[0:13] Just come before you to say thank you. We thank

[0:15] you for all your many blessings. We thank you for

[0:17] this beautiful country. We live in and this beautiful city

[0:20] that you've stowed upon us. We ask at you, just

[0:23] continue to just shine on us, Lord. Please protect us.

[0:26] Please protect our family, our children. And we ask for

[0:28] grace. Bass for your forgiveness, and we ask that we

[0:31] would just live by simple tenant to speak and treat

[0:34] others as we would treat those that we most love.

[0:36] Thank you for this day. And we thank you for

[0:38] all you many blessings. And this, we give you the

[0:40] praise, all God's children said, amen. Please join pledge. A

[0:46] pleasure, Legion to the flag of the United States of

[0:49] America. And so the public fold which stands one nation

[0:54] under God. Individual, justice for all. I can't really, I

[1:02] have my last. Adam said he clerked. He's called the

[1:05] rope. Mayor Gunter. Here. Council members done now. Here. Kaduk?

[1:10] Here. Hill rain. All right. Here. Lastra? Aye. I mean,

[1:14] here. Lehman. See what you started. Lehman. Long. Here. Stein

[1:23] key? Here. All present. Okay, just a reminder, any residents

[1:27] who wish to participate in citizen's input. There is a

[1:31] card box up front. Please fill out the citizen's input

[1:35] card in the city clerk call here shortly. Item five

[1:39] is agenda. I will open up for any changes to

[1:43] the agenda or entertain a motion to adopt a agenda

[1:47] is presented. Most you to adopt it. The agenda is

[1:50] presented. Second. Any council discussion. Seeing none, Madam City clerk,

[1:56] please call the role. Lastra. Aye. Lehman. Aye. Long. Steinky?

[2:02] Aye. Donnelle? Gunter. Aye. Kaduk? Aye. Kill rain. Aye. Eight

[2:09] ice motion carried. Okay. Item six is recognitions and achievement.

[2:13] 6a is presentation for city employees for years of service.

[2:18] I'll make my way down to the front when your

[2:21] name's called. If you would, please come forward. Lieutenant Alicio

[2:30] Fletcha. Fire department. 28 years of service.

[3:02] Today it's our privilege to recognize and celebrate this employee

[3:06] as he retires after many years of dedicated service to

[3:09] the city of Cape Coral. Throughout his career with the

[3:13] Cape Coral Fire Department, he's demonstrated dedication. Professionalism. Leadership in

[3:18] a strong commitment. To protect the and serving our community.

[3:23] A career in the fire service is a tremendous responsibility

[3:27] and sacrifice not only for you, but for your family

[3:29] as well. And we are grateful for the many years

[3:32] that you have devoted for the safety and wellbeing of

[3:36] our residents. And at this time, I would like to

[3:41] turn it over to Chief Russell to say a few

[3:43] words. Good afternoon, everyone. It's been an honor to serve

[3:49] alongside Lieutenant Fletcher, whose retirement marks the end of an

[3:53] incredible chapter in our department. Throughout his career, spanning roles

[3:57] and operations sometime in public education and firefighter training. He

[4:00] brought a larger - than - life personality in an

[4:03] unmatched passion for our mission to everything that he did.

[4:06] His positive attitude is contagious lifting up everyone around him

[4:10] and leaving a lasting mark on the culture of this

[4:12] department. Congratulations, Lieutenant Fletcher. When a well - deserved retirement,

[4:17] you will be deeply missed. But your impact on this

[4:20] department and the community of Cape Coral and the people

[4:23] you've trained and served will endure for years to come.

[4:25] Happy sailing.

[4:37] Come on. Papa.

[5:41] Okay, the next recognition for the Florida Urban Forestry Council

[5:47] 2025 Outstanding Professional Award. I'll turn it over to the

[5:51] city manager. I think he's making his way up front.

[6:32] Okay. The city of Cape Coral is proud to recognize

[6:35] Omar Leone, the city arborists for receiving the Florida Urban

[6:39] Forestry Councils 2025, outstanding professional award. This is a statewide

[6:45] honor, which recognizes Omar's outstanding contributions, leadership, and professional commitment

[6:50] to urban forestry. As Cape Coral's first city arborist, Omar

[6:56] has played an instrumental role in strengthening and advancing the

[6:59] city's urban forestry program. Under his leadership, Cape Cole has

[7:03] earned recognition as both the Tree City USA and Tree

[7:07] City of the world. He has successfully guided the program

[7:10] through significant challenges, including rapid development. Severe weather events, funding

[7:15] constraints, and staffing changes. While remaining committed to the responsible

[7:20] management and preservation of the city's urban forest. Omar's professionalism,

[7:25] knowledge, and dedication have helped make Cape Corals urban forestry

[7:29] program and example for other cities and communities to follow.

[7:32] And the city is pleased to recognize Omar for this

[7:35] well - deserved achievement and thank him for his continued

[7:38] service to the city of Cape Coral. I'll turn it

[7:41] over to James. Congratulations on this well - deserved reward.

[7:46] As the city arborists, you do far more than care

[7:49] for trees. You help shape a healthier, greener, and more

[7:52] resilient future for our entire community. Your expertise in securing

[7:56] grant funding has turned vision and action, allowing the city

[7:59] to invest in projects that expand our tree canopy and

[8:02] bring lasting benefits to neighborhoods across the community. Thank you

[8:06] for your dedication, creativity, and commitment to public service. We

[8:10] are proud to recognize your outstanding work and the meaningful

[8:12] legacy you are growing varsity. Before the photo, I have

[8:21] a question. Since you've been here, because I can see

[8:25] them all over the place, how many trees have you

[8:29] personally been involved with planning throughout the city of Cape

[8:32] Coral. And the time that I've been here, we have

[8:35] planted around 10, 000 trees. Around the city, combination between

[8:42] nonprofits, volunteers, city staff. You know, just grand efforts, everybody

[8:47] working together, try to get the job done. And how

[8:50] long have you been with us? Four and a half

[8:51] years. It's amazing. Great job. Thank you.

[9:01] Take a tiny step this way for me. Perfect. Thank.

[9:08] You. Congratulations, Omar. Okay, item seven is last call for

[9:16] comment cards. Um, and item eight as citizen's input. Time.

[9:23] Just remember citizens are given opportunity to be heard concerning

[9:26] matter scheduling scheduled on the council agenda or any other

[9:31] pertinent city matters. In order to promote an orally system

[9:34] and hold public business meetings ensure the individuals are not

[9:37] embarrassed or arrest as a result of their exercise of

[9:40] free speech, city has established rules by resolution and improved

[9:44] by city council. The speakers require to maintain proper decorum

[9:48] at all times. Only the person recognized by the mayor

[9:51] shall be addressed in the city council. We're making any

[9:55] audible remarks during the business portion of the meeting on

[9:59] authorized and remarks, stomp, and a feet whistling or simpler

[10:02] demonstration shall not be permitted during the business meeting. No

[10:06] person is permitted to interrupt the council proceedings or any

[10:10] comments of any person recognized by the mayor in any

[10:13] manner. No person is permitted to behave in a disorderly

[10:15] manner by shouting, yelling, whistling, chanting, singing, dancing, clapping, foot

[10:20] stomping, curing, jeering or engaging any other disruptive display during

[10:25] the council meeting. No person is permitted to refuse to

[10:30] follow the instructions that are outlined in the resolution and

[10:35] adopted by city council. And also we must make sure

[10:40] that we address the council as a whole, not as

[10:43] an individual person. Um, any person who engages in any

[10:48] behavior that is prohibited within the resolution and his boisters

[10:54] or disruptive in any manner, uh, during the city council

[10:58] meeting, they could be asked to leave or be escorted

[11:00] from the council chambers. With that, Madam City clerk, could

[11:03] you call your first person. Lou Navarro.

[11:32] Good afternoon. Mayor Council, Louis Navarra ancient Cape Corps resident.

[11:37] Uh, I know the grandstanding here by the council since

[11:40] the mayor was defeated. Today's another great day for the

[11:44] ADA, the disabled can speak at the beginning of the

[11:47] meetings, but we need to have the final closure. I

[11:51] want to hear a motion made by the council to

[11:54] put the meetings back to 5 p. m. That's where

[11:57] they were. And working people can come. Now, you get

[12:03] what you give council member over there, changed all that,

[12:07] but she has since been defeated by laws. Why don't

[12:12] we have an amendment today, folks? And, uh, the councilwoman

[12:16] here's running for election. We did the rowing club. Why

[12:19] not the citizens. Restructure code enforcement. Mayor, we met. He

[12:26] said, you'd be back with me in a couple of

[12:27] days, but I guess she got busy cleaning out your

[12:30] office. You're supposed to laugh. It's a joke, man. Take

[12:34] it seriously. But you never got back to me. I

[12:37] hope we can get code enforcement. Fixed up where Mr.

[12:43] Hoglin doesn't micromanage complaints of me and others. Uh, we

[12:47] went over that. There's no sense wasting any more time.

[12:51] But, uh, please look into that, like you promised me.

[12:57] Budget. I guess we got Tom Nashad Shadrach here. He's

[13:01] clearly got his work cut out for him. I spoke

[13:03] with former mayor fight taller. He told me the city

[13:09] had outsourced core logs country club. To trune. But we

[13:15] yet still pay three million. Well, the budget keeps going

[13:19] up for maintenance on that course. It's lost money. I

[13:22] hope when we look at the budgets. We stop this.

[13:27] You know, and, um, core logs is too hard to

[13:30] play as Tiger Woods. The duffers, you should have done

[13:34] the country club. And it was a good, uh, beginning

[13:39] for the cape. Um. Take out the trash committee. You

[13:48] know, I agree with them. We need to have three

[13:50] council members resigned. Mr. Donnell, you've been in their illegally.

[13:58] You're turned out. The other two members, you need to

[14:02] resign as well. I certainly agree. And, uh, make sure

[14:06] Lou, you remember you got to address this. Oh, okay.

[14:09] Well, you council members there. You need to listen to

[14:13] the taxis. And I'm supporting them. You're in there. You

[14:22] went beyond the charter and we know each other. Lastly,

[14:27] thank you, chief sizemore for suspending flock cameras. For now.

[14:32] Good deal, chief. No. Marie Kavanaugh and Jack Johnson.

[15:00] My name is Marie Kavanaugh. I'm vice chair of take

[15:03] out the trash committee of Cape Coral. Today I want

[15:08] to talk a little bit about Bimini East, um, that

[15:11] whole presentation we had. A couple of weeks back was

[15:16] an eye opener. One of the items I would like

[15:20] an answer to today. Well, actually, the two questions I

[15:22] would like to answer today one of them is, um,

[15:26] I'm not that familiar with permits and whatnot. But the

[15:30] value, I would need to know if the value that

[15:32] is entered on permits. Is, I mean, like say you

[15:38] had somebody come out and quote, putting in windows. And

[15:42] they gave you a quote for 20, 000 dollars. Now.

[15:46] Is that what they have to put on there? The

[15:48] 20, 000 dollars. So is the amount on my question

[15:51] is the amount on the permit, is that the amount

[15:54] that it actually costs to do that service or whatever.

[15:58] And the other question is, um, you also indicated that

[16:03] you're going to give four freedoms park to the developer.

[16:09] But you're saying it's going to remain zoned as a

[16:13] park and it can't be changing again. But I need

[16:16] to know, is that the full 3. 2 acres that

[16:20] currently constitutes for freedom's park. And then on the, when

[16:26] going through the presentation, uh, for, for Bimini East, you

[16:32] were allowing up to 200, 000 dollars for the eight

[16:35] remaining properties for demolition and hallway. So I said, that

[16:39] seemed a little excessive. So I went in, the permits

[16:43] I'm going to list here are all, um, full demo

[16:48] with tear out, including road surfaces every day. Okay. Demo

[16:52] 2500 3048 29 tarpon court. Was to hold haule away

[17:01] an entire apartment building pool pool deck at the entire

[17:04] parking services costs 44, 440 dollars That's a far cry

[17:09] from 200, 000. Demo 250067 for 4823 Triton Court. 42,

[17:18] 000, 36 dollars The biggest one I found was permit

[17:24] number or demo 25. And then there's 50s and a

[17:28] two. And a tear out and haul away of seven

[17:32] structures at 4830 Coronado, and that was completed in February

[17:37] of last year, 135, 835 dollars. Again, a far cry

[17:43] from the 200 grand that these people may get. I

[17:47] mean, it says up to. But we all know what

[17:50] happens with up to. It means that they go over.

[17:54] But that needs to be, but I would like answers

[17:57] to those questions. And I'm still waiting for a report

[18:00] on what's going on with JC Park. I've been asking

[18:03] for weeks now. Thank you.

[18:17] You want to. Microphone. Jack, you want to handheld. No,

[18:23] I'm good. I'm here today. To talk about the street

[18:30] in front of my house. I live at one five,

[18:33] two, one northwest 16 terrorists right behind. You state your

[18:36] name real quick, please. I'm sorry. My name is Jack

[18:38] Johnson. Thank you. Um, I live at one five. Two

[18:46] one northwest 16th terrorists. And a year ago, I sent

[18:53] this picture. I'm going to send it up to you

[18:55] guys. This is what my driveway looked like a year

[18:58] ago. This is what it looks like now. The street

[19:04] in front of my house is completely underwater. My driveway

[19:11] is undrivable. I can't even get in it. I built

[19:17] that big garage in 2021. And I never had a

[19:23] problem with the ground. Never had a problem with anything.

[19:27] The first five years I've lived in this house. The

[19:31] day they started digging for that. 7 - 11 on

[19:35] the corner of diplomat in Chiquita. My driveway started sinking.

[19:41] And the road in front of my house, you started

[19:44] sinking. Now. I'm a retired, disabled veteran. And I live

[19:53] on a fixed income. And the city has sent me

[19:57] a letter saying that I am responsible to repair this

[20:01] driveway. I'm going to let you guys look at these

[20:07] pictures. There's one from the day I called, they recall

[20:12] the city and told them about it. And there's one

[20:15] from the day before yesterday when it rained real hard.

