer questions.  
Mayor Grant assumed the various employee issues with Cigna were well  
documented.  
Ms. Krempler answered yes.  
Commissioner Campbell remarked, in his experience with the health insurance  
industry, unless an individual’s primary, or their group of healthcare providers  
changed forcing them to change their insurance, people should not make their  
lives more challenging by jumping from one insurer to another, as all of them  
were similar; and none of them were perfect. He was more concerned about  
negotiating annual increases.  
Ms. Krempler stated she would give the Commission periodic updates on the  
changes with Cigna to better determine if issues that arose were being  
resolved, whether it was regarding prescriptions, treatment, billing, etc. In this  
way, such matters could be brought to the table sooner rather than later for a  
resolution.  
beginning of September to go over the various factors of the agreement prior to  
the beginning of the new fiscal year. Other meetings with Cigna were  
She expected to meet with the Cigna representatives at the  
scheduled for the rest of the year so staff could further discuss some of the  
changes the City wished to make to determine how they could be dealt with.  
Mayor Grant asked if  
a
workshop could be scheduled to have Cigna  
representatives speak to the Commission, particularly on the various concerns  
expressed.  
Ms. Krempler answered yes.  
City Manager Hobbs agreed to schedule a workshop accordingly.  
Ms. Krempler clarified the matter before the Commission was to vote on the  
City’s group insurance, renewing the agreement with Cigna, and the increase  
noted in the resolution. While the City still had the option to go out to bid, she  
would not recommend this, as she did not want the City to develop a reputation  
of being a municipality that jumped from one insurer to another, as this made it  
harder to develop claims experience with providers that might better negotiate  
terms based on that longevity. The City of Lauderhill prided itself on having  
long-term business relationships with its vendors, and renewing the contract for  
another year gave her staff and she time to work out any issues with Cigna.  
A motion was made by Vice Mayor S. Martin, seconded by Commissioner J.  
Hodgson, that this Resolution be approved. The motion carried by the following  
vote:  
4 -  
Yes:  
Commissioner R. Campbell, Commissioner J. Hodgson, Vice Mayor S. Martin, and  
Mayor D. Grant  
1 - Commissioner M. Dunn  
No:  
0
Abstain:  
14A.  
RESOLUTION NO. 25R-08-157:  
A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY  
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAUDERHILL, FLORIDA, RENAMING  
NORTHWEST 42ND WAY AS "CHARLES BOOTHE WAY” IN HONOR OF  
THE  
MEMORY  
OF  
CHARLES  
E.  
BOOTHE  
AND  
FOR  
HIS  
CONTRIBUTIONS AND SERVICES TO THE LAUDERHILL COMMUNITY;  
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER AND CITY ATTORNEY TO DO ALL  
THINGS NECESSARY TO EFFECTUATE THIS RESOLUTION; AND  
PROVIDING  
FOR  
AN  
EFFECTIVE  
DATE  
(REQUESTED  
BY  
COMMISSIONER JOHN T HODGSON).  
Commissioner Hodgson read the subject resolution into the record, as provided  
in the backup, noting that since the business opened in 1986, he recalled them  
as being one of the main sponsors of programs on WAVS radio station. Thus,  
they were instrumental in WAVS thriving to date as probably one of the longest  
surviving Caribbean radio stations in South Florida; he felt sure residents of the  
community would attest to the wonderful things Charlie’s Pastries did for the  
Lauderhill community.  
Mayor Grant opened the discussion to the public.  
Charles Boothe, Jr., thanked Commissioner Hodgson for bringing the subject  
resolution forward, thanking members of the public in the audience attending to  
show their support.  
was a city landmark, and his father believed in giving back to the community; he  
was the 2001 Sun Sentinel Excalibur Award winner for his philanthropy. His  
Having been in Lauderhill since 1986, Charlie’s Pastries  
family and he continued to give back to the community, contributing to  
community schools in Teacher Appreciation Week, and they recently donated  
items to the Central Park Library for their heritage festival.  
People felt  
comfortable approaching them for help whenever they needed sponsorship for  
a community event, as they knew them to be supportive of their community.  
A Lauderhill resident of 39 years shared how, for over three decades, she had  
the honor of knowing Charles Boothe, and she spent much quality time with his  
family and him. She saw a man dedicated to more than just business, and his  
business had been a cornerstone of the Lauderhill community for 39 years, a  
place where countless persons had their first job, and organizations and  
individuals benefited from Mr. Boothe’s and his family’s generosity.  
