[0:50] >> we all right.

[0:50] >> we are in the city chambers

[0:51] and I call the city commission

[0:52] workshop meeting to order.

[0:53] Commissioners present are

[0:57] commissioner mcdowell. Myself

[0:58] mayor white vice mayor

[0:59] commissioner average. I

[1:05] acknowledge that. Vice and

[1:10] vice mayor. But langdon is

[1:11] commissioner hear that there's

[1:14] present for this meeting also

[1:16] the PRESIDENT Our city manager

[1:17] fletcher city attorney slayton

[1:19] city clerk though. There, I'm

[1:26] sorry michael.

[1:27] >> I had to take I didn't take

[1:30] my notes really sorry.

[1:33] >> I do say place to for

[1:34] garrison back there and is

[1:34] that chief titus back there

[1:35] thank you for waving your

[1:36] hand.

[1:40] >> that's always is a little

[1:41] do the pledge and could I

[1:45] have. Carol what would you

[1:54] previous in in the

[1:55] >> I pledge allegiance to flag

[2:01] of united states of america

[2:03] for which it stands one nation

[2:04] under GOD indivisible with

[2:12] liberty and justice for all.

[2:13] >> alright

[2:13] >> city clerk do we have any

[2:14] public comment. All right.

[2:33] Good

[2:34] >> my name is racing on north

[2:38] course see all the black spots

[2:43] on this map. These are

[2:44] single-family homes that

[2:48] already exist and are little

[2:49] areas so this is about zoning

[2:50] in the shire and activity

[2:52] center number 6. South

[2:56] barcelona drought. Has already

[2:58] recently been reconsidered to

[3:01] remain a pocket that is rsf 2.

[3:02] North of barcelona should

[3:06] remain the same also. And

[3:06] alternative could be in the

[3:10] architectural style. Script

[3:11] chan, it could read single

[3:12] family as well as what else is

[3:17] there. Another the is bordered

[3:19] between cocoa kloman

[3:21] bethelehem waterways and north

[3:22] barcelona 30 single family

[3:24] homes. Outside of that

[3:29] boundary. Also there's a large

[3:29] completely occupied section

[3:33] west of christ from yorkshire

[3:33] they can accommodate

[3:36] commercial activity center and

[3:37] the prizes as well as river

[3:37] road as well as further up and

[3:42] the c a so those are the

[3:43] alternatives. Thank you for

[3:43] your time and attention this

[3:49] morning. Okay.

[3:50] >> is so we have no online

[3:51] public comment think okay,

[3:56] thank you. All right, I guess

[3:57] without further ado we'll move

[4:02] on general business. City

[4:06] manager. This is your item.

[4:07] >> thank you MADAM Mayor, the

[4:12] side of the discussion

[4:14] possible you of the guard and

[4:15] real question to sex the real

[4:18] to be in the charter of the

[4:21] cold the city of to the city's

[4:21] authority to issue obligation

[4:27] of bombs as I was coming for

[4:28] for discussion as a

[4:29] conversation occurred after we

[4:34] had hurricane ian all last

[4:36] year. It is no secret that was

[4:37] a good move one of very few if

[4:38] any municipalities in the

[4:42] state that do not have so or

[4:46] enter into without going to

[4:50] put your vehicle to that

[4:50] referendum. And it could

[4:53] impact the city's ability in

[4:58] the future. If we were to come

[4:58] critical situation. Therefore

[4:59] we would back and we explored

[5:03] several options based on what

[5:05] do. 2 out state route are

[5:05] surrounding municipalities of

[5:07] it you're stuck in similar in

[5:10] size. Focus the city of port.

[5:11] Today we have dozen taken by

[5:15] the attorney's office finance

[5:16] department to do information

[5:20] in office to consider court

[5:21] order for people discussion

[5:21] that we come back to you

[5:24] voting item on baker

[5:27] commission now MISTER Michael

[5:28] going to it's vision we have a

[5:29] lot of people the question

[5:32] that MAY go through your

[5:33] process but the fbi for thank

[5:37] thank you.

[5:38] >> good morning commissioner,

[5:42] thank city as city manager.

[5:43] Just said you know we are here

[5:46] to present this presentation

[5:47] as directed on the for

[5:49] potential bond referendum. My

[5:54] of so. On NOVEMBER 8th

[5:54] twenty-twenty to the

[5:57] commission unanimously voted

[5:58] to direct staff to start the

[5:58] process of ordering the

[6:00] referendum. For the general

[6:03] election in 2024 2 men

[6:04] section, one to be see chart a

[6:07] lot of 2 issue general

[6:10] obligation or revenue bonds.

[6:11] The future MS. Presentation

[6:12] we're going to talk about is

[6:15] the city's legal authority

[6:16] issue general obligation new

[6:19] bonds under florida law and it

[6:20] highlights some compared to

[6:20] jurisdictions and how their

[6:24] charters do with bombs. Higher

[6:25] supreme will then provide its

[6:26] recommendations for commission

[6:28] consideration for many of the

[6:29] charter and also city's bond

[6:32] council MISTER Steve miller is

[6:33] here answer specific a

[6:33] specific bond questions.

[6:35] Commission MAY have I relate

[6:38] with the city is doing or.

[6:39] Conditions might have so with

[6:44] that. He will move on to

[6:46] section one to get each other

[6:47] in summary. Effectively

[6:48] restricts the city from

[6:52] incurring debt. Any type. Any

[6:53] amount unless approved by a

[6:53] majority of voters at a

[6:58] referendum. This restriction

[6:59] is uncommon and could impact

[7:00] the city's ability to respond

[7:04] to an emergency situation.

[7:04] Critical infrastructure

[7:05] scenario, we'll talk a little

[7:07] bit more about that later.

[7:07] Officers found no other

[7:09] jurisdiction in the state.

[7:11] It's a strict language its

[7:14] charter litsa bonds, however,

[7:14] because the way the city's

[7:18] charter is written. It's

[7:19] arguable that referendum

[7:20] firemen our charter applies to

[7:22] all types of debt and not just

[7:23] bought. But focusing on bonds

[7:26] for now. Our charter

[7:27] specifically identifies both

[7:31] general obligation and revenue

[7:32] bonds and florida law treats

[7:32] general obligation bonds

[7:33] little bit differently. So

[7:36] we're going to get into the

[7:37] difference there. And what

[7:38] these types of bonds are and

[7:39] the difference is are

[7:44] required. Legal authority

[7:45] regarding general obligation

[7:45] bonds fan of the florida

[7:48] constitution. It provides the

[7:50] general obligation bonds

[7:53] secured traveler. I want

[7:54] station as property taxes

[7:56] based on property values and

[7:57] it must be approved by

[8:00] referendum vote. When the bond

[8:00] matures more and 12 months

[8:04] missions. So there are those

[8:06] parameters there general

[8:07] obligation within 12 months

[8:09] referendums required. They all

[8:13] ask yourself what 12 months.

[8:17] That is the next question for

[8:19] them. MISTER Let colleagues

[8:19] have the authority issue

[8:20] general obligation bonds less

[8:26] than a year. Out a referendum.

[8:27] So short term financing that

[8:28] would be an example commercial

[8:28] bank loans that sort of thing

[8:29] lines of credit, something

[8:31] that the city could do. But is

[8:36] prohibited from doing. Legal

[8:37] authority regarding revenue

[8:40] bonds is found in florida

[8:41] statute. Statute provides as

[8:43] long as the bonds payable from

[8:44] the source. It is not ad

[8:45] valorem taxes. No referendums

[8:58] acquired. So there are on

[8:58] table from reading this as I

[8:59] just said these can be

[9:03] anything from. Utilities

[9:04] excise taxes, gas taxes

[9:07] general revenues. Operation of

[9:10] the pregnancy project, france

[9:11] fees, those sort of things can

[9:13] be used to pay that's major

[9:15] difference is. In those 2 bond

[9:19] times. As we're going to take

[9:20] a look at what other

[9:20] comparable jurisdictions are

[9:23] doing and how they're charged

[9:24] with ons. These are comparable

[9:26] duty to the size of the

[9:27] jurisdiction. Proximity to

[9:28] port. And as you see some

[9:31] charters. I mentioned on

[9:35] sunday on some do it all.

[9:38] Jurisdiction on this slide.

[9:38] They have no bomb in the

[9:40] teeming which in their

[9:40] charters you know they don't

[9:44] mention anything about bonds

[9:44] but it simply provide follow

[9:45] the process as provided by

[9:50] florida law. Works others.

[9:51] Don't have anything within the

[9:51] tournament might their code my

[9:53] deal guns and how to do so

[9:55] some of comparable

[9:57] jurisdictions I do a bombing

[9:59] which now talk about for

[10:02] example sarasota county.

[10:04] Referenced require mundt.

[10:05] Respect to bonds payable from

[10:09] taxes. There they say when

[10:10] county tax revenues are used

[10:11] to pay indebtedness the

[10:13] referendum is required unless

[10:16] the amounts less then

[10:17] 17 million dollars and

[10:18] 70 million dollar amount was

[10:22] in 2003. So there's are solely

[10:22] table so if people from other

[10:25] types of revenue enterprise

[10:27] fund impact assessment. Those

[10:28] are not subject to this

[10:29] referendum requirement.

[10:34] Monitor limitation. The county

[10:35] will issue can issue any bond

[10:35] that's below its monetary

[10:37] level. And then they have

[10:40] built an escalator you'll see

[10:42] that every year on OCTOBER

[10:44] one. A builder escalator in my

[10:46] cpi. Consumer price index that

[10:51] 12 month period. A limitation

[10:53] from 2003 has been a slate

[10:54] every year there are now about

[10:55] 28 million. Plus dollars.

[11:00] Currently. Referendum is

[11:00] required any bond that exceed

[11:01] that fiscal amount per project

[11:04] per year. And then they have

[11:09] additional for requirements.

[11:10] There are additional

[11:13] limitations they out on a limb

[11:15] per project. So you MAY have

[11:15] multiple projects that are

[11:16] under 28 million dollars they

[11:19] can do bond each project. But

[11:22] they could not break up the

[11:23] project in separate parts

[11:24] separate box for each part of

[11:26] one project one project, their

[11:27] limits that bond to that

[11:29] project. Some make sense that

[11:31] you can break it up get around

[11:37] that a limitation. Venice,

[11:38] this a little bit differently

[11:38] they had their general

[11:39] obligation bonds follow

[11:41] florida law. And they require

[11:42] a referendum, more than one

[11:46] year. Revenue on simply

[11:47] require 50% plus majority the

[11:48] commission to say. We're going

[11:57] to city of sarasota. Like for

[11:58] dinner general obligations,

[12:00] bonds follow florida law but

[12:01] they set a limit on the

[12:05] maximum amount of that van and

[12:06] the way that their math works

[12:06] is 10% of the emphasis valiant

[12:10] city real product. I don't

[12:12] know what that number is

[12:13] currently for they do when

[12:14] they got to do have the

[12:15] maximum out can't go past that

[12:16] limit for revenue bonds is

[12:16] simply approved by city

[12:19] commission. No additional

[12:21] limitations on hoping to

[12:24] creek. So they said a florida

[12:28] law. Another limitation

[12:33] regarding of our county. For

[12:34] the general obligation bonds

[12:36] they follow florida law. And

[12:41] then they have revenue a

[12:42] patient's to limit my limits,

[12:44] 15 million dollars per project

[12:45] that limit expires every 2

[12:48] years. So if they wanted to do

[12:49] the same project again after 2

[12:51] years they could that and it

[12:54] specifically excludes certain

[12:54] projects from this limitation

[12:56] the 15 million dollars. Those

[13:00] projects are. Not related to.