[20:20] So my problem here is why has it taken 14

[20:26] months. To fix the road. And now 14 months later,

[20:33] I have a driveway that is unusable. I paid 17,

[20:39] 000 dollars to have it repaired once. They came out

[20:43] twice. And that would be alpha foundations. Third time they

[20:47] came out, they said they won't do it again until

[20:50] the city fixes the street. And now I'm stuck. With

[20:55] another repair. And I like to know what the city's

[20:59] going to do to help me out. Pretty much that's

[21:04] all I got to say. Thank you, sir. Um, with

[21:07] somebody, please take these. Photos up there. She'll give them

[21:11] to the city clerk. We'll get them to us. Yeah.

[21:18] Let them see them. Please. Liza king and Kyle Lahamadou.

[21:35] Good afternoon, Mayor Council. My name is Lisa King. I

[21:39] have a few questions about the consent agenda specifically 108235

[21:45] and six. These items represent significant financial commitments. On agenda

[21:51] items tend to and three. They show a five -

[21:55] year contract with Florida blue at the state annual value

[21:58] of approximately 1. 7 million. I'd like to know if

[22:03] the side - by - side comparison compared along with

[22:08] Etna and Signa. If it would be helpful to understand

[22:12] if these comparisons look at things such as the cost

[22:16] coverage to employees and the overall value. The second question

[22:20] that I have as it relates to this is whether

[22:23] the city is locked in for five years and protected

[22:27] against unexpected costs increases. On agenda item 10A5, it authorizes

[22:34] 2. 31 million for a perimeter role. Around the north

[22:39] RO facility. My question is, is this being proposed primarily

[22:43] for security purposes? And if so, were other alternatives considered.

[22:50] Such as enhanced fencing, surveillance technology. I'd just like to

[22:54] ensure that we are moving forward in the most efficient

[22:58] and effective solution. On agenda item 10A9. It authorizes 500,

[23:05] 000 for emergency roadway repair. I am familiar and have

[23:09] met with these homeowners that just previously spoke. My question

[23:14] here is whether the underlying issues have been identified and

[23:18] will be included in this repair. Anything that can be

[23:22] done to expedite this repair and help this family would

[23:25] be greatly appreciated. As gentlemen said, he is a hundred

[23:30] percent disabled vet's vehicle to leave his home is truly

[23:38] causing a great deal of impact to their family. I

[23:41] thank you for your time and for your service. Thank

[23:44] you. Thank you.

[23:56] Kyle, I'll do take out the trash. Um, well, since

[23:59] the, uh, city manager fundraised so well for the flag,

[24:01] maybe he can actually help these folks fundraise a little

[24:03] bit and actually get them some services out there, um,

[24:06] home donated to fix all the destruction that happened, you

[24:08] know, seems to have happened at that property. Okay. Um,

[24:13] the Cape Coral City Attorney told council that Mary Ann

[24:16] Lucas is in Lee County. The city's on paperwork lists

[24:20] 5, 8 shirt court Sanibel as her business address while

[24:23] listing 3610 Durango Street coral Gables as her mailing address.

[24:28] The coral gables property purchased March 15, 2012 for 789,

[24:33] 000 dollars The soundable property purchased September 25th, 2015 for

[24:38] 550, 000 dollars The Santa Belt property was heavily damaged

[24:41] during hurricane Ian and has been undergoing renovations. As of

[24:45] September 1st, the Ian emergency permit is only 66 percent

[24:49] complete The sound of L property has never had a

[24:52] homestead exemption. The coral gables property is received a homestead

[24:56] exemption for multiple years. Is there possibly homestead exemption fraud

[24:59] going on is that if she's living over here? So

[25:02] if coral gables is her primary residence, why was counsel

[25:07] told that she lives locally? If she's currently living in

[25:10] the hurricane damaged Sanibel property while reconstruction remains incomplete, what

[25:15] documentation establishes that the home is legally approved for occupancy.

[25:20] These are legitimate questions created by conflicting public records and

[25:24] the city attorney's own statement on the record to council.

[25:28] I guess that's why they say those who can practice

[25:30] law, those who can't become city attorneys. Now I'm going

[25:37] to quickly talk about flock in the red speed cameras.

[25:39] So in again, I'm an idiot, but in reviewing the

[25:42] agreement, it seems that there is no clear. Anything in

[25:47] writing that red speed, what their agreement is with the

[25:52] camera suppliers. So if they're getting free cameras and that

[25:58] does, there's nothing that states that flock or any of

[26:01] the other brands do not get to access any of

[26:03] our data. It talks about what red speed can do

[26:06] with our data. And I still think that's very loosely

[26:09] defined. Data sales in the world are estimated to beat

[26:12] 300 billion dollar industry every year. We are putting trust

[26:17] in the city attorney to review contracts and do the

[26:19] right thing for the city, which should mean the citizens.

[26:22] As Dr. D1 said, there is no new counsel, there

[26:27] was only the council. So what is the council going

[26:31] to do about this? We know the governor intervened and

[26:34] we know the chief suspended operations, but that's not ending

[26:38] operations. So that's something that you guys have to figure

[26:41] out what you are going to do for the citizens.

[26:43] Thank you. Wes, Owen and Tom Shadrach.

[26:57] I don't. Think I talk about this. I counsel Wes

[27:01] Owen. I'm stood here and criticized the city budget and

[27:05] its presentations as amateurs, lazy, and even childish. But Councilman

[27:10] Long made a comment last week because me to rethink

[27:12] that. I was wrong. The presentations are not lazy. They

[27:18] are carefully constructed to manipulate and keep needed information from

[27:22] you. Councilman Long observed. The city is very willing to

[27:26] provide. Yeah. Make sure you address this as I'm not

[27:29] addressing him. I'm staying in common at any minute. Councilman

[27:33] Long observed that the city is very willing to provide

[27:35] comparisons when those comparisons support the city's position. But when

[27:38] they don't, they seem to disappear. His example, the fire

[27:42] budget. And the same thing seems to have happened with

[27:46] historical performance metric council needs to determine whether taxpayers getting

[27:50] value for their money. How much did we spend? How

[27:53] did that compare with prior years and how were you

[27:55] coming more efficient or simply more expensive? On Cape Coral

[27:59] Data Book, I published exactly these kinds of historical matrix.

[28:03] And the pushback has come from members of the fire

[28:04] department union. Not because the numbers are wrong, but because

[28:07] those metrics are not favorable to them. This is why

[28:13] council needs the metrics. Good performance data is not supposed

[28:16] to make everyone comfortable. It's supposed to tell you the

[28:19] truth. Cape girls on campus 20, 30 strategic plans as

[28:24] a city's will. Reinstate performance measurement and benchmarking practice to

[28:30] identify efficiencies and organizational improvement opportunities. It also says the

[28:36] lion organisational resources to performance expectations and outcomes. And page

[28:43] 39 says that performance measures are monitored and reported by

[28:47] employees from across city departments. Where are those metrics. Are

[28:51] they being monitored. Our historical benchmarks maintained. And if they

[28:56] are, why aren't you seeing them here? Councilman Stanky also

[29:01] suggested that since had a problem in this budget, we

[29:03] should have spoken up earlier. No, that was your job,

[29:07] not ours. You were elected a scrutinized this budget and

[29:11] demand the comparisons benchmarks and performance metrics before it got

[29:15] this far. I am standing here before you because you

[29:20] failed to do that. And I'm trying to get you

[29:22] to do your job. Do not approve this budget until

[29:26] you have seen historical performance metrics. And spending for every

[29:29] department and every program. What did we spend? What did

[29:34] we accomplish? Are we getting better? Are we getting more

[29:37] efficient. Every department, every program. Do your jobs. Because every

[29:43] taxpayer matters. No falls. Please.

[29:53] Good afternoon. Tom Shadrach. I sent an email Monday to

[29:58] you guys just with a couple topics. I wanted to

[30:00] talk about on your agenda today. And, uh, kind of

[30:03] like Wes said, the first one was dealing with about

[30:06] our audit plan that you're going to approve. Uh, there's

[30:09] supposed to be a risk assessment, which I haven't reviewed.

[30:12] So I'm a little ignorant of that yet. Uh, but

[30:15] we have seven auditors. With pretty good resumes that all

[30:20] work for you guys up there. They don't work for

[30:23] the city manager. They work for the council. And this

[30:26] is a great opportunity now that we're in a crisis

[30:31] in some respects towards property tax reform that we could

[30:35] really focus that audit department on looking at cost reductions.

[30:40] I know there's charter is about processes and procedures compared

[30:45] to statutes. But we have a great opportunity here. We

[30:49] have a surplus budget. We state that it's a balanced

[30:53] budget, but we had 29 million dollar surplus last year

[30:56] total. Just in the general fund. And we're going to

[31:00] have another 20 million to surplus this year. It's not

[31:03] balanced. Why not have this audit. Group look at our

[31:09] actual, when they come out this fall in December and

[31:14] have them compare that to the budget document and see

[31:16] the differences. That would be a great audit topic to

[31:20] see if we're a financial policies match the requirement for

[31:23] a balanced budget per the statute. That would be a

[31:27] great opportunity to level set to understand budget versus actual

[31:32] cost. Kind of foot stomping what Wes said about really

[31:35] looking at what actuals are compared to our budget document.

[31:39] And we're way off and it's really due to our

[31:41] financial policies that need to be addressed. Uh, so I'd

[31:45] appreciate putting these people to work on looking at real

[31:50] cost reductions. We do pay 1. 7 million dollars for

[31:53] this audit department. Let's see what kind of money they

[31:56] can find to reduce our budget. Okay. Uh, the second

[32:02] item. You're going to put up increase the commercial paper,

[32:06] 500, 000. There's no real briefing prepared to tell us

[32:10] what that's far. I've asked a couple of questions, got

[32:13] some feedback that it's about our water bill, putting the

[32:17] expansion to pay for the UEP additions. It's going to

[32:21] cause 500 million dollars and using commercial paper instead of

[32:25] bonds. Okay. But that gets to an issue of timing.

[32:32] And I gave you a lot of questions in my

[32:33] email about where do we stand, uh, with a UEP,

[32:39] costing 30, 40, 000 dollars. There's going to be a

[32:42] meeting at the end of September to say what North

[32:45] one's going to cost. I'm sure there's bad news. So

[32:48] what's the timing of those big projects that we have

[32:51] in the future? Thank you. Lisa Cohen Atkinson and David

[32:55] Holsey. Good evening. Council Lisa Cohen

[33:04] Atkinson, Southwest Cape. Two weeks ago, this council passed ordinance

[33:09] 4926 implementing hefty fines and new investigator positions to correct

[33:14] down on unlicensed contractors. That legislation is a great step

[33:17] on paper, but ordinance is mean absolutely nothing if our

[33:20] city bureaucracy ignores the very residents handling them. Handing them

[33:24] the evidence on a silver platter. When the residents step

[33:27] up, does the research pulls the property files and hands

[33:30] code enforcement clear evidence of extensive unpermitted structural work done

[33:35] right under our noses in the wake of hurricane Ian.

[33:38] So this goes back a little bit. And then information

[33:40] sits on the desk since July 20th without a single

[33:43] callback. The system is failing our citizens. We cannot expect

[33:46] regular families to follow the rules pay skyrocketing taxes and

[33:50] pull costly building permits. If others are permitted to completely

[33:54] bypass the law with zero consequences from our enforcement divisions.

[33:59] Unlicensed contracting during the state of emergencies, not a minor

[34:03] oversight, under Florida law. It is a third degree felony.

[34:08] It threatened safety compromises property values and undermines the rule

[34:12] of law. Code compliance cannot be select cannot be selective

[34:15] standard. It must be the minimum expectation for every property

[34:19] owner. And an immediate priority for our city staff. As

[34:23] you vote tonight on a multimillion dollar capital capital budget,

[34:29] I ask this council to look at the operational breakdowns

[34:32] happening right now. Let's ensure that our departments are actively

[34:35] answering the public and forcing the rule equally and protecting

[34:39] Cape Carl's integrity. And I also just want to thank

[34:42] everybody for all of their dedication. I see a little

[34:47] bit of an end. There's going to be a transfer

[34:48] here. And I just want to thank everybody that's been

[34:50] on council. Obviously, we don't always see eye to eye,

[34:54] but we understand the sacrifices. And I would love the

[34:56] call some people out, but I know that's already going

[34:58] to get gaveled. So I don't want to do that.

[34:59] So I'll just stare at you while I say thank

[35:00] you for all of your service because I understand that

[35:03] I've seen the growth over the years. And as we

[35:06] don't talk about these things when we leave the council

[35:09] chambers, but we enjoy our time on the baseball fields

[35:12] with our families. I just want to say thank you

[35:14] that we have never taken this outside of this room

[35:17] and left it right here where the business continues. So

[35:19] thank you for everything that you have all done. Thank

[35:21] you. I don't know how many times I got to

[35:28] tell you. It's not. Obviousness. Good afternoon. I'm David Halsey.

[35:39] I have, I think I saw a red flag today

[35:42] when, when y'all put ordinance 5226 on the agenda, I

[35:48] have no clue what that is. I know we're going

[35:50] to talk about it in a little while, but to

[35:53] go from in Tom already mentioned it 150 to 500.

[36:00] That's almost a checkbook. And I just want to make

[36:02] sure that that checkbook isn't going to turn around and

[36:05] fund something like yacht club. That's, that's a red flag

[36:10] for me. The other thing I wanted to discuss is

[36:13] the CRA. I was told that my home is inside

[36:18] the CRA. And then I looked on the Cape Coral

[36:24] homepage at where the properties are. I think I'm outside

[36:29] the CRA and I don't pay taxes in. If I

[36:31] do, I'm really going to be upset. But if somebody

[36:34] can answer that question and tell me yes or no,

[36:36] I'd appreciate it. Thank you all. Jenifer Alvarez Wada and

[36:41] Julia Atari. Okay. Jennifer

[36:50] Alvarezwata, Northwest Cabe. I'm here to talk about last week's

[36:54] meeting with a councilman, councilwoman, I should say. It kind

[36:59] of sounded like, wow. She took a page right out

[37:03] of the mayor's playbook. She is a liar. She said

[37:08] she did a research in a rowing club and Tropicana

[37:11] Park. Well, apparently you didn't, because they're there. And they

[37:15] ain't going anywhere. Okay. Second of all, I want to

[37:19] also point out that she mentioned how unfair we were.