His  
commitment to the community was unwavering, and his generosity lived on as  
his family continued his legacy; his many activities included: summer jobs for  
high school teens; scholarships offered to employees’ children; and he made  
donations to the various athletic youth teams in the Lauderhill community. She  
said the success of his business was not a solo effort, so she acknowledged  
the work and dedication of Patrika Boothe, Ms. Pat, Mr. Boothe’s life partner, as  
they worked tirelessly together to build their business, along with the efforts of  
their other family members, particularly after Mr. Boothe’s death, to keep the  
business running as a well-oiled machine.  
Dr. Francine Baugh-Stewart echoed accolades for Charles Boothe and his  
family’s, dedication, commitment to community, and the hard work they put into  
their business as exemplified by the many years’ success of Charlies Pastries  
since its opening. As many in the community had, she, too, benefited from the  
sense of family and togetherness the Boothe family created, and continued to  
do to date, and she applauded their continued support for all Lauderhill schools;  
Mr. Boothe’s legacy stood as a shining example, as he was a pioneer in every  
sense of the word, investing in not just his businesses, but in people, their  
dreams, and the future of Lauderhill. She said that though his philanthropy he  
gave generously, ensuring that the blessings he received were shared, and  
renaming of the subject road was not just a recognition of Mr. Boothe, but a  
tribute to a man who shaped Lauderhill’s identity, and whose legacy would  
continue to inspire generations to come.  
His commitment stood as a daily  
reminder of what it meant to lead with compassion, build with purpose, and give  
with an open heart.  
Paul Baugh, a pastor at the First Church of the Open Bible, Lauderdale Lakes,  
stated their church began in Lauderhill in 1984 on NW 16th Street, behind the  
UPS warehouse, and in 2003 they moved to occupy their current location.  
In  
the early 1990s, Mr. Boothe accepted the Lord as his personal savior, and he  
quickly became an active member of the church, later becoming a board  
member and a deacon, being extremely instrumental behind the scenes as they  
went through the building process of their present site. As stated earlier, Mr.  
Boothe, through his business, provided scholarships to their graduating seniors  
for many years, a tradition that continued to date, and he was very involved in  
the church’s community outreach programs giving both resources and his time.  
Mr. Baugh said he had been in Lauderhill since 1979, and currently resided in  
the City, and he witnessed the numerous changes in the City since that time,  
particularly when many Jamaicans moved into Lauderhill. He was a frequent  
visitor to Charlie’s Pastries, and as residents traveled to and from work, etc., it  
became a source of food for many for lunch and dinner, and during the late  
1990s and early 2000s Charlie’s expanded to two more stores, and  
a
distribution center in Lauderhill behind the UPS warehouse. As many area  
businesses witnessed Mr. Boothe’s success, they started and/or brought their  
businesses to Lauderhill. As a representative of the First Church of the Open  
Bible, he said they fully endorsed the subject resolution.  
A motion was made by Commissioner J. Hodgson, seconded by Vice Mayor S.  
Martin, that this Resolution be approved. The motion carried by the following  
vote:  
5 -  
0
Yes:  
Commissioner R. Campbell, Commissioner M. Dunn, Commissioner J. Hodgson,  
Vice Mayor S. Martin, and Mayor D. Grant  
Abstain:  
Mayor Grant wished to know, with the passing of the resolution, how long would  
it take for the naming ceremony.  
City Manager Hobbs explained there was a process staff had to go through to  
have the actual street sign created, then made, after which the street-naming  
ceremony would be scheduled. Staff would be in contact with the Boothe family  
throughout this process, and barring no unforeseen issues, 30 days was the  
likely timeframe.  
Commissioner Hodgson added that he would have a special broadcast on the  
date of the street-naming ceremony.  
Mayor Grant asked for the Commission to consider item 14C before item 14B.  
14C.  
RESOLUTION NO. 25R-08-161:  
A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY  
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAUDERHILL, FLORIDA, AWARDING  
THE KEY TO THE CITY OF LAUDERHILL TO EDDE CAMPBELL FOR  
HER  
COMMUNITY; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER AND  
ATTORNEY TO DO ALL THINGS NECESSARY TO EFFECTUATE THIS  
RESOLUTION; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE  
(REQUESTED BY MAYOR DENISE D. GRANT).  