[13:05] Those mandated by court order.

[13:06] Liquidity project utility or

[13:06] enterprise fund were road

[13:10] projects vitesse taxes. So

[13:11] those would not fall under

[13:13] that cap additionally

[13:14] commission grants themselves

[13:16] the authority. Case of an

[13:19] emergency. But it declared by

[13:22] the governor the PRESIDENT

[13:23] States related to hair every

[13:23] truck shun of certain

[13:28] infrastructure. So they if the

[13:29] commission determines there's

[13:30] an emergency it's related to

[13:30] these things they can direct

[13:32] deposit. A specific carpet for

[13:38] that. So some possible

[13:39] amendments to north port char

[13:42] so as you've heard for the law

[13:43] provides the general framework

[13:44] for how local governments can

[13:45] issue these general

[13:46] obligations of revenue bonds

[13:47] as long as that framework is

[13:51] follow it jurisdiction can.

[13:52] Facing a guide rails that want

[13:53] on self without a charter will

[13:55] allow. If commission

[13:56] determines that it wants to

[13:58] move forward propose an

[14:02] amendment to chart following

[14:02] most common limitations that

[14:07] we've seen out there. Kind of

[14:08] like al a carte menu though

[14:08] you can go with none of these

[14:09] options all that option. Some

[14:10] of options that's going to

[14:14] recommend. To you, but we'll

[14:16] go over. With the possible

[14:19] amendments could be so. He

[14:20] wants you to simply rely on a

[14:22] constitutional limits within

[14:23] obligation bonds. You can do

[14:29] that. By repealing any

[14:30] reference and wanted to to

[14:30] revenue that haitians you can

[14:31] simply clarify that this is

[14:35] going to follow all along. And

[14:36] the referendums only required

[14:40] for general obligation bonds

[14:41] choose you could clarify that

[14:43] the referendum is not required

[14:43] for bank loans and other

[14:44] private places like we

[14:45] discussed our charter language

[14:47] interpreted as any kind of.

[14:53] Loan taken out authorized

[14:55] revenue bonds completely or

[14:56] within limitations. You could

[14:58] set a maximum authorized them

[15:01] out. You can increase it by

[15:03] cpi. You can set when that

[15:04] period increases annual like

[15:06] we've seen in other places.

[15:08] You can require commission

[15:09] vote. 100% to 2%. In the

[15:14] middle. Respondent you could

[15:16] have a referendum only for if

[15:17] debt matures at a certain

[15:18] period more less than 1020 30

[15:23] years for example. You could

[15:24] authorize them for certain

[15:25] categories for example during

[15:26] a declared emergency is

[15:27] determined by. Governor the

[15:33] PRESIDENT This board. Said the

[15:34] mercy of turnpike commission

[15:35] you can increase it you can

[15:36] set it to simply public safety

[15:38] reasons emergency recovery

[15:39] response to regulators. We're

[15:45] that sort of thing. What we've

[15:45] seen out there with other

[15:46] jurisdictions are doing with

[15:51] our limitations are. This pass

[15:52] it over to staff must have any

[15:55] questions legal but they're

[16:05] recommending.

[16:06] >> good morning. My name is

[16:11] irene and go and then my

[16:12] >> and I'm going to talk about

[16:12] some of options that we are

[16:19] recommending.

[16:24] >> option won this is our

[16:25] recommended option. And this

[16:26] where commission would be

[16:29] awesome I seem to issue in an

[16:31] emergency situation and in

[16:33] this we would define emergency

[16:34] declared a local state or

[16:36] federal emergency.

[16:40] >> as well as public health

[16:41] and safety and public safety

[16:42] health and would be defined as

[16:47] response to regulatory.

[16:48] Agencies such for example

[16:53] department health would come.

[16:54] Which required to do some kind

[16:58] of major infrastructure

[16:58] upgrade. Other wednesday,

[17:01] which down are holding

[17:05] >> with the.

[17:06] >> get to safety

[17:11] infrastructure. Such as roads

[17:11] bridges.

[17:12] >> what a control structure to

[17:16] work. In the water and then

[17:16] also in response to police

[17:25] fire. Disaster. So this is our

[17:27] recommended option also wanted

[17:30] to provide more than just one.

[17:34] So here we have too. With this

[17:39] we would just follow. Florida

[17:42] law. This is similar to how a

[17:43] nurse brevard county as well

[17:44] as other jurisdictions are

[17:45] doing just like michael

[17:49] mention.

[17:49] >> we would still need to

[17:53] establish acceptable that

[17:53] limit policies.

[17:54] >> in order to maintain credit

[18:00] rating.

[18:03] >> and our 3rd where we

[18:05] structure with some set new

[18:09] members bonding limitations.

[18:11] With this commission would be

[18:15] awesome raising that payable

[18:15] from taxes for one time within

[18:18] a set structured. Sections

[18:21] once every 90 days up to set

[18:24] him project like 15 up to

[18:28] 15 million. And with annual

[18:28] cpi adjustment they have to

[18:34] first. With this option we

[18:36] would recommends the

[18:36] commission I would wave to

[18:41] monitor limit if there is an

[18:42] emergency. As we define I

[18:46] defined in option, one. And

[18:47] with this option that that

[18:51] would be so we pay bills from

[18:52] enterprise fund impact fees or

[18:53] months would not be subject

[19:00] limitations. And as some other

[19:00] jurisdictions I do projects

[19:05] would not allowed to be broken

[19:07] into separate parts wanted to

[19:17] the mitigation. Here I wanted

[19:18] to apologize. I the way and

[19:22] the it was scrivener's error

[19:24] on weight since option, one on

[19:24] both of those projects that

[19:28] should be option option 2 is

[19:29] offering to follow florida

[19:34] law. I'm sure wanted to

[19:36] provide some hypothetical

[19:38] projects these are not actual

[19:39] projects we have they're just

[19:40] one hypothetical just for

[19:45] example.

[19:46] >> wanted to present what

[19:50] would be our which options

[19:51] would be able if we had these

[19:52] type of projects out there

[19:57] that we wanted to bonds.

[19:59] >> so the project we have

[20:00] police station for 50 million

[20:00] revenue on that would be

[20:05] secured by certain taxes.

[20:05] Option 2 would be the only

[20:07] option that the commission

[20:09] would be able to operate.

[20:12] Other with options you have to

[20:18] go to a referendum. Our unless

[20:18] the first project it would

[20:22] qualify as an emergency. But

[20:25] in this case we are saying

[20:26] that that's not an emergency

[20:27] just the station that you get

[20:31] to regular replacement. Our

[20:33] second project here is a road

[20:34] improvements and it's at

[20:35] 15 million revenue

[20:41] because it's up to 15 million

[20:43] for option I would

[20:44] option.

[20:45] >> 2 would be following

[20:50] florida law.

[20:51] >> on 3rd a project we to

[20:52] control its for structure

[20:54] where it is an emergency and

[21:00] the public health and safety.

[21:01] We wanted to issue 20 million

[21:01] revenue bond, all 3 options

[21:07] would be able this case

[21:08] commission would be able to

[21:10] right for that project. And

[21:13] then the 4th project, its

[21:13] parks improvement general

[21:14] obligation bond.

[21:19] Regardless of the florida law

[21:20] we

[21:29] have do a referendum.

[21:30] >> here wanted to show some

[21:32] list port possible projects.

[21:41] >> that MAY. The future of

[21:46] finance with that. Not

[21:47] necessarily that we're going

[21:48] go and get projects just

[21:50] wanted to put in some

[21:51] perspective.

[21:51] >> and what are some possible

[21:55] projects. This is not a

[21:57] comprehensive much something

[21:58] to think about in the future.

[22:01] Some of these projects will to

[22:06] do.

[22:11] >> wanted to recap.

[22:12] >> recommended options option.

[22:14] One is the one that

[22:16] recommending.

[22:20] >> commission would be

[22:20] raising, we'd be able to

[22:21] authorized to issue debt for

[22:25] emergency. As as I mentioned

[22:26] declared a local state and

[22:27] federal emergency in public

[22:31] health and safety. With option

[22:36] we with the city follow state

[22:44] long. And then option is where

[22:44] we would parameters and

[22:47] bonding with medication.

[22:48] >> with exceptions bill you'll

[22:48] be able to.

[22:59] Also raise our current just

[23:00] wanted to.

[23:04] Talk as you all know the city

[23:08] is still recovering. Through

[23:13] hurricane here we have

[23:17] activity from ian. And some

[23:22] project costs. This is not a

[23:23] comprehensive list of all of

[23:26] costs this is cost as

[23:32] >> time we pulled.

[23:33] >> but due to a financial

[23:37] policies that the city had we

[23:41] able to cover all activities

[23:45] while we wait for fema and

[23:45] insurance reimbursement.

[23:47] Wanted to point out what if it

[23:48] was in that day and that

[23:48] happened within just a short

[23:52] period time.

[23:53] >> I don't know if we put able

[23:53] to finance with our current.

[24:03] >> cash on hand to do it not

[24:04] that would strain city's

[24:05] finances and eventually a

[24:11] brisk on the credit. Wanted to

[24:17] show 70 and was example.

[24:18] Damage from to water control

[24:22] structure within you know we

[24:26] have price roads peeler we

[24:33] have chancellor there. Stated

[24:42] earlier. If we need to borrow.

[24:42] >> and they have an emergency

[24:43] our current you have rent

[24:48] them. As you all know where

[24:49] primary and general only

[24:55] occur. Every years. We could

[24:56] go to special elections but

[25:00] special elections, time. We

[25:03] have to get supervisor of

[25:03] election and the cost of

[25:04] special elections about a

[25:10] 100,000. When there haim it

[25:11] also has money is there's

[25:15] inflation. So just wanted to

[25:19] reiterate our current process.

[25:19] It's restricts our ability to

[25:20] respond to emergency

[25:23] situations. Critical

[25:29] infrastructure. Includes a

[25:38] presentation which. Okay.

[25:40] >> what I like to do is

[25:40] opening up to commissioner

[25:41] questions I like to go without

[25:43] a court order. That's all of

[25:48] you

[25:51] >> and then.

[25:52] >> have around if you have a

[25:55] question regarding though that

[25:59] commissioners question. So

[26:01] that we stay on the topic

[26:02] because I found workshop

[26:02] sometimes we bounce around and

[26:06] I'd like to get something.