[37:22] Okay. What is actually unfair is how you misled your

[37:27] voters when you ran for position. Or the promises you

[37:31] made that didn't happen. You turned our back on the

[37:36] people that supported you. You voted the way the cronies

[37:41] wanted you to. Certainly not in the best interest of

[37:44] the citizens. You don't listen to what everyone is saying,

[37:48] but now the citizens want you to resign. But funny

[37:52] how you can hear them now. Funny how you have

[37:57] selective hearing skills as you can read the room. Okay.

[38:02] So she also ran on skyrocking taxes. Uh, really, uh,

[38:08] the fire, my fire went over five hundred dollars a

[38:10] month and it came on your watch. The city became

[38:14] a concrete jungle. Well, still is on your watch. Disastrous

[38:21] park projects. And here we are. Also mentioned the UAP.

[38:26] That is a joke. This is when, uh, and why

[38:29] people voted for you. You are a liar, unfair and

[38:33] disrespectful. Let's move on to the crazy budget of 2027.

[38:40] 1. 40 billion dollars, So you mean to tell me

[38:45] that we grew a half a billion dollars or is

[38:48] this Mikey's wishlist. How do the people, you people, meaning

[38:55] counsel do not even ask questions. You all live here.

[38:59] And yet not one of you except one person ask

[39:01] questions. How can you let this person get away with

[39:05] raising our budget 50 million dollars. We pay over 500

[39:10] dollars for fire. That is 132 million dollars a year

[39:14] that does not come out of our 1. 5 billion

[39:17] dollar budget. Okay, so yeah, uh, I can't, uh, and

[39:24] then anytime when you guys do ask questions, little Mikey

[39:27] over here can't even answer the questions. Can't even meet

[39:32] district number seven in person has to bring his entourage,

[39:38] uh, and he should be, can't wait to the numeric

[39:41] it's in and hopefully fire you because you've lost 25

[39:44] million dollars on the eSpace and project would be fired

[39:48] for that. Okay. And also to fire you for your

[39:53] incompetency. Thank you. Please, no applause or we'll take a

[40:00] break. Actually, you'll be

[40:09] surprised. I'm not screaming tonight. Cause I'd like to clear

[40:13] up a couple of things before, you know, we get

[40:17] a new mayor. Amen. Since I've been coming here, which

[40:22] is often and asking questions, one thing that was said

[40:27] right before me is we don't get answers. Up there,

[40:30] you don't get answers. So many times we hear we'll

[40:34] get back to you on that. Mr. City Manager, we'll

[40:38] get back to you on that. Well, if the question

[40:41] is asked publicly, he needs to get back to you

[40:44] on that publicly. Cause I'm still waiting to know what

[40:47] happened to the five thousand dollars out there. And that

[40:52] was over a year ago. That question. Nobody gets back

[40:56] to you. You know, we ask questions that have valid

[41:02] questions. Nobody gets back to you. I'm still waiting to

[41:06] figure out why Mark Mason is assistant city manager. And

[41:10] on whose authority he was appointed that position, he was

[41:14] hired as a finance guy. Now for transparency reasons he

[41:20] got a promotion. But who authorized it. When you go

[41:26] from an executive position to an executive position under a

[41:30] different level, you guys are supposed to authorize it. And

[41:35] I'm going back through my notes and I don't see

[41:38] where it was ever was rice and where the big

[41:40] fat increase in his salary was authorized, which would probably

[41:43] save us another 300, 000 dollars a year. So you,

[41:47] you don't answer the questions that need to be answered.

[41:50] And the 80, 000 dollar year job that you're going

[41:53] to do to stop the contractors from coming in illegally.

[41:58] I have been, that has been an ongoing battle. Since

[42:04] the beginning of time. I have fought that battle so

[42:08] many times as a registered contractor, I've had to bid

[42:12] against unlicensed contractors. And the DBPR, you just could go

[42:17] to their website. You can go to Florida websites and

[42:20] report them. They have an entire Fort Myers office that

[42:25] deals with that. We don't need another 80, 000 dollar.

[42:29] What we do need though is we need somebody to

[42:32] verify that these contractors have the money to finish the

[42:35] houses. Cause I'm dealing right now with a woman who

[42:39] paid a contract to 500, 000 dollars to build her

[42:41] house and she lost her everything. Guy went bankrupt. Everything's

[42:46] gone. Where's your requirement to the city? The citizens, if

[42:51] they're going to build a house to make sure the

[42:52] guy has the money to do it for them. That's

[42:55] more important to me than paying somebody 80, 000 dollars

[42:59] to tell you don't have a license. Because a citizen

[43:01] can do that in two seconds. Go online and look

[43:03] it up. And there is a 5, 000 dollar fine.

[43:09] And that's been since beginning of time. You're going back

[43:11] to crap that's. Received a comment card after the last

[43:19] call had been completed? Just one. Just one. That's fine.

[43:23] Okay. Linda cutney.

[43:33] Yes. Can we go ahead and vote as a body

[43:35] so we can get in front of that to allow

[43:38] our rules as a body to have one more speaker.

[43:42] I'll entertain a motion. I'll make the motion. Go ahead,

[43:47] make it. I'll make the motion to allow additional residents

[43:50] to speak. This one. I second emotions. All right. Any

[43:56] other discussion. What topic am I talking about? Oh, just

[43:59] hold on one second, ma'am. Go ahead, madam city clerk.

[44:02] Uh, please call the role. Lastra. Aye. Lehman. Aye. Long.

[44:07] Steinky. Aye. Then now. Aye. Gunter. Aye. Kaduk? Aye. Kill

[44:11] rain. Aye. Eight eyes motion carried. Okay. Go ahead, ma'am.

[44:18] Red state your name for the record, ma'am. My name

[44:21] is Linda Putney. I live in now I live in

[44:25] Kate Coral proper before I lived in. A homeowner association

[44:30] within that county. Do you want Linda cutting his K

[44:35] - U - T - N - E - Y?

[44:36] Can you hear me? We hear you fine. Let me

[44:39] talk faster. Um, I entered two topics. You can speak

[44:43] on any matters concerning city government up to three minutes.

[44:47] Am I limited to three weeks three for both topics?

[44:50] Two minutes and 40 seconds now. Yes. Let me talk

[44:53] faster. Um, I am not the best speaker. I do

[44:57] talk with sincerity and I know what I'm talking about.

[45:01] I have a lot of background. One, I guess one

[45:05] of my biggest concerns is that amount of time, that

[45:10] code enforcement takes to enforce water restrictions that are impact

[45:19] not only the homeowners, but people that actually use not

[45:23] only groundwater, but, um, surface water. Everything is connected. I

[45:29] worked a long time in the federal government in water.

[45:34] I'm a chemist, a toxicologist and engineer. I have a

[45:37] lot of background in medicine as well. And I really

[45:40] care. Okay. About this particular subject. So, and I've mentioned

[45:45] this before. But I live now in 1718 Southwest 40

[45:51] 3rd terrorists in Cape Coral, Florida. It is a low

[45:55] area, meaning that it is below ground and it tends

[46:01] to flood. The people across the street are on a

[46:05] canal and they feel like they have the right since

[46:08] they have a more expensive house. To use water up

[46:12] to 10 hours a day. Unfortunately, what they do is

[46:16] a start after five o'clock. Now I'm going to propose

[46:20] that one thing that you could do perhaps to maximize

[46:23] the code enforcement would be to look at those areas

[46:26] and see what properties are green. Their lawn is dark

[46:33] green. Not only do they violate de fertilizer restrictions that

[46:38] are supposed to be in effect June 1st, but they

[46:42] also water to the max. So much that they actually

[46:46] kill their plants. That is one issue. And the other

[46:48] issue I feel very strongly about is the burrowing owls.

[46:52] Not that everybody cares about it, but I'm associated with

[46:56] crow and with, um, other live, I worked for the

[47:04] environmental protection agency, other agencies, the federal government that are

[47:08] concerned with not only human health, but environmental health. They

[47:11] are important to the environment. There is no such thing

[47:13] as an unimportant individual. Everybody is important. They have a

[47:17] little space intercognizant, something turning. You don't know what happens

[47:23] if you get rid of those animals. They eat bugs.

[47:26] And if they don't eat those bugs, then the bugs

[47:28] are going to swarm at that time. It's been fun.

[47:31] Thank you very much for your time. Thanks. Thank you.

[47:34] For the opportunity. I'm going to see what's happening. Okay.

[47:37] Citizens then put is now closed and I'll open it

[47:39] up for councils discussion. Council member Steinke. Thank you, Mayor.

[47:45] To the gentleman with the issue with the road and

[47:48] the driveway, I spoke with the people that manage two

[47:56] outreach organizations called Builders Care and Realtors Care last evening.

[48:01] And they are supposed to be in touch with you.

[48:04] Where are there you? Uh, they're supposed to be in

[48:06] touch with you in regard to financial assistance, uh, with

[48:10] the portion of that repair that would be on your

[48:13] private property. Um, hopefully they'll be in touch with you

[48:16] soon. And they can give you a hand there. Um,

[48:22] and the comment regarding, uh, the flat cameras and their.

[48:28] Being put on pause, if you will. They're basically being

[48:31] put on pause until the state comes through with regulations

[48:34] that, uh, will put guardrails on their use. And they're

[48:40] as far as I know, there is no plan, uh,

[48:42] to put them back in use until those guidelines are

[48:46] established by the state. Thank you, Mayor. Council member last

[48:50] year. Thank you, Mayor. Yes, I was going to say

[48:53] the same thing, Mr. Jack, that Council Member Steinkey stated

[48:56] about builders care. They're an incredible organization. And I bet

[48:59] we could get them to assist you with your driveway.

[49:04] And I think we're going to hear about your issue

[49:06] on the Ark consented agenda as we approve the not

[49:10] to exceed rate, to repair it. So I'm going to,

[49:12] I'm going to pause until then, because I'm sure someone

[49:14] will pull it. And if not, I will from consent.

[49:19] Um, let's see, Miss Marie. Yes, you are correct. The

[49:23] value entered on the permit should match the amount of

[49:27] work. Um, I can probably ask someone from the building

[49:30] department. If I see someone here, but I don't, but

[49:33] I'm, I'm pretty sure that's the way am I right?

[49:38] No? You're looking at me? Okay. Um, but yes, you

[49:41] should be, it should match whatever the cost is. So

[49:45] that, that should be the truth. I can verify that.

[49:48] If you'd like, um, and double check cause I don't

[49:50] see Matt here. Um, let's see. And then, uh, Kyle,

[49:55] yes, the flock cameras are at this point paused. And

[49:59] I believe the chief statement stated he was going to

[50:01] allow the state to put the much needed parameters in

[50:04] before he reinstates those or any of the other license

[50:07] plate readers. So stay tuned on that. Um, let's see.

[50:12] And then, uh, Ms. King, uh, we should bring that.

[50:16] I bet you somebody will pull that item as well

[50:18] from consent agenda. Okay. Thank you. Thank you Mayor. Okay.

[50:23] See, no other light zone will move to item nine

[50:25] approval in the minutes. Do we have a motion regarding

[50:28] the mention minutes from the regular meeting of August 19,

[50:31] 2026? Motion to approve. Is there any discussion. Seeing none,

[50:38] all in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed motion

[50:42] carries. Move on to item 10a is the consent to

[50:45] agenda. I'll open up the consent agenda for council to

[50:49] pull any items for discussion or I'll entertain a motion.

[50:55] Council member could do. Thank you mayor. Number five resolution

[50:59] 227 - 26. Number six resolution 228 - 26. Number

[51:05] nine resolution 241 - 26. Councilmember last year. She pulled

[51:14] the same. Thank you. Okay, Council Member Long. Number seven

[51:17] mayor resolution 231 - 26. Okay, looks like we're pulling

[51:23] items four. I'm sorry. Items five, six, seven, and nine.

[51:29] So I'll entertain a motion for the remainder. Motion to

[51:33] approve the remainder of consent agenda, excluding five, six, seven,

[51:36] and nine. Second. Any discussion. Stand none. Madam said he

[51:42] called the rule. Mastra? Aye. Lehman. Aye. Long. Aye. Steinkee?

[51:48] Aye. Janelle. Gunter? Aye. Kaduk? Aye. Kilrain. Aye. Eight eyes,

[51:54] motion carried. Okay, we'll move on to item number five,

[51:57] resolution 227 - 26. Council member Kaduk, you pulled that

[52:01] item. I'll give you the fourth. Thank you, Mayor. I

[52:04] actually wasn't going to pull this item, but then we

[52:07] had a citizen at Citizen's input ask a question that

[52:10] made me think. Uh, Mr. City Manager. Are we expanding

[52:13] the North RO plant. Or Mr. Pearson.

[52:25] Good evening. Jeff Pearson Utilities Director. Yes, we are in

[52:29] the process of design. We're expanding the North RO plant

[52:35] from a current permitted capacity of 12 million gallons a

[52:39] day to 18 million gallons a day. We'll be as

[52:44] part of that project. We're going to be constructing an

[52:46] additional 12 million gallon ground storage tank. We are also

[52:52] under engineering design. For the new North Water Reclamation facility,

[52:57] which is a wastewater plant that will be next to

[53:01] the North RO plant. This particular wall was originally called

[53:09] for in the project development. Uh, plan project development or

[53:17] PDP back in 2006. It was under resolution 12606. Uh,

[53:27] that called for a wall around the original facility. The

[53:32] North government complex, which is going to house those two,

[53:37] uh, facilities at the time they were future. They weren't

[53:41] built yet. Uh, the North RO plant was completed in

[53:45] around 2010. Um, around that same time, uh, there are

[53:53] a lot of projects that just stopped at that time.

[53:58] Uh, that was one of them. And we, um, are

[54:04] currently that wall's going to provide sound attenuation to their

[54:08] surrounding neighborhood. Uh, because sometimes during hurricanes, we lose power.

[54:13] We got to run our generators that helps, uh, you

[54:18] know, our neighbors. We want to be good neighbors with

[54:21] the surrounding communities. So that helps to attenuate that sound.

[54:26] It also provides a higher level of security. Uh, the

[54:30] RO plants, um, are a secure facility due to their

[54:37] criticality and nature to our community. It's our drinking water.