DEDICATION  
AND  
COMMITMENT  
TO  
THE  
LAUDERHILL  
CITY  
Mayor Grant felt it was important, a sentiment she was sure her colleagues  
shared, for the City to give those who worked and labored in the Lauderhill  
community their flowers, as well as the recognition the honor warranted.  
She  
read the resolution, as provided in the backup. She expressed the Citys  
appreciation and honor to Ms. Campbell for her many years of service to the  
Lauderhill community, thanking her for identifying her purpose, and for fulfilling it  
so exemplarily, helping those in need at a time when they needed it most.  
Mayor Grant opened the discussion to the public.;  
Ms. Smith said Ms. Campbell had truly done some work, and she learned more  
about what this meant upon hearing that she would be awarded the Key to the  
City; she thanked Ms. Campbell for doing such an excellent job looking out for  
the people, as this was what true leaders did. True leaders made sure every  
step they made served the people, not self-interest, and she recently learned  
even more that this embodied what Ms. Campbell did, urging her to continue her  
good work.  
Former State Representative Bobby DuBose thought the subject honor was  
being appropriately bestowed in light of the current climate in the country, where  
there was such an atmosphere of I, me, and mine; when an individual displayed  
such selfless dedication that spoke to her real character that exemplified what  
we should be about, she should be honored accordingly.  
Michelle Martin echoed appreciation for all the exemplary work Ms. Campbell did  
for numerous persons she helped over the years; she was definitely one of a  
kind. Even knowing her for only a short period of time, and hearing her history,  
she felt privileged to know her, noting just last week Ms. Campbell asked to  
borrow her truck to deliver food to the Lauderhill nursing home. Years prior, she  
met Ms. Campbell at a time of great need, and when she entered the 19th  
Street facility, she had no way of knowing how things would turn out today,  
where she now stood before the Commission supporting the Citys honoring  
Ms. Campbell for all her good works.  
This was a similar experience of  
numerous other individuals, who she helped find themselves, their talent and  
skills, urging them with her saying, “A little bit at a time.” She was determined to  
thank Ms. Campbell, and show her how positively her efforts to help manifested  
in her life, and to do this while she was still alive to smell the roses she so richly  
deserved.  
A Lauderhill resident stated she had known Ms. Campbell for 75 years; stating  
the desire to help people stemmed from her great, great grandmother, who was  
born into slavery, became a nurse after being freed, and Ms. Campbell did the  
same when she grew up to give others the caring and the giving they needed,  
even giving her house to a family to ensure their safety and shelter. She stole  
the hearts of everyone she met, and she was always there for their family, so  
the honor she was now being receiving was well deserved; they, like she, were  
very proud of her.  
A motion was made by Commissioner R. Campbell, seconded by Commissioner  
J. Hodgson, that this Resolution be approved. The motion carried by the  
following vote:  
5 -  
Yes:  
Commissioner R. Campbell, Commissioner M. Dunn, Commissioner J. Hodgson,  
Vice Mayor S. Martin, and Mayor D. Grant  
0
Abstain:  
14B.  
RESOLUTION NO. 25R-08-155:  
A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY  
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAUDERHILL, FLORIDA, RENAMING  
NW 2ND STREET TO “EDDE CAMPBELL STREET” IN HONOR OF  
EDDE CAMPBELL AND FOR HER CONTRIBUTIONS AND SERVICES  
TO THE LAUDERHILL COMMUNITY; PROVIDING FOR SHARED USE  
OF AN ALTERED ADDRESS FRAMEWORK; AUTHORIZING THE CITY  
MANAGER AND CITY ATTORNEY TO DO ALL THINGS NECESSARY TO  
EFFECTUATE  
THIS  
RESOLUTION;  
AND  
PROVIDING  
FOR  
AN  
EFFECTIVE DATE (REQUESTED BY MAYOR DENISE D. GRANT).  