[26:07] Clear through rather than

[26:08] having to come back and

[26:08] revisit it I made myself clear

[26:10] that's how like to do that and

[26:12] before we do that like the

[26:13] record to recognize former

[26:14] commissioner tom jones in the

[26:22] audience. I don't. It is a it.

[26:28] >> all right I'll start much.

[26:29] >> yeah, I didn't really have

[26:30] any through fairly thoroughly

[26:31] I want to hear what the other

[26:34] commissioners had to and on

[26:34] the question part of that but

[26:38] I'll save my comments. Have

[26:42] any questions. Sounds good.

[26:52] Question's only. What was the

[26:59] law you recommend option want.

[27:04] What your thinking.

[27:09] >> take what happened.

[27:13] >> wanted to be able to.

[27:14] >> issue bonds increase

[27:17] emergency situations. So we

[27:23] thought this point. And bonds

[27:23] when there is an emergency

[27:31] that is crucial

[27:31] >> are we want to make that

[27:34] what we recommend you.

[27:38] >> show that we're not looking

[27:39] for a. We have already us you

[27:43] to be able to issue.

[27:43] >> well I'm a half of the

[27:44] citizens. But what we want

[27:48] something that the texas. Case

[27:49] also and you know that public

[27:52] statement taken care of life

[27:52] like the most important thing

[27:56] that we do with the government

[27:57] being able to react to those

[27:57] needs situations that are

[28:02] timely important.

[28:03] >> and that obviously that

[28:03] makes lot of sense was going

[28:07] conduct an emergency. With

[28:08] regard to our water structure

[28:11] richard so. I think we're at a

[28:14] pace of about one possibly to

[28:18] a year which at at that pace

[28:20] would take us about 30 years

[28:22] to work our way through those

[28:23] certainly don't constitute an

[28:23] emergency unless there's

[28:29] another but. Certainly

[28:32] represents serious issue to

[28:33] our city and to our

[28:33] infrastructure ability to

[28:43] develop and grow. I I guess

[28:43] what I'm saying I mean I sort

[28:44] of know the answer to this

[28:45] question with the same time

[28:49] like to hear it is. Why not

[28:52] address the elephant in the

[28:55] room which we have serious

[28:56] infrastructure and

[28:57] transportation road project

[29:00] issues in this city that we're

[29:01] severely hampered from

[29:02] addressing because we have to

[29:02] go to a referendum to borrow

[29:03] money for anything you know,

[29:05] and you know if we don't take

[29:10] that approach. We basically

[29:10] for going to be opportunity of

[29:11] ever getting ahead of the

[29:14] curve on this.

[29:15] >> the reason why that was not

[29:20] included was well will start

[29:20] fail and it automatically

[29:21] covid public safety alert

[29:24] which qualifies it. Fact out

[29:29] others had a lack of planning

[29:29] or for maintenance that led us

[29:32] to this point and I mean over

[29:33] decades not over the course

[29:39] recent memory when the singer.

[29:39] One here.

[29:40] >> we need to figure that out

[29:41] within our budget which is

[29:42] allowed on the books permit to

[29:43] do that and we need something

[29:44] in addition to that we come to

[29:48] you and say now point where we

[29:49] need to. Addressed that issue

[29:51] so issue could be brought that

[29:54] for bonnie opportunities.

[29:57] Addition to public safety or

[29:58] emergency, but they shouldn't

[29:59] sort of just be included in

[30:03] here because big could.

[30:06] >> we out that outs out

[30:07] operate outside the bounds of

[30:08] what we would call something

[30:09] that was emergency and a

[30:16] public meeting at

[30:16] >> good okay does anybody have

[30:17] any questions with reference

[30:22] what vice mayor asked about

[30:23] that situation. While we're on

[30:27] that topic.

[30:32] >> commissioner mcdowell.

[30:33] >> just to make sure that I am

[30:35] clear on the differences

[30:44] general. General obligation

[30:44] bond and the revenue bonds to

[30:48] please kind of walk me not

[30:50] just for myself to make sure

[30:50] I'm understanding it. But for

[30:54] the citizens. Because it's

[30:57] bond but what are distinctive

[30:59] differences between the 2. In

[31:02] a nutshell.

[31:05] >> yeah, general obligation

[31:09] bond controlled by. For its

[31:10] constitution which and that's

[31:12] what we used to pay that you

[31:15] have a impact. Whereas a.

[31:21] Revenue. As got to pay other

[31:22] revenue sources. Hey for those

[31:26] box. Not for impact. Another

[31:30] controller for look the

[31:36] national

[31:40] >> where is assessment all

[31:41] because I don't see it listed

[31:42] in here.

[31:45] >> and the revenue bonds.

[31:53] >> so so. It okay. Thank you

[31:57] for that.

[31:58] >> I have no further questions

[31:59] on that one, but I do have

[32:01] other questions.

[32:10] >> I had a question about.

[32:10] County tap which you said a

[32:12] 17 million it was in 2003 and

[32:14] now it's about 28 ok news

[32:16] that's per project is that

[32:16] only do they have a

[32:18] stipulation I'm sorry I missed

[32:19] it emergencies and public

[32:20] health and safety only

[32:20] anything any project below

[32:22] that amount. We're not require

[32:31] it. Okay. And they have that

[32:33] in place in general since 2003

[32:35] that's when limit was set

[32:40] right as a 2003. Equated every

[32:45] year it's to a price index

[32:47] since that all right and then

[32:48] emergency situation would we

[32:50] already have grandmothers for

[32:51] that what constitutes an

[32:51] emergency situation where's

[32:54] that in port. Here in the city

[32:58] know,

[32:58] >> it would what you're

[33:02] proposing recommending is

[33:03] emergency for public safety.

[33:04] So we only have 2 grandmothers

[33:05] in place for when it's an

[33:06] emergency we have officially

[33:08] declare it.

[33:10] >> carry emergency, yes, but 2

[33:11] but take a bond out based on

[33:18] that now. Know every in port.

[33:18] City the bond any moment any

[33:20] money that we're trying to to

[33:24] get require a referendum.

[33:24] Regardless of what is right

[33:25] right where that money comes a

[33:28] case.

[33:29] >> all right and and it was

[33:30] mentioned it apos a $100,000

[33:32] for a special election. Right

[33:40] now. Okay. The question here.

[33:48] I teach. See okay. Back to

[33:48] commissioner emerged to do a

[34:00] question question.

[34:00] >> now for going under the

[34:01] emergency status and then

[34:02] you're talking about option.

[34:07] Does that mean that. Regular

[34:08] maintenance of stuff in

[34:09] projects would not have to go

[34:10] to referendum or is it just

[34:13] emergency.

[34:15] >> if if it would be just

[34:17] emergency and then I'm just a

[34:21] reminder bonding it would. For

[34:23] the majority has to be capital

[34:24] projects that can be just

[34:27] regular maintenance and major

[34:27] projects and stuff like that

[34:28] because you did put up the

[34:32] police station.

[34:34] >> and that right now is not

[34:36] emergency status, so that

[34:38] would fall under the emergency

[34:39] that would still have to go to

[34:43] referendum.

[34:46] >> the other 2 options with 2

[34:49] in 2, to and that's all I

[34:53] thank you. Now it has to do

[34:56] with this emergency definition

[35:03] because. What happens because

[35:06] of hurricane ian everybody's I

[35:06] would assume absolutely

[35:07] equates to what is an

[35:12] emergency. I'm I'm very

[35:15] concerned. Who determines and

[35:18] how is that 2 tournament as to

[35:22] what is an emergency. How is

[35:24] it determined by emergency is

[35:25] that determined by the

[35:26] commission is that determined

[35:26] by city managers that

[35:27] determined by finance. How is

[35:35] that defined. Defines it. That

[35:37] to me is the crux of it

[35:37] because.

[35:41] >> like when the pool, the

[35:45] pool sale. And it could have.

[35:46] Been classified when our

[35:50] original or that was 60 years

[35:51] old.

[35:51] >> was failing hayes is an

[35:53] emergency we have to make

[35:53] emergency repairs to this pool

[35:54] or we're going to shut it down

[35:55] and now the pool isn't

[36:02] working. Is that emergency.

[36:02] >> PRESIDENT Not so I'm very

[36:03] concerned and cautious about

[36:06] how that's done so maybe you

[36:07] can help me or maybe this is

[36:08] something that's going to have

[36:13] to come back. A little k so.

[36:14] >> hopefully the commission's

[36:14] going to have to determine

[36:15] whether or not the city isn't

[36:22] take out a possum.

[36:23] Depending on how language is

[36:26] traffic if says that the what

[36:26] it once in emergency is

[36:29] declared either. PRESIDENT

[36:33] Governor this book was body.

[36:34] then this commission can

[36:34] determine there's there's an

[36:35] emergency related to.

[36:36] Something that needs to the

[36:39] repair. The commission at the

[36:40] time will determine is an

[36:44] emergency. They say this is an

[36:45] emergency we need to get

[36:46] prepared because it's going to

[36:47] but the city versus. Have a

[36:50] crack in the pool. The

[36:52] commission term of the bat an

[36:54] emergency they're pretty. I'm

[37:00] living abroad. They are able

[37:00] to the things that you

[37:04] wouldn't mistake think time.

[37:09] >> so.

[37:12] >> when you say it's in a

[37:13] declared emergency. And it

[37:15] says local federal. State

[37:22] declarations. If if there's a

[37:22] federal declaration that

[37:24] somewhere in the country with

[37:29] that and mind.

[37:30] >> these are my concerns

[37:34] because there could be a state

[37:35] emergency. That doesn't even

[37:36] affect yes, yes, that's a good

[37:38] question we would.

[37:38] >> we've gotten such a way

[37:39] that it would be limited

[37:43] affecting. If cleared

[37:43] throughout the city or I can

[37:48] see. The language itself

[37:49] hasn't been written yet would

[37:49] know that is that it looks

[37:51] like that of course that we

[37:51] something you would take

[38:00] mission. What if.

[38:01] >> going back to my pool

[38:05] example. What if there isn't

[38:09] an a declared emergency. You

[38:09] know hurricane ian obviously

[38:14] is a declared emergency but

[38:15] the pool has to get fixed or

[38:16] it's going to get shut down in

[38:17] this is an emergency repair.

[38:24] But it's not too clear.

[38:26] >> but you but we said the

[38:27] city would to the commission

[38:28] as what we believe cause that

[38:31] is an emergency we have to be

[38:31] approved by this board. So the

[38:34] commission itself with the

[38:34] tournament. The parameters we

[38:38] did we give us. Over in this

[38:41] direction pathway that world

[38:46] we would bring you woods is an

[38:47] example of.

[38:48] >> either infrastructure

[38:51] issues or problems that MAY

[38:52] come up a do or don't qualify

[38:52] put them in front of you for

[38:54] your consideration any budget

[38:59] only by the commission.

[39:00] Direction would only get

[39:01] approved for us issue do.

[39:08] Thank you for that.

[39:08] >> that's all ahead on that

[39:09] subject mayor, I don't know if

[39:11] anybody else wants piggyback

[39:15] off that you had my man.