[54:43] Also, um, it's going to provide, uh, construction screening, because

[54:50] we're going to have a lot of activities going on

[54:53] over the next four or five years with a construction

[54:56] in the new, uh, water reclamation facility. And, uh, it's

[55:00] about 6, 450 linear feet of wall. That we're going

[55:07] to be constructing under this, uh, authorization. Thank you. I

[55:14] was really going to ask, um. For me personally, thinking

[55:18] just like a homeowner, I don't know why we would

[55:20] put up the perimeter if we're in the middle of

[55:23] an expansion and you said design. I don't know why

[55:25] we would do the wall first. Uh, actually it'll have

[55:29] gates. Uh, where the construction vehicles can get in and

[55:33] out of. Usually when we have a big construction project,

[55:38] you have to put up some type of screening. So

[55:44] having the wall there before that will actually help us

[55:49] rather than hurt us because we get a lot of

[55:51] complaints. From nearby residents. And that's pretty much in the

[55:56] middle of a residential area predominantly. So, um, and again,

[56:03] it was required as part of our PDP, uh, back

[56:07] in 2006. It was just never completed. This is the

[56:12] third time that we have bid this project. The first

[56:18] two times we had the landscaping included. We removed that

[56:22] from this, uh, bid. And we're, uh, actually really excited

[56:29] to finally get this off the ground because we've been

[56:32] working on it a long time. It's been discussed over

[56:35] the years. I know during strategic planning meetings with council,

[56:41] not necessarily with this particular council that's seated. But in

[56:44] other councils, I know it's came up and we've been

[56:47] working diligently on getting this taken care of. And we

[56:52] had a few setbacks with, uh, LCEC took part of

[56:57] our stormwater. And that set us back some. We had

[57:01] to do some redesign on the stormwater facilities there, uh,

[57:05] to support this wall. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. Okay.

[57:10] So no other light on. I entertain a motion for

[57:12] resolution 227 - 26. Motion to approve. Is second. Second.

[57:19] Any discussion. Seeing none, Madam City clerk, please hold the

[57:22] role. Lastra. Aye. Lehman. Aye. Long. Aye. Thank you. Aye.

[57:29] Donnell. Aye. Gunter? Aye. Kaduk? Aye. Kill rain. All right.

[57:34] Eight eyes motion carried. Okay. Move on the resolution 228

[57:38] - 26. Number six on the agenda. Council member Kaduk.

[57:42] I'll turn the floor over to you. Thanks, Mayor. Again,

[57:45] we had a citizen at citizens input. Speak about this.

[57:47] So if you could just give an overview exactly what

[57:49] we're going to be doing. That would be great. Sure.

[57:52] So, uh, Bill Corbett public works. Uh, the repair includes

[57:56] the injection of a grouted column 40 feet deep at

[58:00] 12 locations underneath the area that's settling. Uh, with the

[58:03] thought that that will provide a firm and stable surface

[58:06] in order to repave and rebuild the road. And just

[58:09] to be clear, the homeowner is responsible for their property

[58:13] lines. It's my understanding at this point in time that

[58:16] this work is limited to the public right of way

[58:18] by public works department. When we inject the grout, will

[58:22] this make it worse for the homeowner. Uh, no. In

[58:26] fact, it may have a positive benefit. So if you

[58:28] can imagine injecting down into the ground, it would not

[58:32] go into a straight column. It will spread. Right. And

[58:35] so it's a viscous material. And so that may provide

[58:38] some benefit outside of, uh, that linear column. So, uh,

[58:42] it may provide some, uh, support, if you will on

[58:45] the outskirts of the right of way, which may benefit

[58:48] the homeowner, uh, and the driveway condition. However, uh, we

[58:52] won't know that. We are unaware of the subsurface conditions

[58:55] horizontally, especially at 40 feet deep. So is there a

[58:59] report. Yes. But so just to give, uh, some detail

[59:02] on the report, uh, went down 270 feet until they

[59:06] found firm and stable ground. Uh, so, uh, beneath the

[59:10] ground all the way down to that 270 feet, uh,

[59:13] the loose soils and water down there. And that's what's

[59:17] contributing to the settlement. Okay. And if it makes it

[59:22] worse for the homeowner, would the city be liable then?

[59:25] I don't have an answer to that question. Mr. City

[59:27] attorney. If you repeat that question one more time, council

[59:33] number one. If it made it worse for the homeowner,

[59:36] because the city is now doing work. Would city's doing

[59:38] to work on its own property, yes. And it made

[59:41] it worse for the homeowner would we then be, would

[59:43] we then be liable? I would take the legal position

[59:45] that it would not. Okay? Thanks. For. What I'm talking

[59:52] about. Council member lastra. Thank you, Mayor. So, uh, Mr.

[1:00:01] City Attorney, this gentleman didn't hear your statement. Can you

[1:00:04] repeat that louder for him. My statement was I would

[1:00:07] take the legal position that it would not create liability

[1:00:12] for the city. It would not create liability for the

[1:00:15] city. If it were to get worse, I believe that

[1:00:17] was council member conduced. The worst we do makes the

[1:00:20] property get worse than we would not be liable, correct?

[1:00:24] I would take the legal position that it would not

[1:00:27] create liability on behalf of the city of Cape Coral.

[1:00:31] Okay. Mr. Corbett, so you explained a little bit as

[1:00:35] to why this happened. So, so, uh, please, I was

[1:00:40] talking in my conversation with the city manager yesterday. He

[1:00:45] had also mentioned that that's why developers and contractors usually

[1:00:49] do like a geo, geographical study underground correct prior to

[1:00:55] building their house or tried, sorry, prior to building any

[1:00:59] property that they were building. Sure. Geotechnical exploration, uh, that

[1:01:04] evaluates the soil subsurface oil conditions. And that is required

[1:01:08] on a variety of different projects throughout the city through

[1:01:10] our permitting and building processes. Um, I will say that

[1:01:14] there is an exception in single family residential where there

[1:01:17] are alternatives to conducting that report. Uh, I don't know

[1:01:22] the details of that. I would lean on DSD and

[1:01:25] building to explain that a little further. But my understanding

[1:01:27] is for single family residential, there is some relief there

[1:01:31] where there is an attestation by the contractor that there

[1:01:34] is adequate soil conditions. However, every commercial development is required

[1:01:40] to do this type of exploration. And this is, this

[1:01:42] isn't recent. In other words, like my, my home was

[1:01:45] built in 1980. So were they doing this back in

[1:01:47] 1980 or is this something recent with Florida building code?

[1:01:51] Let's say over the last 10 years. No, geotechnical engineering

[1:01:53] has been a practice for quite some time, uh, understanding,

[1:01:58] uh, shallow foundations and the subsurface condition impacts on those

[1:02:02] foundations, uh, the need for deep foundations. This is something

[1:02:06] that has been historically part of the civil engineering process.

[1:02:10] To my knowledge, as far as when there may have

[1:02:12] been a permitting requirement, I don't have that date, but

[1:02:16] this is common practice. Okay. So there wouldn't be any

[1:02:19] liability then on his original contractor that built that home.

[1:02:26] For the driveway area. I wouldn't be able to answer

[1:02:29] that. Uh, we have not conducted any geotechnical exploration outside

[1:02:34] of the settlement area within the public right of way.

[1:02:37] Okay. And you said that the reason this was caused

[1:02:40] again was because of, um, the soil, uh, underneath. And

[1:02:45] I know Mr. City Manager stated yesterday that it could

[1:02:47] have been at one point like there was water flow,

[1:02:51] maybe hundreds or thousands of years ago under there. And

[1:02:53] that's what made that sediment and soil mushy, if you

[1:02:57] will. Sorry for the technical. Yeah. So we have, um,

[1:03:01] so, uh, subsurface, we have organic materials and other things.

[1:03:06] There's also limestone down there, which is, uh, water soluble.

[1:03:10] And so it does create cavernous conditions, not similar to

[1:03:13] how you'd have in other areas of Florida because we

[1:03:15] have such a shallow water table. Uh, we also have

[1:03:18] pretty well drained soils with sandy soil conditions. So you

[1:03:22] don't see those types of, uh, settlements and subsidence that

[1:03:27] you do in other areas of the state. But what

[1:03:29] you see here is a settlement that is, is those

[1:03:32] voids are filled. Uh, so there is water down there,

[1:03:35] loose soils. And so the geotechnical report has cited a

[1:03:39] possibility for the cause of the subsidence to be the

[1:03:42] reduced levels in the aquifer. And so if you can

[1:03:46] imagine that water drawing down, uh, almost consolidates those layers

[1:03:50] with it and pulls that soil down with it, which

[1:03:52] is what you're seeing. Are we going to bearing capacity

[1:03:55] of the roadway itself adds to that? Understood. Are we

[1:03:58] going to have this in any other area of the

[1:04:01] city or in this gentleman's area when you mentioned it

[1:04:04] was because of aquifer depletion. I'm thinking, you know, maybe

[1:04:07] in council member Kaduk or Councilmember Longs area that where

[1:04:10] we still have the septic systems. Are we, do we

[1:04:14] anticipate the other areas in the city that we're going

[1:04:16] to see this again? It's very well possible. So, uh,

[1:04:21] we don't know what's going on. You know, hundreds of

[1:04:23] feet deep in every square mile of the city. There

[1:04:27] are other areas in the city that do have these

[1:04:29] types of settlements. Um, we have one right now that

[1:04:33] was in the UEP area, which, um, council has approved

[1:04:37] the purchase of repurposed properties for boat ramps and things

[1:04:41] like that, uh, potential for stormwater. But the bottom line

[1:04:44] is you don't know until it's there. And so I

[1:04:47] can cite about four different locations throughout the city. However,

[1:04:50] they are much different than this one. Uh, they have

[1:04:52] settled over time, long period of time much slower rate

[1:04:57] of settlement. Uh, this location is settling much quicker. Gotcha.

[1:05:01] Okay. Thank you, Mayor. There's no question yet. We can

[1:05:06] get you with a staff member if you have questions.

[1:05:09] Council member Kilring. Yeah. I was going to probe some

[1:05:11] of those same things, Phil. Uh, I'm very familiar with

[1:05:15] on a commercial project that you do those geotechnical analysis

[1:05:19] first. Have we established a boundary of this setback here?

[1:05:27] Do we know what the boundaries are. So it appears

[1:05:30] to be limited to this location. Uh, the geotechnical engineer

[1:05:34] did do some, uh, exploratory electromagnetic testing in the area

[1:05:38] to see if we can determine the horizontal terminus of

[1:05:41] the settlement. Uh, it looks at this point in time

[1:05:45] to be, uh, located right where it is in front

[1:05:48] of the seismic. He did seismic? Or what did he,

[1:05:52] what type did you say. What type of analysis? Electro.

[1:05:59] Effectively, um, like a ground penetrating radar. Okay. So seismic.

[1:06:04] Yeah. Okay. And, uh, basically he established limits based on

[1:06:08] that. Yes. And they've only determined that, uh, right now

[1:06:12] we're at the local point of settlement in front of

[1:06:14] the home. I would just based on my knowledge of

[1:06:18] the way the geostructure is here. I would assume that

[1:06:22] it's probably an isolated deal. I don't think we, like

[1:06:26] we have in North Florida where we got a lot

[1:06:29] of caving potential, uh, but it's probably as a result

[1:06:32] of either the loss of the water and the aquifer.

[1:06:37] I think as you described probably coming down, that would

[1:06:40] be my first guess at it without looking at the

[1:06:43] data. But I think you're headed in the right direction

[1:06:46] anyway. Um, there may be some other things you may

[1:06:50] want to do. Have you completed the total engineering on

[1:06:56] it and you have the prescribed scope project work right

[1:07:01] now for this one? Yes. So, uh, we worked with

[1:07:04] our geotechnical consultant to develop a specification for a repair.

[1:07:08] And that's what this purchase is not to exceed 500,

[1:07:11] 000 to install those grout columns. And the word came

[1:07:14] to me, we did electro resistivity testing. And so that's

[1:07:17] what we did for the horizontal terminus. All right. Thank

[1:07:20] you, Mayor. Councilmember that. Yeah, Mayor, this is one of

[1:07:25] those that gets interesting. All right. Because they asked a

[1:07:29] very specific question. I kind of caught wind of it

[1:07:31] about, we need some help with our driveway because it's,

[1:07:34] we can't get in our driveway. So they're here asking

[1:07:36] the city for help. This particular ordinance specifically addresses the

[1:07:41] roadway. In front of the property. If I heard you

[1:07:46] clearly, we started throwing terms out there. And certainly I

[1:07:50] follow you geotechnical services and two seven feet. But the

[1:07:53] end of the day, the question was, is a city

[1:07:57] able to help them. It was preceded by the fact

[1:07:59] that what they asked to that question based on what

[1:08:01] I'm hearing is no. But I'm hearing that we have

[1:08:04] entities within the community. That will help. Now what, and

[1:08:10] I'm very thankful for all of those communities, but you

[1:08:12] know, it's one of those no good deeds going punished.

[1:08:15] I'm saying suggesting it's hard to, for someone like me

[1:08:19] to understand, wait a minute, there was a problem with

[1:08:21] the road in front of the house. And hurting hearing

[1:08:24] from the testimony their thoughts are, well, because of the

[1:08:27] problem with the road, ours in front of the house,

[1:08:29] then thus my garage gets damaged. So it makes sense

[1:08:33] to them. I say, well, wait a minute. You need

[1:08:35] to help me fix it. That makes a lot of

[1:08:36] sense. But I do follow what you're saying when he's

[1:08:39] saying, well, no, it's not really. There was something going

[1:08:41] on at your personal property, which takes the liability off

[1:08:45] of the city. That doesn't really square with anybody starting

[1:08:48] here, but that is the answer. As we move forward,

[1:08:51] this ordinance, which I am full support of. But I

[1:08:55] will maybe counsel we need to have a conversation because

[1:08:58] we don't have a comprehensive policy for, this is one

[1:09:02] of those one offs for me that I'm suggesting that

[1:09:05] we might need to look at because although this is

[1:09:07] going to get taken care of the way I understand

[1:09:10] it by, um, some partners of the city. We might

[1:09:14] want to address that downstream. What happens? Cause you're right.