Mayor Grant explained the subject resolution sought to rename the street on  
which Ms. Campbell’s home was located as Eddie Campbell Street; this was a  
matter that had been discussed for many month, and it was now on the agenda  
to allow further discussion by the Commission as a group. The Commission  
understood that the Broward Estates/St. George bylaws, created many years  
ago, stated that the naming of buildings, or other specific areas had to be done  
via ballot; the naming of streets was prohibited within the community boundaries  
of Broward Estates and St. George. She noted the present discussion was for  
the Commission to learn if those bylaws could be amended to allow the subject  
street naming. Mayor Grant mentioned discussing the matter with Ms. Martin,  
who conducted conversations with members of the community, and the  
majority of those she spoke with supported the change to the bylaws, as well as  
the street naming. She stressed that the City had no authority at present to  
make such decisions, so the dialog was to get input from the community HOA,  
and residents.  
HOA President Samuel Wilkerson thanked Ms. Campbel for all she did, and  
continued to do, and if it was up to him only, there would be no obstacle to  
name the street after her. However, the community bylaws had to be adhered  
to, unless the matter was brought to the community to draft a ballot question for  
a vote.  
City Attorney Ottinot indicated he would need to research the matter further, but  
as the community’s bylaws governed the neighborhoods, and their streets, he  
believed the City had to yield to those bylaws unless his research indicate  
something else.  
St. George/Broward Estates HOA Parliamentarian stated the community’s  
bylaws had been in place for a long time, and they could be updated and  
changed at any time, but the request for such changes had to come from the  
residents of the community; they had to vote to update them.  
Commissioner Campbell wondered if there was anything in the community  
bylaws that stated petitions showing support of a certain percentage of the  
residents could be made to allow exceptions, that is, a temporary rather than a  
permanent change to a bylaw to allow a specific action.  
Mr. Wilkerson answered yes. He did not foresee it being a problem, the matter  
just had to be presented to the community to get their input before proceeding  
any further.  
A motion was made by Vice Mayor S. Martin, seconded by Commissioner J.  
Hodgson, that this Resolution be tabled to a future City Commission Meeting. The  
motion carried by the following vote:  
5 -  
Yes:  
Commissioner R. Campbell, Commissioner M. Dunn, Commissioner J. Hodgson,  
Vice Mayor S. Martin, and Mayor D. Grant  
0
Abstain:  
15.  
RESOLUTION NO. 25R-08-146:  
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAUDERHILL, FLORIDA, REMOVING  
KELVIN HAYNES AS MEMBER OF THE LOCAL AFFORDABLE  
A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY  
A
HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND APPOINTING __________ TO  
THE LOCAL AFFORDABLE HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE BY THE  
CITY COMMISSION AS A WHOLE FOR THE REMAINDER OF A FOUR  
(4) YEAR TERM EXPIRING JUNE 2028; AND PROVIDING FOR AN  
EFFECTIVE DATE. (REQUESTED BY CITY MANAGER, KENNIE  
HOBBS, JR.).  
Commissioner Campbell asked which city board Mr. Lewis currently served on.  
Brent Lewis, Lauderhill resident, replied he was currently serving on the  
Planning & Zoning Board.  
City Attorney Ottinot believed one of the positions to be filled on the LAHAC was  
by a member of the City’s P&Z Board.  
City Clerk Anderson affirmed the LAHAC required that a member from the P&Z  
Board serve on that board; this position was formerly filled by Kelvin Haynes,  
who no longer served on the P&Z Board, so he needed to be replaced.  
A motion was made by Vice Mayor S. Martin, seconded by Commissioner J.  
Hodgson, that this Resolution be approved. The motion carried by the following  
vote:  
5 -  
Yes:  
Commissioner R. Campbell, Commissioner M. Dunn, Commissioner J. Hodgson,  
Vice Mayor S. Martin, and Mayor D. Grant  
0
Abstain:  
X
ORDINANCES & PUBLIC HEARINGS - FIRST READING (AS ADVERTISED IN THE  
SUN-SENTINEL)  
16.  
ORDINANCE NO. 25O-08-123: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY  
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAUDERHILL, FLORIDA, AMENDING  
THE CITY’S CODE OF ORDINANCES BY AMENDING CHAPTER 6  
“BUILDINGS AND BUILDING REGULATIONS”, ARTICLE I “IN GENERAL”,  
SECTION 6-10 “ENUMERATION OF PERMIT FEES, REGULATION AND  
INSPECTION FEES” TO INCREASE FEES FOR MINIMUM HOUSING  
INSPECTIONS AND RENTAL HOUSING INSPECTIONS; PROVIDING  
FOR  
CONFLICTS,  
SEVERABILITY,  
AND  
CODIFICATION;  
AND  
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE (REQUESTED BY CITY  
MANAGER KENNIE HOBBS, JR.).  