[39:15] >> so basically if we were to

[39:19] go in this direction. We could

[39:25] ease not we could. We could

[39:27] create a combination emergency

[39:28] declarations in other words we

[39:29] could say we could clean more

[39:32] clearly define it. We could

[39:35] say we're there to be a local

[39:40] state or federal. Emergency

[39:41] declaration which effects the

[39:44] city in port. The city

[39:47] commission in addition

[39:51] consider sent an emergency. I

[39:51] mean it triggers our ability

[39:58] to. Incur debt. So it's in

[39:59] that definition and that's

[40:00] something we could with you

[40:04] know. Weigle and whatever

[40:08] additional support im put I

[40:10] mean you could bring that back

[40:13] to us so we could create that

[40:14] kind condition that might

[40:15] create a comfort level

[40:16] obviously the red here

[40:18] commission with bell says we

[40:19] don't want to create a car

[40:19] launch situation but we do

[40:23] want to protect the city and

[40:24] its ability to address

[40:29] emergencies. And GOD forbid we

[40:30] did another emergency like ian

[40:31] in the short term and we

[40:34] didn't have to really that the

[40:36] financial wherewithal we had

[40:38] we would have been tough spot.

[40:43] And and it would cost what

[40:44] because we wouldn't any

[40:45] ability to borrow the money we

[40:48] needed to address debris

[40:52] removal, all kinds

[40:53] infrastructure replacement,

[40:54] you know it is important we do

[40:55] this is just important we do

[40:55] it in a way that creates

[40:57] enough protection so that our

[41:00] citizens. Have that comfort

[41:04] level to know that there are

[41:06] some good and strong

[41:07] restrictions and and

[41:09] identifiable and the amateurs

[41:10] because in order to make this

[41:14] change. We're going ask them.

[41:18] The vote on so you know it

[41:19] needs to be very clear it

[41:20] needs to be concise should be

[41:21] something that the public's

[41:24] going to understand so that

[41:24] they don't think we're just

[41:25] asking for card wants to spend

[41:28] dollars. So I some that could

[41:33] be done. That's that's.

[41:33] >> what for today also

[41:34] direction of what you like to

[41:34] see.

[41:37] >> and we can

[41:44] >> that for your

[41:45] >> I just want to provide a

[41:45] little bit of additional

[41:48] clarification an option number

[41:49] one. There's a couple

[41:53] different moving parts in so

[41:54] for example you have to be you

[41:58] read the port commission MAY

[41:59] authorize debt for declared

[41:59] local state or federal

[42:02] emergency. That's what I

[42:07] second night. Public health

[42:08] and here's some items under

[42:14] that public health and safety.

[42:15] First bullet.

[42:15] >> response to regulatory

[42:17] certainty to put that back up

[42:18] because yeah that's I just it

[42:20] change chain.

[42:22] >> over the weekend haha.

[42:27] Okay, so that we can see what

[42:28] you're saying appreciate

[42:30] problem. Thank you michael.

[42:31] >> so the second for public

[42:35] health and safety. Under

[42:36] public so health and safety

[42:37] there's a couple of items, the

[42:38] first response to regulatory

[42:45] agency. For example swiftmud

[42:45] supports or water management

[42:46] district department amendment

[42:47] protection and they tell us is

[42:50] the city we need to do

[42:50] something. So this is

[42:51] something cases going to come

[42:53] to the commission for us. This

[42:56] is the second item under this

[43:01] public health and safety

[43:02] bullet. Infrastructure,

[43:03] including roads bridges, water

[43:03] control structures, sanitation

[43:06] water and sewer. So need to

[43:11] put something in not.

[43:11] >> in an emergency basis we

[43:12] just this week we need to

[43:16] water control structure. And

[43:17] for that I be coming to the

[43:17] commission as well any of

[43:18] those infrastructure items. In

[43:22] the 3rd bullet. Police fire

[43:25] declared a disaster. So police

[43:28] and fire MAY have a need. So

[43:31] what's included under option.

[43:31] Number one, we tried to do is

[43:34] not only cover the emergencies

[43:35] but some public safety type

[43:37] things and infrastructure.

[43:39] That can be very expensive

[43:40] that would be included

[43:42] underneath book this option.

[43:47] Thank

[43:49] >> yeah, I appreciate that is

[43:50] actually that was going to be

[43:53] basis of my my questions that

[43:53] we do have 2 segments we're

[43:57] not just talking about

[43:58] declared emergencies. That

[43:58] it's other things that can

[44:04] come up that need to be

[44:05] infrastructure, including

[44:06] roads in our control

[44:07] structures that that's when

[44:08] something happens. That's not

[44:09] related to an emergency, but

[44:10] it's got be taken care of. I'm

[44:14] thinking about. And you

[44:15] remember this the great flood

[44:22] of 92. When the water control

[44:22] structures wouldn't work and

[44:26] then a day just collapse that

[44:26] wasn't in the clair emergency

[44:28] that was just a lot of rain we

[44:29] had. But that had to be taken

[44:32] care of so that this this

[44:33] would apply in that situation

[44:34] this has to get fixed. And we

[44:40] could. Authorized and that we

[44:41] would is still to come before

[44:42] the commission correct. Yes,

[44:44] so either way everything was

[44:48] still come before any

[44:48] commission. So this would be

[44:51] in the future any sitting

[44:52] commissioners. They would have

[44:53] decide whether it warrants

[44:59] winning getting a bond. City

[44:59] manager I don't speak it

[45:01] causes. MADAM Mayor for.

[45:02] >> he was in addition to

[45:06] remember realize that. We do

[45:06] want to ensure that the the

[45:08] situations that were. One

[45:09] person mostly what we're

[45:14] seeing. We do want to it seem

[45:14] like that we're going to just

[45:15] start borrowing money to fix

[45:18] things but out people having

[45:19] their say so in those things

[45:21] that wouldn't be hit that

[45:26] we're trying carry out. It be

[45:26] the word emergency in the

[45:27] public in all of the public

[45:32] health and safety item. We do

[45:32] need to make sure that the

[45:33] language is clear that it was

[45:34] mostly on pushing so that it's

[45:36] not something that's a look at

[45:37] say. Well you didn't prepare

[45:38] properly. And now you want us

[45:44] to react quickly that's not.

[45:46] >> right and I appreciate that

[45:47] because I'm thinking could

[45:48] have a road bridge collapse

[45:49] has nothing to do with

[45:51] anything else. But it. And and

[45:54] that has to get it fixed. I

[45:55] just had one of the question

[46:01] about that the county cap.

[46:03] >> and she was my question.

[46:10] Come back to me. Curious

[46:11] they would you know that has

[46:18] come before them to prove.

[46:18] They have kept does that mean

[46:19] they'll have to come before

[46:20] the county commissioners of

[46:23] its over that 17 million or.

[46:26] >> it's currently over

[46:27] 228 million anyway so it's

[46:27] over that it require

[46:30] referendum. Okay it's under it

[46:34] goes to the board and they

[46:34] still approve it yet correct

[46:39] or not okay. I that's it for

[46:44] my questions so MISTER Image.

[46:46] >> yeah that's that's the spot

[46:48] where I was looking at it if

[46:49] we didn't the commissioner

[46:51] stokes we didn't restrictions

[46:51] per se and let's say the cap

[46:56] is 28 million. And a tornado

[46:56] comes through and takes out

[46:57] the police station we're

[47:00] looking at 50 million. We

[47:01] would have to go back out to

[47:01] referendum to go ahead and

[47:06] make up that difference. Under

[47:07] option, that we could decide

[47:10] as a commission. To go ahead

[47:10] and approve going out there

[47:12] and doing that.

[47:13] >> revenue for dinner and the

[47:15] van.

[47:20] >> I just want to make

[47:20] understand there's

[47:21] restrictions it's not a type

[47:25] thing going out there to spend

[47:27] spend but I don't ian came

[47:28] through you look at the

[47:29] debris, we're looking at what

[47:30] you have been on the slide

[47:30] 45 million dollars that we had

[47:31] to pay out just for debris,

[47:35] cleanup. What if we did have a

[47:40] second ian. You know. We would

[47:40] have been stopped and we would

[47:41] have been relying on a lot of

[47:42] the neighboring communities.

[47:46] And really still be stuck in

[47:49] probably still devastated to

[47:50] this day rather than being in

[47:51] the position that we were and

[47:54] getting everything cleaned up

[47:55] quickly and getting our

[47:57] citizens back to work and and

[47:58] working properly there still

[48:01] some damage out there. Yes,

[48:01] but not as much as could have

[48:05] that so. Yes, I just want to

[48:06] make sure it still came to the

[48:10] commission if it was over that

[48:11] cap or that went out to the

[48:12] public and then now you're

[48:13] taking time your cost more

[48:14] special said you know they're

[48:18] so. Thank you. All right

[48:23] commissioner mcdowell. I

[48:23] cannot recall when we've had

[48:27] special election for bonds.

[48:28] That's always been something

[48:29] that was done a general

[48:38] election. So I'm not too. Sure

[48:39] we need to be concerned with a

[48:46] special election. But anyways

[48:48] my my concern is we have to

[48:49] sell this to citizens and why

[48:50] appreciate what the city

[48:53] manager is saying that then

[48:54] says.

[48:54] >> for unforeseen incidences

[48:55] like go back to what assistant

[48:57] city manager said that sounds

[49:02] like it's also for water

[49:04] control structures a police

[49:06] station and other things and

[49:07] that grant I understand it's

[49:07] going to come back to the

[49:10] commission. With the to be

[49:14] able to issue the bonds.

[49:15] Thinking about how are we

[49:21] selling this too. The citizen

[49:23] and making sure that we have

[49:25] parameters in place for like a

[49:26] dollar limit I don't know

[49:26] 10 million dollars is our

[49:31] limit. And that we then they

[49:36] they still have authority as

[49:37] citizens to be able to approve

[49:38] or deny the bond request,

[49:44] especially if it's. Revenue

[49:45] I'm wanting to get kind of

[49:49] feedback from you guys on.

[49:50] >> leader of the special

[49:53] election. The fact that they

[49:54] have it has occurred you know

[49:57] frequency you mentioned in the

[49:58] past put in there because if

[49:58] there was an emergency really

[50:02] need to then go have special

[50:02] and action in order to have

[50:05] this referendum put on about 4

[50:05] people to react to so it's not

[50:09] based on what is in the past

[50:09] it's about making that we're

[50:12] protected for the future and

[50:13] again the infrastructure

[50:17] improvements that are efforts.

[50:18] We need to make sure that what

[50:19] we're seeing and what is

[50:19] understood that the citizens

[50:23] is on the best. It is of their

[50:25] behalf. The fact that a public

[50:25] safety issue has occurred

[50:26] because this infrastructure

[50:27] has failed. And so we action

[50:30] needs to be taken that is

[50:34] either timely to make sure no

[50:36] one knows is her is her or the

[50:37] financial implications are

[50:37] working in the city's favor

[50:41] specific save the money and as

[50:41] able to make sure that you

[50:44] know several of the districts

[50:45] in order if we were to not

[50:48] have bonding authority it

[50:52] would allow for. The

[50:56] decreasing up to the east a

[50:56] rate increases. It would be

[50:59] able to be able to to be able

[51:01] to pay it out into more term

[51:02] systematic manner as opposed

[51:04] to having a large increase you

[51:04] know we didn't get to our

[51:05] citizens and their ability to

[51:08] react to it therefore we

[51:09] asking too reactive into more

[51:13] proactive way that we play.