[1:09:18] We won't be able to tell until we'll get there.

[1:09:21] But saying to a person, well, I know you okay

[1:09:23] until we put the road, but the business came in

[1:09:25] and now it's on you. I don't know if we're

[1:09:27] palatable that. So in a nutshell, what I'm saying is

[1:09:30] I'm in support of support the ordinance, but understanding that's

[1:09:34] not that we're doing it. There are other entities that

[1:09:37] are going to help you. And then how we make

[1:09:39] that how we partner with them or get with them,

[1:09:44] the business to ensure that it's done. It's something that

[1:09:47] I guess we need to come downstream. I don't know

[1:09:49] if that helps at all. But, and I'll be free

[1:09:52] to talk with you now, by the way, but I'm

[1:09:54] glad that it's going to get taken care of.

[1:10:04] I hear you. I hope I was trying to articulate

[1:10:07] that from up here. So I get where you're coming

[1:10:09] from. So I'll see you. I will talk and we'll

[1:10:13] talk. But we're going to get, we're going to get

[1:10:14] it done. All right. But for the city matter, we

[1:10:17] do need to have this conversation when we have issues

[1:10:19] like this. So things are not happening. And we're like,

[1:10:22] Oh, that's an owner's responsibility. That's all I'm saying to

[1:10:25] the council. All right. And we'll see you at break

[1:10:27] or after the meeting. All right. Thank you. That's all

[1:10:30] council member Steini. Thank you Mayor. For what it's worth.

[1:10:34] This is more common than many people think. It doesn't

[1:10:37] tend to happen in this, uh, great and instance. Uh,

[1:10:42] but on home sites, uh, based on how, uh, Cape

[1:10:48] Coral was, was developed, um, and, and over the years,

[1:10:54] um, the canals being dug out, uh, the materials and

[1:10:57] where they were taken. Um, have caused some problems, uh,

[1:11:01] in other areas of the county where that debris was

[1:11:03] taken. Uh, and so for instance in my life outside

[1:11:09] of council, um, if we are not going to do

[1:11:13] geotechnical, um, analysis on a home site where we will

[1:11:18] build the homeowner actually signs off a release that says

[1:11:23] they're okay with not having geotesting done. Because what geotesting

[1:11:27] can show is that there is some subterranean support required

[1:11:31] because of, um, soil conditions that are found like we're

[1:11:36] finding here. Um, as bad as you would see here,

[1:11:41] but you'll see many homes that have, the cracks in

[1:11:45] the sides of the walls because the home is settling.

[1:11:47] We all see the advertisements on television about the companies

[1:11:51] that will come out and they'll support foundations because of

[1:11:55] cracks in the wall. Doors not being able to open

[1:11:58] so on and so forth. Um, that, that has everything

[1:12:01] to do with the conditions of, uh, the subterranean soils.

[1:12:05] And so, um, it is so, um, site specific, uh,

[1:12:10] that oftentimes, uh, those subterranean supports will be needed on

[1:12:15] one home site. And on the very next home site

[1:12:18] next door, they are not needed. Uh, and so it

[1:12:20] is very, very, very sight specific. And so, um, the

[1:12:26] fact that we've, the city's responsible for how it's affecting

[1:12:31] the city property, um, the fact that we're trying to

[1:12:33] get someone engaged to help with the private property, uh,

[1:12:36] it's, it's still the same issue. And it literally can

[1:12:39] come up anywhere. And to try to geotest 120 square

[1:12:45] miles all at once, pretty tough. So thank you. Council

[1:12:53] Member Kadu. Thank you, Mayor. Did I hear the homeowner

[1:12:56] say that he thinks this started after the 7 -

[1:12:58] Eleven started. I believe that is their opinion. The city

[1:13:04] has hired our consultant to determine the opinion of probable

[1:13:08] cause of the settlement. And at this point in time,

[1:13:11] they are attributing the subsidence to the reduced levels in

[1:13:16] the aquifer. Is the 7 - Eleven on City water

[1:13:19] and sewer. I do not have an answer to that

[1:13:23] question. If the city would look to see if the

[1:13:27] 7 - Eleven is on the well, did the 7

[1:13:31] - Eleven do a CO technical study. The 7 -

[1:13:34] Eleven did do a geotechnical study. Okay. That's part of

[1:13:36] their process, yes. Okay, so if they have a well,

[1:13:41] could that be contributing to this problem? Based on our

[1:13:44] discussion with the geotechnical consultant, they did not think it

[1:13:47] did. Okay. Thank you. Councilmember last year. Thank you, Mayor.

[1:13:53] One last quick point. Just thinking about this and we're

[1:13:57] concerned about fault, I guess. And given that the state

[1:14:02] preempted us to not be able to do building more

[1:14:07] touriums. And he's saying this happened within the last five,

[1:14:10] six years. Would this state have any culpability in this?

[1:14:14] In other words, would the South Florida water management district

[1:14:19] have any fault in this given that we were still

[1:14:22] building when the aquifer was obviously low and they mandate

[1:14:26] that for us? I mean, in your opinion, I would

[1:14:29] not know the legal ramifications for the state or any

[1:14:33] other agency based on that. However, what I will say

[1:14:35] is that although the aquifer was depleted, we were not

[1:14:39] below the levels to where they issued that type of

[1:14:42] order. Uh, so what I would say is, um. Should

[1:14:46] a moratorium have been instituted at that time, I believe

[1:14:49] it would have been based on the levels that they

[1:14:50] were monitoring. I don't have the details on how far

[1:14:53] off we were or what they were utilizing as they're

[1:14:56] mitigating factor and when they actually do that, uh, but

[1:14:59] what I will say is the timing, uh, the five

[1:15:02] to six years and it happened just within the past

[1:15:04] year, year and a half. Makes sense from a water

[1:15:07] shortage perspective. We were at a critical water shortage right

[1:15:10] around that time. So, uh, they do seem to align.

[1:15:14] And it does appear that, um, you know, that, uh,

[1:15:17] was incorporated into the consultants result of the cause. Could

[1:15:22] you maybe talk with, um, public works director, Matt Williams

[1:15:27] and ask him his opinion. And then someone let us

[1:15:30] know. I would just be curious if anyone has spoken

[1:15:33] to the South Florida water management, um, organization to see

[1:15:39] if there have any fault in this or if any,

[1:15:45] you know, they didn't think about this maybe during that

[1:15:47] time when the aquifer was low. True. We can ask

[1:15:50] that question. That would be great. Thank you, Mayor. Okay.

[1:15:57] 26. Motion to approve. Any other discussion. Sand none, Madam

[1:16:03] City Clark, please call the role. Thank you. Lastra. Aye.

[1:16:06] Lehman. Long. Aye. Steinky? Aye. Donnell. Aye. Gunter? Aye. Kaduk?

[1:16:13] Aye. Kill rain. Aye. Eight eyes motion carried. Okay. Move

[1:16:17] on. Next one is resolution 231 - 26. Council member

[1:16:22] long. You pulled that. I'll give you the floor. Thank

[1:16:26] you, Mayor. So I had a question on this one,

[1:16:28] mostly with not necessarily with regards to the subject of

[1:16:31] the protest or the subject of the bid itself. But

[1:16:35] the protest procedures. So I don't know Mr. Wanda. I

[1:16:39] think this is probably a legal question. I don't know

[1:16:41] if the attorney's office is prepared. To ask. It's just

[1:16:46] a, if you're reading the face of the ordinance, it

[1:16:48] bit more or less is goes through our procedures, which

[1:16:51] are copied from state statute with regards to Dola hearings

[1:16:53] and those sorts of things. Um, it says that the

[1:16:57] city council approved a resolution. Basically directing itself or the

[1:17:04] city attorney's office too forward. This protest who DOA. Where

[1:17:11] are we on the same page? Yes. And then the

[1:17:16] factual basis, I guess that we've been provided is that.

[1:17:18] You reached out to the protester, you know, as required

[1:17:24] by statute in our code. To sort of mitigate or

[1:17:29] mediate, so to speak. They failed to reach out to

[1:17:33] you. Now you're coming back to us and under the

[1:17:36] same provision. That you brought forth the resolution for us

[1:17:40] to forward it to Doha. Now you're telling us to

[1:17:43] not. Well, the way we're viewing it is we've tried

[1:17:48] to speak with them as of July 10th. If you

[1:17:51] see the attachment, uh, we emailed their lawyer. We obviously

[1:17:54] can't speak with the individual. We got no response at

[1:17:58] July 10th email and the telephone call that was left.

[1:18:02] We then followed up with a follow - up email

[1:18:05] on August 3rd again, letting them know that if, if

[1:18:08] they don't engage forward, we're essentially Trinity as an abandonment

[1:18:12] of that appeal of that protest. And then more importantly

[1:18:16] as of last Friday, we again try to reach out

[1:18:19] to the attorney for, um, the protester. And we got

[1:18:22] no response letting them know that this matter was coming

[1:18:25] for the council for recommendation of denial. Because at this

[1:18:28] point in time, the way we're viewing it under the

[1:18:32] law is they've essentially abandoned their protest and they're not

[1:18:36] moving forward with it. Okay. And as you know, the

[1:18:39] doe hearing is not binding on us. It's a recommendation.

[1:18:42] So. That's correct. And I just, I don't want to,

[1:18:44] I don't want to let stuff fall through the cracks

[1:18:47] inadvertently. And skip some sort of procedural issue. Because I

[1:18:51] mean, if we, if we suggested or we acknowledged or

[1:18:54] directed you to forwarded to DOA. And it wasn't forwarded

[1:18:57] to Doha. And I understand why. Should we, should we

[1:19:02] forward it to DO and let them kick it back

[1:19:04] just so that we, cause now I'm seeing that they,

[1:19:07] and I'm not questioning the way you've done it. I

[1:19:08] just want, I'm for the organization's sake. I see somehow

[1:19:11] and I've looked through the materials that the, the notice

[1:19:14] that, uh, that one of our assistant city attorney said

[1:19:17] provided to them just basically saying, Hey, we're going to

[1:19:19] afford a council was, uh, illegal firm. And so I

[1:19:24] don't see anywhere in here that we've corresponded with them

[1:19:26] prior. So if they retain counsel, I just want to

[1:19:28] make sure that, cause typically an in particular shuts and

[1:19:32] bowen. They're not necessarily going to fail to respond. I

[1:19:36] agree with you. I don't want them to like be

[1:19:38] laying and wait for us to mess up procedurally when

[1:19:41] I agree we have a solid case if it was

[1:19:43] afforded to do it. I don't have any issue with

[1:19:45] our position. In fact, I would agree with it. I

[1:19:48] just don't want to run into a position where. We

[1:19:51] were supposed to send it to them because technically you're

[1:19:54] supposed to send it to them within seven days if

[1:19:56] they, if they requested and we didn't. Right. And it's

[1:20:00] their obligation to proceed forward. I don't have a problem.

[1:20:03] I, you know what I'm saying? I understand. I'm not

[1:20:06] alleging that you guys did anything wrong, but I think

[1:20:07] if it goes to dough it and they ignore it,

[1:20:10] then that's fine. And we can say, and we can

[1:20:11] wipe our hands clean of it. Um, but if Florida

[1:20:13] statute says that they, if they request a formal hearing

[1:20:16] that we have to advance it in seven days. And

[1:20:18] then we also have a resolution where we've directed you

[1:20:20] guys to advance it. Um, and it was in advanced.

[1:20:25] And maybe prudent and understanding, I don't want to create

[1:20:28] an issue with her. No, I'm not. It shouldn't be

[1:20:30] one. Um, maybe to tie up that loose end as

[1:20:33] you so maybe we reset it. For the next, maybe

[1:20:39] not the next regular council, maybe the year one on.

[1:20:44] October. 7th. You mean to have let's go through it

[1:20:50] again. What's that? You're talking about to have counsel review

[1:20:53] again? No, no, just to, to reset this resolution for

[1:20:56] the October 7th regular conversation. I'll just so you can

[1:20:59] look into it. That's correct. Okay. And I guess. If

[1:21:03] you look and you and you determine that you want

[1:21:05] to send it, we could just remove that from the

[1:21:06] agenda and we'll just send it up and kick it

[1:21:08] back. That way I don't want to, I don't want

[1:21:10] to necessarily waste the time of not. We're going to,

[1:21:12] we're going to, I'm very confident in the outcome of

[1:21:15] it. I just don't want to screw it up for

[1:21:17] no reason. I get it. Just because there's a question.

[1:21:20] I appreciate you. You answering those questions. Yeah. If we

[1:21:22] could just open and continue it to the October 7th

[1:21:25] regular council meeting and then in the event that it's

[1:21:28] not resolved by then, uh, then what I'll do is

[1:21:30] I'll just have removed. Madam City Claire, could I make

[1:21:32] that motion to continue it to said meeting for the

[1:21:35] reasons stated. Thank you, ma'am. Thank you. Sir, a second

[1:21:40] to the motion. Any other discussion. Madam City clerk, please,

[1:21:47] uh, call the role for the continuance. Lastraye. Aye. Clemen.

[1:21:52] Aye. Long. Aye. Steinky? Aye. Donnell. Aye. Enter. Aye. Taduk?

[1:21:59] Aye. Hill rain? Aye. Eight eyes motion carry. Okay. Move

[1:22:03] on a resolution 241 - 26. Council member Kaduk, I

[1:22:07] believe you pulled this. I'll give you the floor. Thank

[1:22:10] you, Mayor. If our chief of police could just give

[1:22:12] a quick overview and then I will ask my question.

[1:22:20] Good evening. Anthony, size, more chief of police. Uh, the

[1:22:24] overview is this is a voca grant or victim of

[1:22:27] crime grant act that we've had for many, many years.

[1:22:31] That is a supplemental funding source for a victim advocate

[1:22:33] program. Thank you. And thank you Mr. City Manager for

[1:22:37] adding what I've asked for with the reimbursement of funds.