City Manager Hobbs explained that on an annual basis, owners of rental  
property were required to have an inspection completed by city staff to ensure  
their property was in compliance with Schedule “M” of the City Code. This was  
to ensure that the systems within the property were up to code, such as the air  
conditioning, plumbing, electrical, windows, etc., all the basic requirements for a  
residence to be habitable. He said the inspection was done on an annual basis  
by Community Standards Division staff within the Finance Department, noting  
the proposed increase would be, on average, $25.00 for the owners of rental  
property, and the additional revenue would be used to cover the Citys cost to  
provide those services in the community.  
Commissioner Dunn wished to know what other fees a rental property owner  
paid.  
Operations Administrator Yolan Todd commented a basic COU for a rental  
property owner was $205.00 for a single unit minimum housing; they would pay  
$18.77 for their actual COU, and an additional $28.94 for  
a
business  
development fee for a total of $253.17, and that would scale up based on the  
number of units the person owns up to ten. After the first ten units, the amount  
prorated down 11 to 99 units, so rather than paying $205.00, the owner paid  
$140, and 100 or more units they paid $106.00 for the minimum housing  
inspection fee.  
Commissioner Dunn asked if these fees were in alignment with similar charges  
by surrounding cities.  
Ms. Todd said Lauderhill was in alignment, as other cities did other things in lieu  
of charging such fees on an annual basis.  
Commissioner Dunn wanted to make sure, as the City was raising a number of  
its fees in the coming new fiscal year, and in light of a possible recession, she  
did not wish to make things more challenging for Lauderhills residents, as  
Lauderhill was a 60-percent rental city.  
A motion was made by Vice Mayor S. Martin, seconded by Commissioner J.  
Hodgson, that this Ordinance be approved on first reading to the City Commission  
Meeting, due back on 9/8/2025. The motion carried by the following vote:  
4 -  
Yes:  
Commissioner R. Campbell, Commissioner J. Hodgson, Vice Mayor S. Martin, and  
Mayor D. Grant  
1 - Commissioner M. Dunn  
No:  
0
Abstain:  
17.  
ORDINANCE NO. 25O-08-124:  
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY  
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAUDERHILL, FLORIDA, AMENDING  
THE CITY OF LAUDERHILL CODE OF ORDINANCES, CHAPTER 2,  
“ADMINISTRATION”, ARTICLE II, “OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES”,  
DIVISION 3, “RETIREMENT”, PART 3, “POLICE PENSION PLAN AND  
TRUST  
FUND”,  
BY  
AMENDING  
SECTION  
2-75 “DEFINITIONS”  
RELATING TO THE DEFINITION OF TIER TWO; PROVIDING FOR  
CONFLICTS, CODIFICATION AND SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING  
FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.  
A motion was made by Vice Mayor S. Martin, seconded by Commissioner R.  
Campbell, that this Ordinance be approved on first reading to the City  
Commission Meeting, due back on 9/8/2025. The motion carried by the following  
vote:  
5 -  
Yes:  
Commissioner R. Campbell, Commissioner M. Dunn, Commissioner J. Hodgson,  
Vice Mayor S. Martin, and Mayor D. Grant  
0
Abstain:  
18.  
ORDINANCE NO. 250-08-125:  
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF  
LAUDERHILL, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE CITY OF LAUDERHILL CODE  
OF ORDINANCES, CHAPTER 2 - ADMINISTRATION, ARTICLE II  
-
OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES, DIVISION 3 - RETIREMENT, PART 4 -  
SENIOR MANAGEMENT PENSION PLAN AND TRUST FUND, SECTION  
2-88.7 - VESTING AND TERMINATION; PURCHASE OF PRIOR  
COVERED SERVICE, BY AMENDING SUBSECTION (F) TO REVISE  
THE PURCHASE OF PRIOR SERVICE PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR  
CODIFICATION; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING  
FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE (REQUESTED BY CITY MANGER, KENNIE  
HOBBS, JR.).  
A motion was made by Vice Mayor S. Martin, seconded by Commissioner J.  