[51:17] But you said. The failure of a

[51:19] water control structure.

[51:22] >> and I agree that is an

[51:23] emergency whether it's

[51:24] declared or not it is an

[51:27] emergency it failed. When I

[51:28] heard MISS Julie talking it

[51:32] sounded more like a.

[51:33] >> we need to do these water

[51:34] control structures or hey this

[51:39] bridge is close to failing.

[51:42] >> so I'm hearing different

[51:43] language and intentional on

[51:44] what this is going to be for

[51:46] public safety. Let me clarify

[51:50] for so.

[51:50] >> in an example of what

[51:53] really over saying if we need

[51:57] to fix 10 water control

[52:00] structures welcome you with

[52:01] authority or public safety

[52:04] needs because they don't under

[52:04] the direct authority that

[52:05] asking for permission put them

[52:08] on a regular. A rep for the

[52:08] way you would do today in was

[52:12] still a little bit. But that

[52:12] those were building and we

[52:14] said hey in the next. Well,

[52:18] they're going to all out that

[52:19] we really need to do something

[52:19] we haven't been there we can

[52:22] make it work. It was say, hey

[52:23] we need to talk about doing

[52:26] this right now otherwise we

[52:27] wait for the next election

[52:28] going there and then move with

[52:31] it as usual. The authority

[52:33] that we're asking are you just

[52:34] been now does not remove any

[52:36] all authority to go to the

[52:38] citizens. We're asking you for

[52:38] what you as a board and they

[52:42] staff should be very aware of

[52:43] as it relates to how do you

[52:44] keep the public safe protect

[52:48] taxpayers dollars that was 2.

[52:48] >> thank you for that

[52:49] clarification that that helped

[52:55] a lot thank you. Vice mayor.

[52:55] >> yeah, I'm in that same it's

[53:00] basically. Things that are.

[53:06] Just seeing for emergencies.

[53:06] Don't happen in ordinary

[53:10] course of business. So what we

[53:16] do see that there as city

[53:17] manager said infrastructure

[53:19] issue that was looming and

[53:22] eminent MAY not what would

[53:24] qualify as a serious

[53:26] emergency, but clearly

[53:26] something that is going to

[53:30] fail or is imminent to look

[53:30] those conditions can be built

[53:32] into that option. One. With

[53:34] the proper language that you

[53:37] know we would you know we

[53:38] would put some around our

[53:45] weeks. We bonded and again

[53:46] reiterate what city manager

[53:56] said. This month there late

[53:57] season, hurricane. But

[54:00] devastating proportion. We

[54:02] would have no option. We would

[54:08] be sure forest. As we sit now,

[54:10] hold a special election soon

[54:11] humanly possible that you know

[54:12] something we could get

[54:15] permission to do it and that

[54:16] would cost the city 100 grand

[54:16] a pop everything else it will

[54:22] cost because. Right now we're

[54:23] limited to every 2 years

[54:24] thing and it's true emergency

[54:26] at and then offseason. We

[54:31] would have no option but to go

[54:31] out and hold a special

[54:32] election polls point to that

[54:36] why that come up the other

[54:38] thing we can additionally due

[54:38] to create some say the courts

[54:40] as you mentioned they shun is

[54:44] create a super majority. The

[54:47] simple majority of commission

[54:48] 3 to 2 super-majority which

[54:49] require for in this case out

[54:54] of 5. You know, that's that

[54:55] much more comfort level that

[54:57] the vast majority everybody on

[54:57] commission so comfortable

[55:04] with. Board. Absolutely

[55:04] everyone.

[55:12] >> the. The request of the

[55:13] only authority the burden of

[55:14] for that it live on you know

[55:15] we have the burden of proof to

[55:19] make sure that you understand

[55:20] the request and we can

[55:21] validate the concern that the

[55:21] emergency authorization would

[55:22] be necessary and needed that

[55:27] is it you would not authorize

[55:28] it and then we would sort of

[55:30] going the way that we were

[55:32] going. So we feel very

[55:33] strongly that in those

[55:34] situations where it was it we

[55:37] would have information to

[55:38] provide you with a book that

[55:39] will in that decision on

[55:43] happens is if you witness it.

[55:44] >> just to finish up the short

[55:47] commissioner mcdowell takes

[55:48] put the sort of

[55:51] proper perspective. Staff did.

[55:54] Get it touch on it initially

[55:59] michael we're the only city.

[56:01] These kinds of all of this

[56:08] kind of restriction. We are

[56:12] some little municipality we

[56:12] are huge. We're 250 million

[56:16] dollar budget with. Hearing

[56:21] the 100,000 people. Order to

[56:22] respond in order adjust order

[56:24] to properly one. A government

[56:28] decisive city this size there

[56:30] has to be some level of social

[56:31] already and there to be some

[56:34] level of that's really what's

[56:34] being asked here there MAY

[56:36] have very good reasons in the

[56:36] past.

[56:37] >> for the citizens of this

[56:40] city. Question. Its leadership

[56:46] and 2. It's these kinds of

[56:48] restrictions but as the city

[56:53] grows. It is just unreasonable

[56:54] and and get on just want to

[56:57] say it people take issue with

[57:00] but if the people of this city

[57:01] can have confidence in a

[57:04] structured system of debt.

[57:07] With the proper safeguards and

[57:11] the proper decision making of

[57:12] its government and its

[57:13] leadership and its elected

[57:14] officials and it just needs to

[57:17] elect new officials but by

[57:18] needs to have the flexibility

[57:21] operate a city this size and

[57:22] that needs to be something

[57:24] everybody needs to think about

[57:27] we're going to change this

[57:28] citizens. North port have to

[57:32] decide that. They're willing

[57:33] to buy into otherwise old time

[57:34] we're spending here absolute

[57:38] waste of time citizens need to

[57:39] take some comfort in the fact

[57:42] that we have professionally

[57:43] run city and we have elected

[57:44] officials that really worked

[57:45] for the best interest of the

[57:48] people here and and I hope

[57:48] that they're ready to make

[57:53] that leap of faith.

[57:55] >> group to add to that vice

[58:00] mayor is we are very good.

[58:02] That is very cold with getting

[58:02] outside independent

[58:06] third-party opinions advice

[58:07] well, even when the situation

[58:08] warrants so that you're not

[58:09] still leave about lot going

[58:10] people within the wall to all

[58:14] or that the commission.

[58:15] >> all right. Thank you i

[58:16] thank you. Vice mayor and to

[58:17] get back what you just said

[58:19] there because at night

[58:22] crossings off my list, but yes

[58:23] we have a representative form

[58:28] of government so we are have

[58:29] been elected to make decisions

[58:31] and sometimes are not easy

[58:32] decisions. But their decisions

[58:33] that have to be made people

[58:37] complain about government

[58:38] moving so slowly sometimes

[58:39] because we have all these

[58:40] restrictions in place rather

[58:41] than allowing those that were

[58:43] elected

[58:44] in our are very qualified

[58:46] staff to make. The best

[58:49] decisions to

[58:50] move forward. Something like

[58:51] this that we have in place is

[58:55] very. It's very hindering I

[58:57] mean if we had a real problem

[58:59] have go through all this and

[59:00] people wonder how comments on

[59:00] fixed yet. Well we have to go

[59:04] through all this. I wouldn't

[59:05] want my last question is and

[59:07] I'm sorry if you answer this

[59:07] have and option one is is

[59:10] there a cap. It's been

[59:10] established.

[59:14] >> not not with option on. But

[59:15] with option 3 there is a cap

[59:24] emergency. Is reason why staff

[59:25] for option, one which is what

[59:26] recommending why he didn't

[59:26] recommend a calf with that

[59:31] one.

[59:32] >> in case they are emergency

[59:37] situation is more than and.

[59:37] >> and some of lake with the e

[59:38] and you saw some of that is

[59:44] significant.

[59:44] >> you just say that the

[59:49] county up to 20. 23 9 yeah and

[59:54] change.

[59:58] >> all right commissioner I

[1:00:00] >> from my level of comfort.

[1:00:00] >> there really needs to be a

[1:00:07] cap. And I understand that

[1:00:07] emergencies happen in that you

[1:00:08] know just the debris remove

[1:00:09] all along was 43 million but

[1:00:13] this way we have we have the

[1:00:15] benefit of being able to issue

[1:00:16] a bond for an emergency up to

[1:00:21] a specific dollar amount. But

[1:00:22] then we also have our fund

[1:00:23] balance policy to help pick up

[1:00:29] that slack. This point in time

[1:00:33] it really is and what we want.

[1:00:34] Voters get to decide on so we

[1:00:39] have to make sure voters have

[1:00:40] a level of comfort not me not

[1:00:42] anybody sitting up here not

[1:00:43] staff. The voters need that

[1:00:46] level of comfort and I really

[1:00:50] think a cap MAY give them that

[1:00:51] I don't know I don't want to

[1:00:52] speak for our voters but to

[1:00:57] leave it. Open ended.

[1:01:00] Especially after the last

[1:01:01] referendum. And the feedback I

[1:01:02] received from the last

[1:01:05] referendum. Am I I am

[1:01:08] concerned that it MAY not

[1:01:09] pass. So I'm just throwing

[1:01:10] that out there for a book 0.2

[1:01:16] and think about. So if. If

[1:01:19] this referendum. Does not pass

[1:01:23] let me back up. We're going to

[1:01:25] be doing this referendum in

[1:01:31] primary or general election.

[1:01:36] >> does that time.

[1:01:37] >> how we doing this

[1:01:38] referendum that we're

[1:01:40] discussing today are we doing

[1:01:40] that at a primary referendum

[1:01:42] or at the general.

[1:01:45] >> the general 0.4. What what

[1:01:48] are

[1:01:52] >> all right so. The public

[1:01:54] over the language to about. I

[1:01:59] thought wouldn't

[1:01:59] >> we were still waiting on

[1:02:00] direction from our consultant

[1:02:01] on the timing of when to put

[1:02:03] it on, but if we have to elect

[1:02:06] its next year ideally getting

[1:02:07] the bomb lane which approval

[1:02:09] would go in the first one in

[1:02:09] the project that was related

[1:02:14] what was needed as we know

[1:02:14] right you know that of our

[1:02:15] police station would be on the

[1:02:17] second win in the general

[1:02:18] election. The first getting

[1:02:20] approved second it election

[1:02:23] would be for the actual

[1:02:25] product is so now that's ideal

[1:02:27] world and it MAY not work that

[1:02:28] way but as we continue to work

[1:02:29] with the consultant I think

[1:02:31] we'll have more information as

[1:02:31] it relates to the timing the

[1:02:34] report to you.