[1:22:40] So with that being said, we are now being reimbursed

[1:22:43] money that we spent. Can we save this money for

[1:22:47] fiscal year 2027. I will defer to the finance department

[1:22:52] for that. Crystal feast financial services director. Um, this

[1:23:01] particular grant is for fiscal year 27, the grant period

[1:23:04] is 101, 26 through, um, next September. And so it

[1:23:09] will be incorporated into next fiscal year's budget. Into the

[1:23:12] budget because now we've received the money. So now we

[1:23:14] actually get to move the money forward. We haven't received

[1:23:17] it. So it's still reimbursement of funds. Right. So what

[1:23:22] happens is as we incur the cost, we submit it

[1:23:25] submitted to the grant for grantor for reimbursement. So I'll

[1:23:29] see it for budget moment four. Nope. The funds will

[1:23:32] be the grant funds will be incorporated into the budget.

[1:23:35] So we will already have those funds budgeted, um, and

[1:23:38] the associated expenditures. Okay. Sorry. I'm going to just pick

[1:23:41] your brain just a little bit more because I'm thinking

[1:23:43] like a normal person. If you're incorporating it into the

[1:23:46] budget and we've already spent the money and you're being

[1:23:49] reimbursed. We haven't already spent the money. Then how are

[1:23:52] you being reimbursed once we do incur those personnel costs.

[1:23:57] We will then submit a reimbursement request to the grantor.

[1:24:01] And then they will then provide us with the grant

[1:24:03] funds. But because we are approving this ahead of time,

[1:24:09] we can then incorporate that into the budget so it's

[1:24:12] part of our spending plan for next fiscal year. Okay.

[1:24:17] So we're not really being reimbursed. Well, we are. Can

[1:24:21] you say it in a different way? Try to help

[1:24:22] me understand. So we are being reimbursed as far from

[1:24:28] like, um, curly experiments. But we're spending the money and

[1:24:33] we're budgeting the money. So we're. How are we being

[1:24:36] reimbursed? Because we will incur the expenses up front before

[1:24:39] we actually receive cash, those grant funds. Right. Okay. So

[1:24:44] we're in current cars. We're going to pay for it.

[1:24:47] Exactly. And so then this is going to reimburse it.

[1:24:51] But that money was already spent. So I'm asking, can

[1:24:55] we move that money once we have it. Cause it's

[1:24:59] not like a zero sum balance, right? It doesn't just

[1:25:01] zero itself out. So what's different is. In the budget,

[1:25:05] the spending plan, we're budgeting those expenditures or budgeted using

[1:25:09] grant funds. So it's not like we're using local general

[1:25:12] fund revenue or local revenue to pay for those expenditures

[1:25:16] first and then get reversed. We're going to see this

[1:25:18] in the general fund. I would just see this in

[1:25:20] a grant fund. Correct. Okay. Thank you. Oh, the lights

[1:25:25] are entertain a motion for resolution 241 - 26. Push

[1:25:28] into approve. Second. Any other discussion. Saying, no, Madam City

[1:25:34] Clark, please call the role. Lastra. Aye. Lehman. Aye. Long.

[1:25:41] Steinkey? Aye. Donnell? Aye. Gunter? Aye. Kaduk? Aye. Kill rain.

[1:25:47] Aye. Eight eyes, motion carried. Okay. 9B is appointment subordi.

[1:25:51] We do not have anything listed. 10C is unfinished business.

[1:25:55] C1 is follow - up items for council. There's none

[1:25:57] listed. Uh, C2 is follow - up items for city

[1:26:00] manager. Management. There's nothing listed there. Uh, item D is

[1:26:05] new business, non - listed. Item 11 is ordinance and

[1:26:08] resolutions, first of which is 11a quasi - judicial hearings.

[1:26:13] There are no quasi - judicial hearings tonight. So we'll

[1:26:16] move on to 11b, which are legislative public hearings first,

[1:26:21] of which as ordinance 45 - 26, Madam City clerk,

[1:26:24] please read title. Ordinance 45 - 26, an ordinance of

[1:26:28] the mayor and city council of the city of Cape

[1:26:31] Coral, Florida, amending the city of Cape Coral, Florida, land

[1:26:35] development code by amending section 5. 2. 1 general requirements.

[1:26:40] And section 5. 2. 4 attached and detached garages. As

[1:26:45] set forth within Article 5, Development Standards Chapter 2, Accessory

[1:26:49] Structures. We're guarding attached and detached garages, providing for several

[1:26:54] ability and an effective date. I'll turn it over to

[1:26:58] chat. Okay. Good evening, Mayor City Council for the record,

[1:27:01] Chad Boykour, Principal Planner of the City's Plain Division. This

[1:27:03] is an amendment to our LDC. It deals with attach

[1:27:07] and detached garages. Uh, the sections affected our 521A 524.

[1:27:13] What we're doing is we're fixing a internal inconsistency with

[1:27:16] some of our language. We're allowing an additional height increase

[1:27:19] for detached garages. Uh, we are also clarifying some language

[1:27:23] within 524 and then some additional language for that extra

[1:27:27] height. Uh, the first thing we're doing is fixing a

[1:27:31] inconsistency within our lane development code. One part of our

[1:27:35] code required a 20 yard rear 20 foot rear yard

[1:27:39] setback for, uh, detached garages. Another only had a 10

[1:27:43] foot. We always go text over table. So what we're

[1:27:46] doing is just adding, um, the table. We're going to

[1:27:49] make, so it's 20 feet. We were enforcing a 20

[1:27:51] foot rear setback. Uh, this is just a fix any

[1:27:54] issues with, uh, the code going forward. Also within this

[1:27:58] table, we are going to increase the height for detached

[1:28:00] garage to 16 feet from 14 feet. Have some research

[1:28:05] as to why we are doing that. Uh, most average

[1:28:07] height for RVs is between 11 to 13 feet. I

[1:28:11] suppose you could have some that exceed that. We have

[1:28:13] a chart that's in front of you that details, um,

[1:28:16] all the way from the travel trailers all the way

[1:28:18] up to the class A motorhomes, which are about 13

[1:28:21] and a half feet. And talking to contractors and builders

[1:28:24] around the area, um, to avoid some of these attached

[1:28:28] garages that have these long breezeways, uh, that the breeze

[1:28:31] weights may be somewhat unnecessary and they're only installing them

[1:28:34] to have the additional height. We figured what we could

[1:28:37] do is we could add the two feet, the detach

[1:28:39] garages, hopefully clear up a lot of, um, the issues

[1:28:42] that we have with the breezeways so that people can

[1:28:44] put their RVs in there just within the detached garage

[1:28:47] and not have to go through the extra expense of

[1:28:49] constructing that breezeway from the house to the garage. Uh,

[1:28:52] so what we're doing is that 16 feet should clear

[1:28:55] up most of the issues. Um, it's possible that people

[1:28:57] still, um, may have an RV that's bigger than that.

[1:29:00] But hopefully the 16 feet will get them the way

[1:29:02] they need to go. Uh, also what we're looking to

[1:29:04] do is clarify something that occasionally trips builders up and

[1:29:09] homeowners up is that we are, uh, specifying the minimum

[1:29:12] dimensions of garages. We're used to say that it was

[1:29:15] a minimum dimension of 14 feet by 20 feet. You

[1:29:18] can interpret that as, uh, the 14 feet was the

[1:29:21] depth rather than the width. What we're going to do

[1:29:23] is here and say is that the 14, it's 14

[1:29:25] feet in width and 20 feet of depth for of

[1:29:28] unaffected space for garages, uh, that should hopefully, uh, clear

[1:29:32] up any, any sort of confusion we had with builders

[1:29:35] and homeowners going forward. Um, and then lastly, we're also

[1:29:39] doing that with the breezeway as well, because we didn't

[1:29:42] specify width and length. And here for the breezeways, we're

[1:29:45] going to establish that the breezeways, if you were going

[1:29:47] to attach your garage, our four feet in width and

[1:29:51] eight feet in length. And I'm here for any further

[1:29:53] questions. Okay. Thank you. Uh, public hearing, any one wishing

[1:29:58] to speak on ordinance 45 - 26, please come forward.

[1:30:02] Saying none public hearing, are you coming.

[1:30:14] My question. Is this. If you're changing the height and

[1:30:19] what happens if somebody needs an extra foot, are you

[1:30:23] going to tell them they can't do it? I mean,

[1:30:24] this is really kind of invasive. If I had to

[1:30:27] build a garage for an RV, um, I'm just curious.

[1:30:32] Is this just restricting it if they need any more?

[1:30:34] There's no leeway. This is it. Uh, yeah, I mean,

[1:30:39] we set standards for setbacks height, all, you know, all

[1:30:43] through our code. This would give them the extra two

[1:30:45] feet. If they needed, if they were looking to detach

[1:30:49] garage at a height greater than 16 feet, then they

[1:30:52] could either apply for a variance, which is within our

[1:30:55] code that goes before the hearing examiner, uh, or they

[1:30:58] could build the attached garage, which has a maximum height

[1:31:02] of 30 to 35 feet. Is there a reason for

[1:31:05] that maximum height. Why did you pick that particular height?

[1:31:10] I mean, houses don't have maximum heights. Apartments don't. What's

[1:31:14] the reason? Actually, single family homes do have maximum heights.

[1:31:19] I'm not saying, but it's not 16 feet. I'm just

[1:31:21] asking, what was the reason? Chad, Chad. Can you let

[1:31:25] the resident ask their questions and then respond later? Okay.

[1:31:28] Oh, you don't have to answer now? I didn't know

[1:31:30] that. I asked all your questions and didn't hold it.

[1:31:33] So I just curious, you picked a height. What was

[1:31:36] the reason for that height? And if somebody needed more

[1:31:40] than that, you just said they had to go for

[1:31:43] a variance. But what determined that particular, who determined that?

[1:31:47] Was it safety reason or just, that was it? Was

[1:31:51] it for a safety reason hurricane reasons? What was the

[1:31:54] reason? Is that all your comments? That's it. All right.

[1:31:56] Thank you. Go ahead, Chad. Are we referencing the 14

[1:32:01] feet height for detached garages that I think our question

[1:32:04] was how did we determine 35 feet as that? For

[1:32:08] Singapami Holmes, I think that was 30 feet for the

[1:32:10] garage. Single flame homes are 30, I want to say

[1:32:15] 35 feet. And that has been usually around two and

[1:32:18] a half stories, which is a standard height. It's been

[1:32:20] that way within Cape Coral for 30, 40 years. Uh,

[1:32:25] deed chat garage height of 14 feet had been that

[1:32:27] way. Uh, in terms of just not having some, it's

[1:32:30] an accessory structure. So we don't want to have an

[1:32:32] accessory structure that has, um, the same height as a,

[1:32:35] as a single flame at home. Generally, you want those

[1:32:37] to be a little lower. Um, and then the 16

[1:32:39] feet was based upon the research that we did to

[1:32:42] allow for most of the RVs to fit comfortably within

[1:32:44] those detached garages. And if I recall, we actually increase

[1:32:47] that. Height. We would have to based on Senate Bill

[1:32:51] 180. We cannot be more restrictive. We're actually loosening the

[1:32:54] restrictions here. That's right. Okay. Anybody else wishing to speak

[1:32:59] on, uh, ordinance 45 - 26, please come forward. Saying

[1:33:06] none public hearing is now closed. Motion to approve ordinance

[1:33:10] 4526. All right. And I'll open it up for council

[1:33:14] discussion. Council members thank you. Thank you, Mayor. Just a

[1:33:19] quick question. And obviously you shared your research with us

[1:33:23] for those types of vehicles that were given that extra

[1:33:27] height for, obviously. Other than just that data that you

[1:33:32] provided us with, did we involve the construction industry at

[1:33:35] all in our thought process around this and get feedback

[1:33:39] from them? We did ask, uh, couple of contractors around

[1:33:42] the city. I couldn't recall this. You know, we had

[1:33:45] done this research a little while ago. Uh, we did

[1:33:47] ask some of the contractors that did a lot of

[1:33:49] the detached garage construction. And most of them that I,

[1:33:54] that I spoke to in doing this research said that

[1:33:56] the 16 feet should accommodate most of the work that

[1:33:59] they're looking to do for the RVs. Okay. Thank you.

[1:34:04] Okay. See, no other lights on. We got a motion

[1:34:06] in second, Madam City clerk, please call the role. Lastra.

[1:34:10] Aye. Lehman. Long. Steinkee. Aye. Donnell. Aye. Gunter. Kadoo? Aye.

[1:34:18] Kill rain. All right. Eight eyes motion carried. Okay. Move

[1:34:21] on to ordinance 51 - 26, Madam City clerk. Please

[1:34:24] read title. Ordinance 51 - 26. An ordinance of the

[1:34:29] mayor and city council of the city of Cape Coral,

[1:34:32] Florida, approving the Second Amendment of conservation easement, passive recreational

[1:34:36] uses at yellow fever creek preserve. Between the city of

[1:34:40] Cape Coral, Florida and the South Florida water management district.