Hodgson, that this Ordinance be approved on first reading to the City Commission  
Meeting, due back on 9/8/2025. The motion carried by the following vote:  
5 -  
Yes:  
Commissioner R. Campbell, Commissioner M. Dunn, Commissioner J. Hodgson,  
Vice Mayor S. Martin, and Mayor D. Grant  
0
Abstain:  
19.  
ORDINANCE NO. 250-08-126:  
LAUDERHILL, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE CITY OF LAUDERHILL CODE  
OF ORDINANCES, CHAPTER 2 - ADMINISTRATION, ARTICLE II  
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF  
-
OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES, DIVISION 3 - RETIREMENT, PART 4 -  
SENIOR MANAGEMENT PENSION PLAN AND TRUST FUND, SECTION  
2-88.15 -- DEFERRED RETIREMENT OPTION PLAN, BY INCREASING  
THE MAXIMUM PARTICIPATION IN THE DEFERRED RETIREMENT  
OPTION PLAN (DROP) FROM FIVE YEARS TO SEVEN YEARS WITH  
CONDITIONS; PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION; PROVIDING FOR  
SEVERABILITY;  
AND  
PROVIDING  
FOR  
AN  
EFFECTIVE  
DATE  
(REQUESTED BY CITY MANAGER, KENNIE HOBBS, JR.).  
A motion was made by Vice Mayor S. Martin, seconded by Commissioner J.  
Hodgson, that this Ordinance be approved on first reading to the City Commission  
Meeting, due back on 9/8/2025. The motion carried by the following vote:  
5 -  
Yes:  
Commissioner R. Campbell, Commissioner M. Dunn, Commissioner J. Hodgson,  
Vice Mayor S. Martin, and Mayor D. Grant  
0
Abstain:  
20.  
ORDINANCE NO. 25O-08-127: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF  
LAUDERHILL,  
FLORIDA,  
AMENDING  
THE  
CITY  
CODE  
OF  
ORDINANCES, CHAPTER 2, ADMINISTRATION, ARTICLE II, OFFICERS  
AND EMPLOYEES, DIVISION 3, RETIREMENT, PART 1, FIREFIGHTERS  
PENSION PLAN, SECTIONS 2-54, DEFERRED RETIREMENT OPTION  
PLAN, (DROP) BY AMENDING SUBSECTION 2-54.2, ELIGIBILITY, TO  
AMEND THE DROP PLAN TO INCLUDE A ONE AND ONE HALF  
PERCENT CONTRIBUTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE COLLECTIVE  
BARGAINING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF LAUDERHILL  
AND  
FIGHTERS, IAFF; PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION; PROVIDING FOR  
SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE  
LOCAL  
3080,  
METRO  
BROWARD  
PROFESSIONAL  
FIRE  
(REQUESTED BY CITY MANAGER, KENNIE HOBBS, JR.).  
Attachments:  
A motion was made by Vice Mayor S. Martin, seconded by Commissioner J.  
Hodgson, that this Ordinance be approved on first reading. The motion carried by  
the following vote:  
5 -  
Yes:  
Commissioner R. Campbell, Commissioner M. Dunn, Commissioner J. Hodgson,  
Vice Mayor S. Martin, and Mayor D. Grant  
0
Abstain:  
XI ORDINANCES & PUBLIC HEARINGS - SECOND READING (AS ADVERTISED IN  
THE SUN-SENTINEL)  
21. ITEM REMOVED  
XII UNFINISHED BUSINESS  
XIII OLD BUSINESS  
XIV NEW BUSINESS  
XV  
COMMUNICATIONS FROM PUBLIC OFFICIALS SHALL BEGIN IMMEDIATELY  
BEFORE ADJOURNMENT  
Commissioner Dunn noted Lauderhill businesses seeking to scale their  
business, or a Lauderhill resident wishing to start a business, Lauderhill Shines  
was currently accepting applications; an information session would take place  
on September 3, and the application period would close around September 7,  
2025. Now was the opportunity for business owners to get the support they  
needed to start or grow their business in Lauderhill; more information could be  
found on the City’s website.  
She said the program graduated over 150  
businesses, providing the owners with support in order for them to move  
forward, and most of the owners were Lauderhill residents.  
Commissioner Hodgson expressed appreciation to everyone who attended the  
meeting, and spoke.  
Mayor Grant echoed the Commission’s appreciation for the public attendance  
and participation.  
XV ADJOURNMENT - 8:39 PM