[1:02:35] >> and that is exactly why I'm

[1:02:39] asking this question if it's

[1:02:40] imperative that we know when

[1:02:42] this is going on because I

[1:02:46] don't want to squander

[1:02:47] election to do the things that

[1:02:49] the commission has spoke about

[1:02:49] water control structures. The

[1:02:55] police station. Bridges, those

[1:02:58] things still have to get done

[1:02:59] with or without this bond

[1:03:01] referendum. And I would hate

[1:03:02] to wander an opportunity to be

[1:03:04] able to put something out to

[1:03:04] bond which would then delaying

[1:03:07] these projects.

[1:03:11] >> as we move forward with

[1:03:11] the.

[1:03:12] >> deeper dive into the needs

[1:03:18] of our issues we're cautiously

[1:03:18] aware that we do not want to

[1:03:24] put a. Value in general

[1:03:25] election people what they do

[1:03:28] half of billion dollars with a

[1:03:29] b dollars that number is going

[1:03:31] to be. Intimidating for any

[1:03:35] voter in a bubble. So being

[1:03:38] able to ask them would you

[1:03:39] language in pudding a high

[1:03:39] bond that on the same ballot

[1:03:40] is almost certain certainly

[1:03:44] not to get it past trying to

[1:03:45] break it up but as it believes

[1:03:47] all items you just mention

[1:03:48] that could go over and that we

[1:03:50] need those items are all

[1:03:52] needed. But we will likely

[1:03:53] would not be bringing all

[1:03:55] those I don't ask for both

[1:03:56] consideration. In the fall

[1:04:00] election of 2024. The cap. It

[1:04:01] if you decide to put a cap

[1:04:02] over their support a little

[1:04:04] whether it's arbitrary number

[1:04:08] that's but let's also remember

[1:04:09] there are various ways to

[1:04:10] engage our citizens before you

[1:04:12] get to election. Instead of

[1:04:14] just waiting at the elections

[1:04:15] c as a commissioner when you

[1:04:19] would say, yes, I feel like

[1:04:20] this is something we should

[1:04:25] vote all survey due to get

[1:04:26] different things in theory in

[1:04:27] order to gauge their

[1:04:27] temperature that would help a

[1:04:29] decision

[1:04:31] >> and follow up with on that

[1:04:32] same meeting state statute

[1:04:38] does not allow government to

[1:04:39] expend money and if we were to

[1:04:39] do surveys that's kind of

[1:04:44] spending money. So we have to

[1:04:46] be very cognizant on how we

[1:04:46] educate and how we get a pulse

[1:04:49] of our citizens because we the

[1:04:49] government entities cannot

[1:04:55] spend money can a way I didn't

[1:04:56] say mail.

[1:04:56] >> I'm pretty sure there is

[1:04:57] there are 3 ways to survive,

[1:05:01] but I get your point we can't

[1:05:02] we can't spend money survey

[1:05:03] survey isn't the only way to

[1:05:04] engage the community if you

[1:05:04] want to get opinions before

[1:05:06] you make your decision. But

[1:05:09] point is we don't want

[1:05:10] following way and say oh a

[1:05:14] referendum is the way that

[1:05:19] commissioner

[1:05:20] >> yeah this is probably for

[1:05:23] the city clerk. When it comes

[1:05:26] down to the special elections.

[1:05:27] >> approximately how long

[1:05:30] would it take. Should go for a

[1:05:31] special election or

[1:05:33] referendum. And I note. I'm

[1:05:34] timing and stuff like that we

[1:05:38] can piggyback. Often the

[1:05:40] election that could be coming

[1:05:41] up like. Let's say next year,

[1:05:42] but it's all through the

[1:05:43] supervisor of elections and

[1:05:43] the reason I'm getting to this

[1:05:46] point is. And hit in SEPTEMBER

[1:05:50] of 2022. The next election was

[1:05:53] NOVEMBER of 2022. No I don't

[1:05:54] believe there was enough time

[1:05:58] to be able assess our needs

[1:05:59] and then put it on a

[1:05:59] referendum in that three-month

[1:06:01] window is that truer.

[1:06:07] >> I would say that pretty I

[1:06:07] don't have a way to determine

[1:06:09] how long it would take to get

[1:06:09] something to a special

[1:06:10] election because it ultimately

[1:06:12] is up to the county. We just

[1:06:13] let them know that we have an

[1:06:16] item our special election. And

[1:06:18] we can present dates to them,

[1:06:18] but it is ultimately up to

[1:06:20] them to say yes or no we can

[1:06:20] do that if there is an

[1:06:24] election in another

[1:06:25] municipality. I know from the

[1:06:25] last time we talked about it

[1:06:26] with the they will say why can

[1:06:27] you not. On this one and

[1:06:31] piggyback on that. So it is

[1:06:33] ultimately up to them and if

[1:06:35] they have a lot of things

[1:06:36] going on with the supervisor

[1:06:37] of elections that will also

[1:06:37] push it out I know they

[1:06:41] reviewing some election. Some

[1:06:42] things that were going on with

[1:06:43] the actual election process

[1:06:45] this last time and they said

[1:06:47] that we would not have been

[1:06:48] able to get a special election

[1:06:49] at the time that we're looking

[1:06:50] at last time they would have

[1:06:50] pushed us to other

[1:06:52] municipalities.

[1:06:57] >> and our falls into the

[1:06:58] hands of other people at that

[1:07:00] point. Depending on the time

[1:07:02] lines and stuff. You know

[1:07:07] it's. It's very difficult if

[1:07:10] we're an emergency situation

[1:07:10] and we need to take care of

[1:07:15] stuff so. You know, I just

[1:07:15] want to get that out there

[1:07:18] because it it wouldn't have

[1:07:19] happened. You know and and a

[1:07:20] timely matter even it was 6

[1:07:23] months later. Still a little

[1:07:24] bit too long to get our needs

[1:07:27] and our citizens care.

[1:07:32] >> commissioner.

[1:07:33] >> the the answer to what we

[1:07:34] would do in that situation is

[1:07:35] that's why you have good

[1:07:36] financial controls in place to

[1:07:38] have whether it's to preserve

[1:07:38] that is.

[1:07:39] >> and with the excess of that

[1:07:43] or is there the cash flow

[1:07:44] ability to handle emergencies

[1:07:47] which is what we were very

[1:07:48] fortunate to have based on our

[1:07:51] staff and our. Pre planning to

[1:07:55] order to cover that without

[1:07:57] having to ask the citizens for

[1:07:58] evening as related to gotten

[1:08:01] reimburse a timely manner so

[1:08:01] we're coming back sort of

[1:08:06] feeling that book it back up.

[1:08:06] But in the example and the end

[1:08:08] of another union that's what

[1:08:13] makes those vulnerable in the

[1:08:14] the outside soul the county

[1:08:21] and it's that but help was

[1:08:22] totally out of our control but

[1:08:23] I know it's a citizen looking

[1:08:25] back and saying why didn't you

[1:08:30] city of port. Change and alter

[1:08:31] your abilities when you could

[1:08:33] in a time that you could have

[1:08:35] done it as opposed to leaving

[1:08:38] us double in a time of need.

[1:08:39] so this what sort of help

[1:08:42] efforts to taxes for that.

[1:08:43] >> and I agree with you

[1:08:44] because we did have end and

[1:08:47] then we have a threat of I

[1:08:48] doubt and luckily that wasn't

[1:08:49] as devastating as was, but it

[1:08:52] could have that. Yes are you

[1:08:54] know, and we are in hurricane

[1:08:54] season once again and

[1:08:58] everything so. We go through

[1:08:59] every year hopefully it's most

[1:09:02] most of the missiles but hey

[1:09:03] and got a spat and we need to

[1:09:05] learn from that. So I

[1:09:06] appreciate all your efforts.

[1:09:10] Thank you.

[1:09:11] >> commissioner mcdowell my

[1:09:11] last one has to do with

[1:09:18] timing. Commissioner much

[1:09:18] touched on how long it takes

[1:09:20] to do a special election I

[1:09:21] know when we the special

[1:09:23] election to get mayor white.

[1:09:24] It took approximately 5

[1:09:29] months. To draft an ordinance

[1:09:30] and talk to the supervisor of

[1:09:31] elections and actually hold

[1:09:32] that election.

[1:09:33] >> but not all intents and

[1:09:40] purposes. Issue a bond for

[1:09:41] whatever emergency reason if

[1:09:43] this was to get passed by the

[1:09:47] voters would take 5 to 6

[1:09:48] months anyways because they

[1:09:50] have to talk with council. How

[1:09:51] is this going to be done so

[1:09:52] that it's not affecting our

[1:09:52] credit rating. We have to

[1:09:56] issue ordinance the commission

[1:09:57] has to cure it twice and I

[1:09:58] pray that this is going to be

[1:09:59] done by ordinance and not

[1:10:03] resolution. But that's part of

[1:10:03] that conversation of what

[1:10:11] we're looking for. So this

[1:10:12] isn't quick and easy thing

[1:10:13] like oh we have an emergency

[1:10:14] and then a month later we can

[1:10:17] do to readings. So unless you

[1:10:20] guys have things in the

[1:10:21] pipeline. That we're not aware

[1:10:22] of that our emergency that

[1:10:22] would scare cheaper side of

[1:10:28] me. Government is quick and

[1:10:30] easy we all recognize that,

[1:10:33] but if you have.

[1:10:34] >> there is in jail where you

[1:10:37] have an election in NOVEMBER.

[1:10:37] It could get done in the 5

[1:10:40] months that you referenced in

[1:10:41] mayor do why would you not do

[1:10:42] that as opposed to waiting to

[1:10:43] something that happens in

[1:10:44] NOVEMBER and then beginning

[1:10:46] that process from the you

[1:10:47] should really be able to react

[1:10:50] as a government in a way it

[1:10:50] allows you to preserve public

[1:10:54] safety as quick as possible.

[1:10:55] Not quite private quick the

[1:10:55] quicker government quick and

[1:10:59] that still means they're all

[1:11:00] the right steps that does not

[1:11:00] mean taking shortcuts that

[1:11:03] does not mean doing anything

[1:11:04] that is it in the best fiscal

[1:11:05] responsibility.

[1:11:09] >> of municipalities.

[1:11:12] >> it just means that you as

[1:11:13] board would have the right to

[1:11:14] make a decision that was in

[1:11:15] the interests of the most

[1:11:17] people order to make sure that

[1:11:18] we were the homeless and it's

[1:11:22] possible.

[1:11:22] >> understand that, but my

[1:11:24] point is comparing the

[1:11:25] timeline to do ordinance talk

[1:11:27] with on council get the

[1:11:31] commission to readings it's

[1:11:32] going to take 5 or 6 months

[1:11:35] just like a special election,

[1:11:36] what but with a special

[1:11:39] election. I recognize the fact

[1:11:41] that the voters ultimately

[1:11:41] would decide is this something

[1:11:45] they want to approve if. Kathy

[1:11:49] forced doesn't get past. I

[1:11:50] agree something needs to get

[1:11:54] past. What that looks like we

[1:11:55] have to be very careful

[1:11:56] because the voters are the

[1:12:00] ones in control. Not and I

[1:12:00] really hope that there are

[1:12:07] going to be dollar limits on

[1:12:12] all I've got to say because.