[1:34:44] Authorizing the mayor to execute the Second Amendment. Providing for

[1:34:48] several ability and an effective date. Okay, thank you, alternative

[1:34:52] staff. Good evening, Mayor City Council members. Don Andrews with

[1:34:56] the public works real estate division. Ordinance 51 - 26

[1:35:02] authorizes the Mayor to execute the Second Amendment of conservation

[1:35:06] easement at Yellow Fever Creek preserved to permit passive recreational

[1:35:12] uses necessary for the construction of three boardwalks and associated

[1:35:18] viewing platforms. Yellow fever creek preserve is located in northeast

[1:35:24] Cape Coral on approximately 198 acres. In 1997, the city

[1:35:30] granted a conservation easement over portions of the yellow fever

[1:35:34] creek preserved parcel. To South Florida water management district as

[1:35:39] required mitigation for the construction of the Dell Prado North

[1:35:45] Boulevard extension. In 2019, the city entered into an interlocal

[1:35:51] agreement with Lee County for the design construction and operation

[1:35:55] of a water management system. That was the large pond

[1:35:59] that recently was built. Connecting yellow fever creek system to

[1:36:04] the Weir 29 system to create an interconnect system facilitating

[1:36:09] the conveyance of excess water flow in 2021. The city

[1:36:15] approved the First Amendment to the conservation easement adding the

[1:36:19] U. S. Army Course of Engineers as a third party

[1:36:22] beneficiary. The city has received a tourist development grant to

[1:36:26] construct the three boardwalks, each having a viewing platform within

[1:36:31] the conservation easement area. The construction of the boardwalks has

[1:36:35] created the need to amend the conservation easement for the

[1:36:38] second time. I can stand by for questions. Okay, thank

[1:36:43] you. I'll now open up public hearing in one wish

[1:36:45] and a speaker and ordinance 51 - 26. Please come

[1:36:48] forward. You have a question. Please, Owen. Does

[1:36:58] this amendment authorize only the specific passive recreational improvements being

[1:37:02] proposed or doesn't give great broader authority for future development

[1:37:06] within the conservation easement. This distinction matters. If the amendment

[1:37:11] is narrowly narrowed limited to boardwalks and viewing platforms and

[1:37:15] related passive recreation, this looks like a good use of

[1:37:17] grant funding. And appropriate way to improve public access to

[1:37:21] the preserve. If it opens the door to a broader

[1:37:24] development later, counsel should know exactly what authorities granted before

[1:37:27] voting. Support the project, but protect the easement and answer

[1:37:30] the scope question first. Thank you. Anyone wishing, uh, else

[1:37:35] wish to speak on ordinance 51 - 26. See a

[1:37:40] numb public hearing is now closed. I'll entertain a motion

[1:37:42] regarding ordinance 51 - 26. Motion to approve. Second. And,

[1:37:50] uh, council members, thank you. Is that light on from

[1:37:52] before? Do you have a. Sir. Thank you, Mayor. Uh,

[1:37:54] I just wanted to publicly recognize the support that we

[1:37:58] received from the tourist development council. And that's something that

[1:38:01] we'd worked on in the past or request that we

[1:38:03] made that was, uh, uh, fully approved. And so, uh,

[1:38:06] thanks to the county and TDC for providing the funding

[1:38:09] for the boardwalks that are going to go into that

[1:38:12] spot. That's it. See, now the lights on Madam City

[1:38:15] clerk, please call a roll. Lastra. Aye. Lehman. Aye. Long.

[1:38:22] Aye. Steinkey? Aye. Donnell. Aye. Gunter? Aye. Kaduk? Aye. Kilrain?

[1:38:28] Aye. Eight eyes, motion carried. Hey, move on item 11

[1:38:31] C introductions, first of which is ordinance 51 - 26.

[1:38:35] Madam City clerk. Please read title set to public hearing

[1:38:37] date. Ordinance 50 - 26. An ordinance of the mayor

[1:38:43] and city council of the city of Cape Coral, Florida

[1:38:45] authorizing the issuance of not to exceed. 10, 100, 000

[1:38:50] dollars in principle amount of a stormwater utility revenue bond

[1:38:54] of the city of Cape Coral, Florida. To finance costs

[1:38:57] of the acquisition, construction, and equipping of various capital improvements

[1:39:01] to the city's stormwater utility system. Pledging the here and

[1:39:05] described pledged funds to secure the payment of the debt

[1:39:08] service on the bond, providing for certain rights of the

[1:39:11] holders of the bond and providing an effective date. The

[1:39:14] public hearing will be September 16, 2026. Okay, thank you.

[1:39:20] Any discussion by staff or council. See, a numb will

[1:39:23] move on to ordinance 52 - 26 Madam City clerk.

[1:39:27] There's read title set to public hearing date. Ordinance 52

[1:39:31] - 26, an ordinance of the mayor and city council

[1:39:34] of the city of Cape Coral, Florida. Amending ordinance number

[1:39:37] 23 - 04, ordinance number 56 - 07, an ordinance

[1:39:43] number 31 - 24 of the city of Cape Coral,

[1:39:46] Florida to increase the aggregate principal amount of commercial paper

[1:39:50] obligations that may be outstanding under the city's commercial paper

[1:39:54] program at any one time from 150 million dollars to

[1:39:59] 500 million dollars and providing for an effective date. The

[1:40:02] public hearing will be September 16, 2026. Thank you. Any

[1:40:07] discussion by staff or council. Council Member Kadu. Thank you,

[1:40:12] Mayor. Okay. I did a lot of research on this.

[1:40:17] I watched the May 1st, 2024 video, which had ordinance

[1:40:22] 31 - 24. And in my humble opinion, I think

[1:40:26] staff should update that briefing. And at the very least,

[1:40:29] have it as backup, but also brief the public on

[1:40:32] it. Uh, I watched the whole meeting. It was good.

[1:40:36] It addressed the amount, and that was lowering it. And

[1:40:38] now we're raising it. So does this include any funds

[1:40:42] for the yacht club. Festival park, Bimini East. If you

[1:40:47] could answer, that would help, because I have more questions.

[1:40:51] UEP. So this increase to 350 million is specifically related

[1:41:01] to our revenue sufficiency study that was presented in May.

[1:41:09] I'm sorry, in April, where counsel was presented with some

[1:41:12] options for funding. Future projects for the utility system. Um,

[1:41:19] at that time, we got a consensus to move forward

[1:41:22] with the commercial paper program to fund a number of

[1:41:25] those projects within that, um, that. So it's water and

[1:41:28] sewer related projects, not UEP projects. Not yacht club. Not

[1:41:32] yacht club. The 350 million dollar increase is specific to

[1:41:37] water and sewer. Perfect. Just because we had a speaker

[1:41:39] in public input ask about that. I wanted to clear

[1:41:42] that up. Sorry to jump around ADHD style, but Bimini

[1:41:46] East is on commercial paper, correct? The funding used to

[1:41:52] purchase that property was through commercial paper. Okay. When I

[1:41:55] watched back the May 1st, 2024 video ordered into 31

[1:41:59] - 24. Mr. Mason said that commercial paper is only

[1:42:02] good for 270 days. It's usually a three to nine

[1:42:05] month period. How are we doing that with Bimini East?

[1:42:09] It's a rolling paper. Or how does that work. So,

[1:42:15] yes, each obligation is, has a maturity. We set by

[1:42:22] myself, uh, and the financial advisors we determined. So we've

[1:42:25] been rolling it for a certain period of time, depending

[1:42:28] on the market. Um, within the commercial paper program as

[1:42:32] a whole is 270 days, um, within it, each obligation,

[1:42:37] um, for instance, for Bimini East, we've took out a

[1:42:40] total of, you know, 46 million. That has been rolled

[1:42:44] for certain period of time based on staff, our management,

[1:42:48] uh, direction. Thank you. I know that has nothing to

[1:42:50] do with this one because it's water and sewer, but,

[1:42:52] um, I just wanted to learn about commercial paper. So

[1:42:55] how does commercial paper interest only payments. Factor into our

[1:43:00] budgeting funding amounts. So for the existing obligations under the

[1:43:07] commercial paper, we're able to estimate annual interest payments based

[1:43:12] on how long we expect to keep those funds, are

[1:43:16] those obligations within the commercial paper program. So it's part

[1:43:19] of the budget we estimate those annual payments. Okay. Not

[1:43:23] annual, but on an annual basis, but the interest payment.

[1:43:25] Yeah, it's monthly, interestingly. I get it. How does commercial

[1:43:28] paper impact our credit limit. Uh, it's factored in. And

[1:43:35] when we do, you know, the analysis, our debt capacity

[1:43:38] analysis, it's part of that. Okay. I also saw an

[1:43:42] ordinance 31 - 24 that every tranche would come forward.

[1:43:47] And this is, I wrote down exactly what Mark said.

[1:43:49] Every tranche would come forward, every project would come forward.

[1:43:53] And it would be a new ordinance authorizing the use.

[1:43:56] Is that still going to be correct for this. Yeah.

[1:43:59] So as an example of that, um, there have been

[1:44:04] either four or five authorizing ordinances after we reestablish the

[1:44:09] commercial paper program. There have been about four or five

[1:44:13] authorizing ordinances that we've brought forward for future fire, um,

[1:44:19] facilities, um, vehicles, excuse me, park facility improvements, um, so

[1:44:26] separate or authorizing ordinances have been brought forward already. So

[1:44:30] the plan for this 350 million dollar increase is to

[1:44:33] do the same. It will most likely just be one,

[1:44:37] um, authorizing ordinance for water and sewer improvement projects since

[1:44:43] it's one category of projects. It will most likely just

[1:44:46] be one. But yes, that will come forward. Thank you.

[1:44:49] And just to be clear, I think I know the

[1:44:52] answer, but I just want everyone to understand ordinance 52

[1:44:55] - 26, this intro is specific to water and sewer.

[1:45:00] UEP. The commercial paper, no. So it's not UEP, it's

[1:45:07] specific to the increase capital projects. Yes. Copper projects. Okay.

[1:45:12] The RO expansion. Um, and so when I say UEP,

[1:45:15] I want to make sure that you and I are

[1:45:17] talking about the same thing. Assessment, the assessment portion, it

[1:45:22] would not fund any of that because obviously that's funded

[1:45:24] by the assessments. The annual assessments that residents will pay.

[1:45:28] That's what I mean by it does not include that

[1:45:30] portion. Understood is there may be projects within a UEP

[1:45:33] area that our water and sewer related that aren't assessment

[1:45:37] funded. Um, that could very well fall into this category.

[1:45:40] Perfect. Thank you so much for the explanation. Council Member

[1:45:43] Kilring. Yeah. I just want to jump in here and

[1:45:46] mention that. I don't know of any other more effective

[1:45:50] or cost effect. The mechanism, then commercial paper for funding

[1:45:54] short term debt requirements. And it is truncated and must

[1:45:58] be turned and rolled over periodically. And, uh, the key

[1:46:03] to it is, uh, that analysis which we had done

[1:46:06] earlier in the year. And I agree with that. It

[1:46:09] should be repeated to updated. Uh, I think that it's

[1:46:12] important to make sure our debt service ratio, uh, on

[1:46:17] our coverage is within a compatible area for ourselves. So

[1:46:21] we don't lose our bond ratings. Um, and just from

[1:46:25] my recall, for my, what I can remember, uh, back

[1:46:29] in my private days, uh, if you got over a

[1:46:33] one and a quarter, you're okay. A one and a

[1:46:37] half debt service ratio, uh, is, is pretty good. And

[1:46:42] two is kind of like a rated. And you get

[1:46:46] in order to get a AAA, you got to be

[1:46:48] up around two eight death coverage. Uh, so I, that's

[1:46:51] the parameters that they typically look at. I forget what,

[1:46:54] uh, we were in pretty good shape at that last

[1:46:56] one, but we're expanding it now. You know, it'd be

[1:47:00] appropriate probably to look at that again and just see

[1:47:03] where we're at. So that makes me feel comfortable with

[1:47:06] where we're at and where we're proceeding so. Thank you.

[1:47:08] Thank you, Mayor. Council Member Last. Thank you, Mayor. And

[1:47:11] just real quick, Crystal, I just want to clarify for

[1:47:13] the public, as you explained it to me yesterday, um,

[1:47:16] it is more, uh, cost effective as Council Member Kilrin

[1:47:20] just stated, um, in terms of commercial paper versus bonds

[1:47:24] because we get to draw on it as we go.

[1:47:27] Correct. Whereas in a bond, we got to take all

[1:47:29] that money up front and then boom, we're paying that

[1:47:31] interest. And this lets us do it a little bit

[1:47:33] by little bit, correct? That's correct. We would only pay

[1:47:36] interest on what we borrow at that time versus the

[1:47:39] whole amount of. Thank you for letting me break it

[1:47:41] down. So simply, thank you, Mayor. Can I follow up

[1:47:46] on that in relation to Councilwoman Cadukes questioning in that.

[1:47:51] So when there was a question asked about each tranche

[1:47:55] will come forward with an ordinance. When we bring forward

[1:47:58] the ordinance to use commercial paper for the water wreck

[1:48:02] facility, I don't want the two questions to be misconstrued.

[1:48:07] If we pull multiple times for one project, we're going

[1:48:11] to get one authorization. Correct? Or are we planning on

[1:48:18] bringing an ordinance? No, in my thought it was one

[1:48:23] ordinance, but for the project. Okay. Well, as long as,

[1:48:26] all right. I just wanted to make sure the two

[1:48:28] answers didn't get crossed. Thank you for that. Yes. Don't

[1:48:32] need that. Okay. I meant tranche as in project, not

[1:48:37] each draw on the expansion. Yeah. Yeah. And the problem,

[1:48:41] it would just be a category really. So a number

[1:48:43] of water and sewer related projects may fall under that

[1:48:46] category. Right. And if it were Bimini East, that would

[1:48:48] be a different ordinance that would come forward. And I

[1:48:50] know I'm mixing that because we're specific to water and

[1:48:52] sewer, but that's what I would, that's what my thought

[1:48:54] process was. And just to conclude the three, uh, the

[1:48:57] 350 million is the increase to the commercial paper specific

[1:49:01] to water and sewer related projects. I just want to

[1:49:04] make sure I was clear on that. Okay. And to

[1:49:07] other comments, we'll move on to ordinance 54 - 26.

[1:49:11] Madam City clerk, please read title set to public date.

[1:49:15] Ordinance 54 - 26. An ordinance of the mayor in

[1:49:19] city council of the city of Cape Coral, Florida, authorizing

[1:49:22] the donation of surplus real property as further described here

[1:49:26] in to Lee County. Excuse me, to lead building industry

[1:49:31] association, builders care, ink of Florida not - for -

[1:49:34] profit corporation. Pursuant to section 2 - 15 of the

[1:49:38] city of Cape Coral, Florida, Code of Ordinances authorizing and

[1:49:42] directing the city manager and clerk to execute a special

[1:49:45] warranty deed conveying the aforementioned surplus real property to lead

[1:49:50] building industry association builders care ink of Florida not -

[1:49:54] for - profit corporation. Providing several ability and an effective

[1:49:58] date. The public hearing will be September 16, 2026. Mr.

[1:50:04] City, turning. Yes, thank you, Mayor. I just wanted to

[1:50:06] refresh the council's recollection at this originated originally from a

[1:50:10] committee of the whole meeting back on August 12th, which

[1:50:13] was fertilized by a formal motion that took place on

[1:50:16] August 19th of 2026. And this is the culmination of

[1:50:20] that motion that was done on 19th along with the

[1:50:22] final hearing, as was read by the clerk. So I

[1:50:25] just wanted to put that out there so that the

[1:50:28] understanding of confusion that will clear it up. Thank you.