[1:12:13] Always to get something passed

[1:12:15] and if it's not feeding the

[1:12:16] appetite of the voters. It's

[1:12:27] not going to passed.

[1:12:28] Vice mayor and that I think of

[1:12:29] public comments before I start

[1:12:29] looking for some consensus,

[1:12:31] yeah just to clarify.

[1:12:35] >> this issue

[1:12:35] >> special

[1:12:38] >> election. And then the by

[1:12:43] just to to a pond. Okay is a 5

[1:12:46] to 7 month process. I mean

[1:12:47] realistically whatever time

[1:12:49] frame it takes. But it's you

[1:12:55] to wait. Until a special

[1:12:56] election in order to begin

[1:12:59] that process you're talking

[1:12:59] about what potentially could

[1:13:03] be a half a year or more. To

[1:13:05] get to the special election to

[1:13:11] get the voters to approve.

[1:13:13] Which would start the process

[1:13:17] obtaining the so we're talking

[1:13:17] about the time with that I

[1:13:19] think is what city manager was

[1:13:19] trying to point out so that

[1:13:24] you know to me.

[1:13:25] >> a no-brainer I mean, can

[1:13:26] you bring up the first slide

[1:13:28] option, one because. There

[1:13:31] were 2 parts to okay so we

[1:13:38] have a public health and

[1:13:39] safety response to regulatory

[1:13:50] agencies. Responding to a 3rd

[1:13:51] party a party that tells us

[1:13:55] something needs to be done.

[1:13:56] When we get to infrastructure,

[1:13:57] including roads bridges, water

[1:13:58] control structure sanitation

[1:14:00] water and sewer. Police fire

[1:14:03] and the clear disaster could

[1:14:13] items. For a and public safety

[1:14:14] and health and response to

[1:14:16] regulatory agencies which

[1:14:17] gives us flexibility a

[1:14:17] catastrophic hurricane and

[1:14:19] tornado GOD forbid the course

[1:14:23] the city a 100 million

[1:14:25] dollars. I mean to be tracked

[1:14:26] to shift iin 20 25 million

[1:14:28] dollar cap would be. Insane.

[1:14:32] But. Roads bridges water

[1:14:37] structures. Pro project. Might

[1:14:40] be reasonable in those cases

[1:14:46] because the dollar. Costs to

[1:14:46] replace them or address the

[1:14:53] problem. Or certainly up a

[1:14:54] lesser dollars value and MAY

[1:14:55] give voters more for comfort

[1:14:58] trying to. Rich the issue that

[1:14:59] commissioner mcdowell

[1:15:01] springing up. It's esta this

[1:15:06] is going to have to meet. You

[1:15:09] know comfort level of our of

[1:15:10] our voting public out there so

[1:15:11] I'm trying to think how do we

[1:15:14] protect our souls from

[1:15:14] something shuman this in

[1:15:20] nature. First is what this

[1:15:25] what we would consider it in

[1:15:27] crisis road bridge water

[1:15:29] control structure nature but

[1:15:31] that had some parameters on

[1:15:32] dollars point is doable it's

[1:15:34] certainly within your free

[1:15:34] too.

[1:15:35] >> do that to the set the

[1:15:38] limits and senate multipliers

[1:15:39] which would increase over time

[1:15:42] get more so we could something

[1:15:43] later with the previous that

[1:15:46] they get the aside from our

[1:15:46] council that about 3 to 4

[1:15:51] months to get the

[1:15:51] >> that would give something

[1:15:52] to play with create a little

[1:15:53] more structure to whole thing

[1:15:54] so it's a slight modification

[1:15:58] option one. Should chicken

[1:15:59] getting a little option 3 into

[1:16:00] into option. One.

[1:16:03] >> it's.

[1:16:04] >> it also clear we want to

[1:16:09] remind that. There are units

[1:16:11] other than just so there, you

[1:16:13] know everything just in the

[1:16:23] bonn bucket.

[1:16:24] >> okay match or you're on

[1:16:27] here yes that I going to say

[1:16:29] okay all right. If I MAY yes I

[1:16:36] have.

[1:16:37] >> on takes about 3 to 4

[1:16:41] months to issue. As the bonds

[1:16:42] that the voters approved for

[1:16:43] price boulevard already been

[1:16:50] issued.

[1:16:54] >> because you to go until

[1:16:57] you're faced with the design

[1:16:59] is the needs of the project

[1:17:00] we're going the project based

[1:17:03] on what that change just off

[1:17:03] of the timeline what it the

[1:17:06] time and now. The other I

[1:17:09] would say was about you know

[1:17:12] the the might that look

[1:17:16] something happening in issue

[1:17:17] in MAY. Most of this but

[1:17:19] special election. And I heard

[1:17:22] that a clerk

[1:17:23] >> ration regarding on factors

[1:17:25] that could affect that.

[1:17:26] >> the special elections

[1:17:28] kaufman we're talking about

[1:17:29] it. You it with decision

[1:17:33] without. Using potentially

[1:17:34] $100,000 of dollars when

[1:17:38] everyone would say yes we

[1:17:40] wanted ask the emergency at a

[1:17:41] situation. You probably

[1:17:45] exercise your authority as an

[1:17:47] elected official at the say

[1:17:48] well I need to go back to the

[1:17:49] citizens asked are the place

[1:17:54] is. Going do now that would

[1:17:59] this state to replace to us it

[1:18:00] all within the scope of

[1:18:02] responsibilities that we are

[1:18:03] charged you know all

[1:18:04] representing important people

[1:18:10] are.

[1:18:10] >> if

[1:18:11] >> I can continue because city

[1:18:15] manager opened the door, we're

[1:18:15] not just talking we're talking

[1:18:16] about other decked being

[1:18:25] incurred. Is all of that

[1:18:27] whatever avenue of debt being

[1:18:29] incurred whether its bond or

[1:18:30] is that covered in what we're

[1:18:45] talking about today.

[1:18:46] >> yes, been a lot lots of

[1:18:47] talk about getting the voters

[1:18:48] confidence and I know I've

[1:18:52] talked to people that and I

[1:18:53] know people my life we just

[1:18:54] don't want to spend money on

[1:18:57] anything but I I. Do want they

[1:19:02] just they want break. But when

[1:19:03] things have to be done they

[1:19:07] have to be to spend money on

[1:19:08] things that I've never and all

[1:19:08] the years lived here have

[1:19:11] never known commission to just

[1:19:13] spend money on something for

[1:19:14] religiously in. And it's a set

[1:19:17] was a big mistake. I mean

[1:19:18] everything was well thought

[1:19:20] had a plan. Staff presented.

[1:19:26] What what's being done. This

[1:19:26] idea that I know there are

[1:19:27] people out there that think

[1:19:31] that. If we're not watching

[1:19:32] what you're doing you're going

[1:19:34] to be spending money to send

[1:19:34] people to on a trip around the

[1:19:37] world or something don't know

[1:19:37] what but we're talking about

[1:19:39] emergency situations we're

[1:19:43] talking about public health

[1:19:44] and safety being able to make

[1:19:46] those decisions and get things

[1:19:47] done so we can continue to

[1:19:48] live our lives and not have to

[1:19:51] worry about these what I call

[1:19:52] nuts and bolts of living like

[1:19:56] that's what your job is to

[1:19:57] take care of those things and

[1:20:02] what you need to get it done.

[1:20:04] And I say great this is what

[1:20:06] we need to I guess we do have

[1:20:08] discussed about caps I like

[1:20:14] mayers idea different

[1:20:14] different. The 2 agents here

[1:20:15] with the 2 check marks those

[1:20:17] are 2 completely different

[1:20:20] segments here so. At this time

[1:20:21] I'd like to ask if there's any

[1:20:24] public comment.

[1:20:29] >> jasmine bowman. Public

[1:20:29] referendum should always be

[1:20:30] part of any decisions made

[1:20:31] about more borrowing. Thank

[1:20:31] you.

[1:20:38] >> all right, yes,

[1:20:39] >> wasn't what it what next

[1:20:42] and what you we want from you.

[1:20:43] Yeah so the conversation that

[1:20:44] we heard you know we will

[1:20:48] bring you back. Lately that

[1:20:49] you know has a 3 combined

[1:20:52] based on you know the cap

[1:20:53] conversation definitions about

[1:20:54] the emergency what does that

[1:20:58] mean in how to better get your

[1:20:59] comfort level. There is his

[1:21:01] push them out in ways that

[1:21:06] would still he MAY be caps or

[1:21:07] either either suncap for some

[1:21:07] guidance toward taub of dollar

[1:21:13] amounts can factored into your

[1:21:18] decision to what the upside it

[1:21:18] >> ok so you don't need a

[1:21:19] consensus for those things it

[1:21:22] got

[1:21:26] that. I can sense it would be

[1:21:29] great what you're looking for

[1:21:30] specifically but we know that

[1:21:36] having to come back. What to

[1:21:37] present stick to the advisory

[1:21:37] work but also to bring back

[1:21:38] what you

[1:21:44] >> all right. Okay.

[1:21:51] >> the floor, yes.

[1:21:53] >> always a question that to

[1:21:54] MAY be trying to prepare or

[1:22:01] trying to present a consensus.

[1:22:01] Are we not overly qualifying

[1:22:05] this. We've had. A pretty

[1:22:08] flexible discussion here.

[1:22:11] Wondering what it. And again,

[1:22:15] I'm looking for direction city

[1:22:15] manager as well as as city

[1:22:21] attorney. Do we want bring for

[1:22:22] the consensus or do you folks

[1:22:25] have a comfort level for the

[1:22:26] general parameters of what

[1:22:29] we're looking for and see what

[1:22:30] might brought concerned only

[1:22:36] about us. And not giving you

[1:22:40] as much flexibility to really

[1:22:41] come up with something you've

[1:22:42] heard everything we've had to

[1:22:45] say we're also missing one

[1:22:46] commissioner and and this is

[1:22:47] not something that that's

[1:22:50] going to a real but can final

[1:22:51] decision it's going to be a

[1:22:54] bit of a process here. If I'm

[1:22:54] just wondering do you need us

[1:22:58] to really do a consensus.