[1:50:34] Hey, thank you. We will move on to item 12

[1:50:37] reports. Council member Donnell report. Council Member Kadu. No report.

[1:50:43] Council Member Killring. Yeah, I attended the court's second perjury

[1:50:48] on Saturday. And what done is they do up there.

[1:50:54] Looks like they're pretty enthusiastic about opportunities to bring in

[1:50:58] more income there. And it's looking better and better every

[1:51:02] time I go there. Uh, also had a meeting with

[1:51:06] some CCCIA personnel just updating them on activities that we're

[1:51:12] doing with BIA and general discussion on that. Um, I

[1:51:17] have a town hall meeting coming up September 26th. I

[1:51:21] take Christian noon 10 a. m. to noon. The charter

[1:51:27] school will be making a presentation here to update people

[1:51:32] on the good things that they're doing. And also that's

[1:51:35] going to be very tombling. And I open it up

[1:51:37] really to discussion about, uh, property taxes and other focus

[1:51:41] and impacts it out on the city. Um, also I

[1:51:46] would like to request a second. We have a, uh,

[1:51:52] trailer rental operation in the city, which is facing inability

[1:51:58] to rent 26 for trailers because of a change in

[1:52:02] ordinance. Uh, he was doing this business beforehand. And afterward,

[1:52:07] uh, the ordinance was changed so to his location is

[1:52:11] now not allowed to do 26 foot trailers. And looking

[1:52:15] for a waiver mechanism to do that. And I would

[1:52:18] like to pursue that. So if I could get a

[1:52:19] second to do that. I'll give you a second to

[1:52:24] work. Thank you. And that's it Mayor. Thank you. All

[1:52:29] right. Council member last year. Thank you, Mayor. Two quick

[1:52:31] things. First, I wanted to bring forward to counsel and

[1:52:34] just buy a show of hands if you agree. Um,

[1:52:37] national league, the cities is hosting their city summit on

[1:52:42] November 18th in Nashville, Tennessee. And, uh, I would like

[1:52:46] to let you all know that I would like to

[1:52:49] send, um, Connie Griglin, one of our legislative aides in

[1:52:53] the office to attend along with one youth council member.

[1:52:58] And the reason is because, um, this particular summit, our

[1:53:02] youth council member will actually get to work on the

[1:53:05] plan and the agenda for the National League of Cities

[1:53:08] Conference in March, the big one that we're raising money

[1:53:11] to send these kids to. So I just wanted to

[1:53:14] make sure you guys were all okay with it. There's

[1:53:16] no money coming out of the general fund. This is

[1:53:19] all in youth council budget. It's leftover money that we

[1:53:22] raise from last year. So that will cover the trip.

[1:53:25] It won't be any additional costs to taxpayers. Does everyone

[1:53:28] okay with that? Have a problem. Okay. Thank you. And

[1:53:31] then secondly, I know that we have account meeting next

[1:53:34] week. So I'm not sure Mayor if this is the

[1:53:36] appropriate time, but I'm going to ask if I can

[1:53:39] participate from December step, sorry, September 16th city council meeting

[1:53:45] remotely as I will be out of town picking up

[1:53:48] my Dutch relatives. And I'm requesting if I can participate

[1:53:52] remotely on September 16th. Is that okay? Everybody okay with

[1:53:57] that? Okay, cool. Thank you, Mayor. All right, counsel remember

[1:54:00] layman. Council Member Long. No report. Council Member Steinke. No

[1:54:04] report. Okay, I just got a couple of things that

[1:54:08] I wanted to discuss. First, it's that time a year

[1:54:12] again for evaluations for the city attorney and the city

[1:54:16] manager. Actually, the city attorney were a few weeks behind.

[1:54:21] Also, on a yearly basis usually on September. We also

[1:54:26] do an evaluation on our council staff. As far as

[1:54:30] council staff is concerned, uh, typically what we've done in

[1:54:33] the past is county who's our assistant office manager does

[1:54:41] James's evaluation. And the individuals that Connie reports to as

[1:54:47] far as council members, those four council members, uh, they

[1:54:52] do the evaluation for Connie. And the council members that

[1:54:56] report to Lisa, they do the evaluation for, for Lisa.

[1:55:02] And then as you remember, all of the evaluation, once

[1:55:05] we do those individually, whether it's the city manager, the

[1:55:09] city attorney, also the city auditor. Uh, in our council

[1:55:15] staff, once we do it individually, our staff combines all

[1:55:20] of our evaluations to get an overall evaluation. So my

[1:55:24] recommendation would be, um, as we know some of the

[1:55:29] positions like the city manager, the city auditor and the,

[1:55:34] uh, city attorney, they like to do self - evaluations.

[1:55:39] And then we do the evaluations after that. So my

[1:55:42] recommendation, uh, would be, uh, to give the city auditor,

[1:55:47] city attorney and the city manager of the opportunity, if

[1:55:52] they so desire to do a self - evaluation and

[1:55:55] turn that in by September 11th at the end of

[1:55:57] the business day, which is next Friday. And then that

[1:56:01] would give counsel the opportunity to review that. And we

[1:56:06] as a council will have a week to September 18th

[1:56:10] to close a business to submit our evaluations for the

[1:56:14] city attorney, the city manager, the city auditor, and our

[1:56:19] appropriate council legislative aid that's in our office. And then,

[1:56:27] uh, that following Monday, uh, which would be the 21st,

[1:56:34] uh, our staff with average those, uh, evaluations out and

[1:56:39] redistribute the overall evaluation to all of us. And then

[1:56:43] we have a committee of the whole meeting on September

[1:56:47] 23rd, two days later. So I would recommend that after

[1:56:51] the committee of the hope that we would have a

[1:56:53] special meeting and do all of the evaluations at once,

[1:56:58] uh, during the special meeting. So my recommendation would be

[1:57:02] the set the meeting, uh, special meeting for 10 a.

[1:57:05] m. or directly after the committee of the whole. Uh,

[1:57:10] as we know, if we do a specific time and

[1:57:13] we get done the cow meeting and we have to

[1:57:15] sit around and wait, we do 10 a. m. if

[1:57:18] it takes to 11, 12 o'clock to get the cow

[1:57:20] meeting, we can do that meeting directly thereafter. So that

[1:57:25] would be my recommendation. Again, the 11th, the city attorney,

[1:57:30] city auditor and the city manager would do their self

[1:57:32] - evaluations and turn it in to us by the

[1:57:36] 11th. And then we would have until the 18th, a

[1:57:39] week later to do our evaluations. And then the overall,

[1:57:43] uh, average will be conducted on the 21st and distributed

[1:57:49] to council. And then we'll have a public meeting on

[1:57:54] the 23rd. And what's the conference room that we typically

[1:58:01] use? 220. 220A. Yep. So I would, if that works

[1:58:06] for everybody, then I would, uh, entertain a motion to

[1:58:09] have a special meeting at 10 p. m. on September

[1:58:15] 23rd in conference room 220 for evaluations for the appropriate

[1:58:24] positions that I had mentioned. Okay. Any other comments or

[1:58:30] questions regarding that. Seeing none, Madam City clerk, could you

[1:58:34] call the role. Lastra. Aye. Lehman. Aye. Long. Stanky. Aye.

[1:58:43] Donnell. Aye. Gunter? Aye. Kaduk? Aye. Kill rain. Aye. Aed

[1:58:49] ice motion carried. Okay. And lastly, the last thing I

[1:58:53] wanted to talk about very similar council member lasted did.

[1:58:58] But a little different reasoning. Um, September 16, two weeks

[1:59:03] from the day or the next regular meeting. I have

[1:59:05] surgery schedule. Uh, a couple of months ago I was

[1:59:09] diagnosed with, uh, illness that, uh, I need to have

[1:59:13] surgery for. There's going to be about a four week

[1:59:16] rehabilitation for this particular procedure that I have to have

[1:59:20] done. So I will miss the 16th since that's the

[1:59:23] day of my surgery. Uh, but for about three to

[1:59:27] four weeks after that, I would ask that I could

[1:59:32] participate remotely in the meetings. Uh, if I happen to,

[1:59:36] uh, to, uh, rehabilitate a little quicker than anticipated, then

[1:59:42] I'll be back sooner. But I just wanted to make

[1:59:43] sure about four weeks after September 16th, I have the

[1:59:47] opportunity to, uh, participate remotely. I just want to make

[1:59:50] sure that was all right with everybody. God bless you,

[1:59:53] my friend and prayers are with you. Thank you. All

[1:59:56] right. Mr. Mayor, real procedurally, when you're appearing remotely, are

[1:59:59] you able, are you still able to, our mayor pro

[2:00:04] - Tem around you? But we count the DJ, Bruth?

[2:00:06] We count as a quorum without like on the 16th,

[2:00:09] you and I won't be there. So we'll still have

[2:00:12] six people that'll meet the corn. Okay. I just didn't

[2:00:15] know who the presiding officer was. Okay. Thank you, sir.

[2:00:18] All right. All righty, council member Cadu can see your

[2:00:22] light on. Thank you, Mayor. Um, I also have something

[2:00:24] very important happening on the 16th. I still plan on

[2:00:27] being here. But just spot if you like, I'd be

[2:00:32] more than happy. Just in case I may be late.

[2:00:35] But you don't have one. I got to get worked

[2:00:36] on. Thank you. I can't. Hang on. Um, that would

[2:00:42] have us not have a quorum. How many people do

[2:00:46] we need for a quorum five, correct? Each five. So

[2:00:49] we, we can have three people missing. Yeah. Okay. But

[2:00:52] if we don't count remotely, right? Well, I won't be

[2:00:56] in that meeting. But I will. You won't count towards

[2:00:58] the quorum, but you'll be able to participate. Okay. But

[2:01:02] you need at least five individuals present here in chambers.

[2:01:05] And I'll be here as soon as I can get

[2:01:06] here. I plan to be here on time. But just

[2:01:08] in case I'm not. Okay. All right. All righty. You

[2:01:15] cut that off. Okay. I think that takes care of

[2:01:17] everything. Uh, Mr. City attorney. You have a report? No,

[2:01:21] nothing at this point. Thank you. Mr. City Manager. Thank

[2:01:26] you, Mayor. I have one item to announce. And then,

[2:01:29] uh, some information, uh, to share with the community. What

[2:01:33] I'd like to announce is keep girls invites the community

[2:01:36] to an open house on the Jakita corridor project. Well,

[2:01:44] it's actually was today three to six. So, uh, it's

[2:01:46] just ending. So no, no need to go. September 9th,

[2:01:53] Wednesday. What do you want me to do? Tell me

[2:01:56] about yesterday. Huh? That's next week. Oh yeah. I'm sorry.

[2:02:00] Yes. Today. Yes. Okay. So Wednesday, September 9th from three

[2:02:06] to 6 p. m. I got the 16th in my

[2:02:08] head with all the stuff you all have going on

[2:02:10] up there. So yes. So next Wednesday, uh, September 9th

[2:02:16] from three to six at the Cape Coral public operations

[2:02:19] center, uh, we will have an open house for the

[2:02:22] Chiquita corridor project. For those of you that are interested

[2:02:25] in turn lanes and all the things infrastructure related to

[2:02:31] Chiquita, it would be important to show up at this

[2:02:34] timeframe to get, uh, ask questions about capacity, intersection improvements,

[2:02:40] uh, we're working on infrastructure, which is a major thing

[2:02:44] that community asked for. So next Wednesday. Okay. JC Park.

[2:02:52] We hear all the time that JC Park was a

[2:02:54] waste and it, you know, it was people have different

[2:02:58] opinions about JC Park. So we have now concluded a

[2:03:02] full summer with JC Park being open. And so I

[2:03:07] asked our team to go back, uh, through the data

[2:03:12] all the way back to 22. Look at 24. 25

[2:03:16] was closed for construction and now 26 with the reopening.

[2:03:20] So, and I have this data. If anybody wants to

[2:03:23] see it. So from May 1st through July 31st, we're

[2:03:29] talking about a three May, June and July. Of 2022.

[2:03:35] We had a total number of visits of 23. 6

[2:03:39] thousand visitors over the three months. So a little bit

[2:03:44] over 7, 000 people a month. And there were 13.

[2:03:50] 5 thousand unique visitors, which means some of them were

[2:03:54] return. Average dwelling time for those visitors staying there was

[2:04:00] 59 minutes. Fast forward to the year prior to, uh,

[2:04:07] the park being reconstructed. We had 21. 3 thousand visitors

[2:04:12] over the same time frame, May, June and July. So

[2:04:17] people attending the park went down. The unique visitors was

[2:04:23] 12. 7. So also down from 13. 5. And the

[2:04:27] average dwell time went from 59 minutes to 57 minutes.

[2:04:32] But still 21, three, uh, 7, 000 each on average.

[2:04:39] Now 2026, May 1st through July 31st. Any guesses.

[2:04:49] 60, 000. 58. 7 thousand people. We went from 7,

[2:04:56] 000 a month. To almost 20, 000 a month. Unique

[2:05:02] visitors. From 12, 000 to 37. 1 thousand. An average

[2:05:10] dwell time went from 57 minutes to 64. So we

[2:05:14] have three times as many people using the park. We've

[2:05:18] got three times as many unique individual people using the

[2:05:23] park. And the average time they're staying there is longer.

[2:05:28] Just the facts. Thank you. Okay. Item 14 time place

[2:05:34] future meeting. We have a community redevelopment agency meeting schedule

[2:05:38] for Wednesday, September 9, 2026. Begin in at 9 a.

[2:05:41] m. here in council chambers. We also have a committee

[2:05:44] of the whole was scheduled for Wednesday, September 9th beginning

[2:05:47] at 9. 30 a. m. and council chambers. And we

[2:05:50] have a special meeting at the Cape Coral City Council

[2:05:52] is scheduled for Thursday, September 10th, 2026, beginning at 505

[2:05:57] p. m. And council chambers. That will be our first

[2:06:01] of two public hearings. I will entertain a motion to

[2:06:04] adjourn. Somit. Second. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any

[2:06:09] opposed meeting journey.

City Council – Regular Meeting

Agenda

Transcript