[1:23:04] >> up to that you've that city

[1:23:05] attorney it says it as it

[1:23:06] relates to getting the most

[1:23:10] definitive. The I don't you

[1:23:11] get consensus on any direction

[1:23:12] you could not all of the unit,

[1:23:16] what that should look like you

[1:23:17] qualify, but is no box in

[1:23:20] district to what we're able to

[1:23:22] sort of. Explore for greenback

[1:23:23] your final decision made that

[1:23:26] that was the ways that we kept

[1:23:27] the bucket. But I believe that

[1:23:27] we all have been given

[1:23:29] sufficient direction and her

[1:23:31] under if permission for us to

[1:23:35] go continue to develop this to

[1:23:36] the process. We are based on

[1:23:36] what we do

[1:23:44] launch yes, are related to

[1:23:46] getting the language to give

[1:23:47] leverage you know on timeline

[1:23:49] part of the reason why it sort

[1:23:52] of get to that I separate

[1:23:57] meeting early 2024. So so

[1:23:58] based on what we heard you

[1:23:59] know I feel very as to what

[1:24:01] you do, but I would like to

[1:24:02] with it

[1:24:08] that was to

[1:24:09] >> I respect what you're

[1:24:10] saying with not having

[1:24:15] consensus it would make. Do do

[1:24:16] that highlights that we are

[1:24:18] trying to get into in hitting

[1:24:19] the charters current

[1:24:20] requirements to go to charter

[1:24:20] review advisory board to get

[1:24:25] there. They're advising

[1:24:26] commission if you could give

[1:24:29] wrought. Consensus something

[1:24:29] that you would like to see it

[1:24:34] would. It would be helpful if

[1:24:34] you choose not to get it

[1:24:37] that's fine to teenagers

[1:24:41] office too. Provide.

[1:24:42] Correction or provide language

[1:24:43] based on

[1:24:47] >> so do I have someone. If

[1:24:48] the consensus.

[1:24:55] >> talk you want to try for

[1:24:58] >> consensus construct. City

[1:25:03] attorney city. And that staff

[1:25:11] to come back with. A proposed.

[1:25:14] Charter amendment. Based on

[1:25:24] option one. We situation of.

[1:25:30] >> apps.

[1:25:35] >> non-emergency or clemson

[1:25:42] some caps. Rich you trying to

[1:25:45] keep general what's possible.

[1:25:45] So something more you'd like

[1:25:49] to see their might.

[1:25:51] >> whatever you

[1:25:53] >> we want to add something

[1:25:58] that.

[1:25:59] >> I I understand why city

[1:26:00] attorney needs a consensus is.

[1:26:06] This is why. I really don't

[1:26:07] like workshops because we

[1:26:07] could if we had it on

[1:26:09] commission meeting.

[1:26:15] >> we could gain a motion and

[1:26:17] majority will look at that

[1:26:19] workshop now we just have we

[1:26:21] have only a consensus as

[1:26:21] opposed to clear and decisive

[1:26:25] direction to city manager.

[1:26:26] >> if we start small small

[1:26:28] bites of the apple.

[1:26:33] >> talk about caps.

[1:26:34] >> talk about what we want in

[1:26:36] this recommendation for option

[1:26:37] one it might give him a little

[1:26:37] bit clearance putting it all

[1:26:39] in one bucket little bites of

[1:26:41] the apple of buck. Well it

[1:26:48] might be more beneficial.

[1:26:49] >> let's say we with that with

[1:26:51] your consensus that was pretty

[1:26:52] lot it didn't set any cap

[1:26:56] limits on set have caps for

[1:26:57] those 2 bullet check both to

[1:26:58] components there so

[1:27:02] commissioner average.

[1:27:02] >> yeah I was I was in

[1:27:07] agreement with that. With the

[1:27:08] saying being with the caps

[1:27:08] going on, but I would like to

[1:27:11] stay conducive

[1:27:12] to what the counting I don't

[1:27:13] want to cut it short that. You

[1:27:16] know there 28 mountain. I I'm

[1:27:19] giving you a cut off, but

[1:27:23] right around 30 million. Would

[1:27:23] be were I rather than having

[1:27:25] it all wide open. You know on

[1:27:27] those other areas. So that's

[1:27:30] what I'm looking at not giving

[1:27:33] you a number that's just. I

[1:27:35] can agree with some tips. All

[1:27:39] right so yes.

[1:27:40] >> I'm a yes, vice mayor of

[1:27:41] I'm a yes with that and

[1:27:46] started commissioner mcdowell.

[1:27:47] What happens when you bring it

[1:27:50] back all up to the voters and

[1:27:50] you.

[1:27:51] >> please be cognizant if you

[1:27:53] want this pass. Have to make

[1:27:56] sure that voters are going to

[1:27:57] be amenable to caps 30 million

[1:28:02] dollars.

[1:28:02] >> sitting up here is totally

[1:28:03] different than sitting out

[1:28:04] there and if I had to vote on

[1:28:08] this is a citizen, not being

[1:28:09] elected official not

[1:28:10] understanding 30 million

[1:28:10] dollars would scare I mean

[1:28:14] it's a #

[1:28:14] #

[1:28:15] #

[1:28:15] not.

[1:28:16] >> that's going to feature

[1:28:18] discount you're you're you're

[1:28:21] so can either be safe and

[1:28:21] prepared.

[1:28:26] >> or I

[1:28:26] >> I get that but we have to

[1:28:27] make sure that the citizens

[1:28:28] are going to be amenable to

[1:28:33] that if you need another or

[1:28:35] yes, it

[1:28:41] >> thank you MADAM Mayor, the.

[1:28:42] >> rose bowl to make their

[1:28:43] decisions that will be both a

[1:28:44] vote on behalf of what they

[1:28:45] think is in the best interest

[1:28:50] of their so you as a board

[1:28:51] today we're asking you which

[1:28:52] is what you're trying quit

[1:28:54] which is the thing about the

[1:28:54] most people and the good for

[1:28:57] the most of city. That's the

[1:29:00] difference in so we look at a

[1:29:01] workshop shot we have these

[1:29:04] conversations has rescission

[1:29:07] that can you imagine tech

[1:29:08] overnight meeting. At that

[1:29:09] acting to the already busy

[1:29:10] agenda. We need direction so

[1:29:12] we don't go in. There are hold

[1:29:16] the waste time way since that

[1:29:19] wasting taxpayer dollars. So

[1:29:20] our goal here is to get

[1:29:24] because does get the direction

[1:29:24] we can then narrowly focus our

[1:29:27] efforts into something that

[1:29:28] not only is time since might

[1:29:29] be just important it is

[1:29:33] sensitive sort of of a pickle

[1:29:39] of that that we. Property for

[1:29:40] the future. But we have to

[1:29:40] make sure that we get the

[1:29:44] right direction from you over

[1:29:44] that city doing both at the

[1:29:45] day

[1:29:51] >> okay, so.

[1:29:52] >> clarity what you are asking

[1:29:56] for caps when you look at

[1:29:57] casper category.

[1:29:58] >> that's bring up end of that

[1:29:59] training that for screening to

[1:30:02] check mark.

[1:30:05] >> so basically it's consensus

[1:30:10] bring back with us option one.

[1:30:17] With some caps on. 3 are the

[1:30:18] bottom to infrastructure,

[1:30:19] including roads bridges, water

[1:30:22] control structure sanitation

[1:30:23] water and sort police fire and

[1:30:26] the clear to falls on the

[1:30:27] public's health safety that

[1:30:28] would be whatever cap is that

[1:30:33] would apply to all 3 of those.

[1:30:34] >> little not necessarily as

[1:30:36] public health and safety with

[1:30:37] but that's what they're

[1:30:38] determining its public health

[1:30:39] and safety the regulatory

[1:30:43] agency though I would to a

[1:30:44] cap. On regular tour on the

[1:30:44] response regulatory agencies

[1:30:46] with mike came in made a

[1:30:49] declaration we need to do

[1:30:52] something it turned out to be

[1:30:54] 30 million dollar expense and

[1:30:55] we have a cap per event of

[1:30:57] 15 million dollars or

[1:30:58] 20 million dollars that would

[1:30:59] severely restrict to me the

[1:31:00] bottle to the latest there are

[1:31:02] the items were. My personal

[1:31:04] opinion I felt there were

[1:31:08] some. That could be

[1:31:08] instituted, but when it comes

[1:31:12] to. The clear local state

[1:31:16] federal emergency or in terms

[1:31:19] of public health and safety a

[1:31:19] response to a regulatory

[1:31:23] agency, things I don't think

[1:31:24] you can put a cap on should

[1:31:26] put a cap on because they

[1:31:27] could be huge and they could

[1:31:28] be extremely restrictive. It's

[1:31:29] the bottom 2 items there that

[1:31:34] I fell. What was some dollar

[1:31:38] cops. Get what you want some

[1:31:39] back without.

[1:31:39] >> and then at that time we

[1:31:40] could discuss we wanted to

[1:31:41] break it up my understanding

[1:31:43] was those 3 bullet points

[1:31:46] under public health and

[1:31:47] safety.

[1:31:51] >> not matter we're so I was

[1:31:51] it was it would be a cap on

[1:31:52] the emergency category the

[1:31:56] capital put a category. I

[1:31:57] would look and see what the

[1:31:58] county doesn't on with it is

[1:32:03] you know per project I really

[1:32:04] are there was appetite to

[1:32:05] follow the county does what I

[1:32:05] thought was very good to keep

[1:32:08] us in alignment with one of

[1:32:11] the you know jurisdictions

[1:32:13] around so maybe following

[1:32:15] model based on how they do it

[1:32:15] because we shouldn't be

[1:32:17] sitting here trying to

[1:32:18] reinvent the wheel. Let's do

[1:32:19] something that someone

[1:32:21] successfully around this good

[1:32:22] that we is sort of back of

[1:32:23] that model okay.

[1:32:24] >> and when it comes back

[1:32:29] that's we could night that.

[1:32:30] >> commissioner average you

[1:32:30] know one last thing and

[1:32:31] basically they're following

[1:32:32] what state allows. So that's

[1:32:36] what that's about in line. You

[1:32:36] know in my opinion so we can't

[1:32:42] do anything illegal.

[1:32:44] >> did you say had something

[1:32:45] else turning the mayor that

[1:32:49] we've this meant.

[1:32:49] >> manager could make a all

[1:32:55] right. We public. Okay. All

[1:32:56] right so when you want to move

[1:33:00] on to. Item anybody need short

[1:33:02] break stake. Frank what do you

[1:33:07] that also in your go bags you

[1:33:13] should have non-perishable

[1:33:16] batteries or all power goes

[1:33:20] out we good break on 97 any

[1:33:21] break any emergency

[1:33:23] information all right we're on

[1:33:28] to.

[1:33:28] >> item d discussion and

[1:33:29] possible direction regarding

[1:33:31] the draft of not unified land

[1:33:31] development code chapter for

[1:33:34] site development part. City

[1:33:36] manager this is your

[1:33:42] >> they came this active going

[1:33:43] to development co chapter for

[1:33:47] part 2 is.

[1:33:47] >> a lot what the commission

[1:33:48] have received in review over

[1:33:51] the course both we are headed

[1:33:53] towards completion of this

[1:33:54] very sooner rather than later

[1:33:58] kind excited. But we do have

[1:34:00] our team here on the table and

[1:34:00] to go through this with us a

[1:34:04] little further as we get word.

[1:34:05] It would indirectly the

[1:34:06] workshop, so that we can bring

[1:34:07] for some action in the future

[1:34:14] over to this case.

[1:34:29] >> I you want it.

[1:34:32] Good for the

[1:34:37] record katie while planet 3.

[1:34:37] >> with the city of port so

[1:34:38] today we're going to talk

[1:34:39] about you want to chapter for

[1:34:46] part 2. So my presentation

[1:34:51] basically covers updates on 23

[1:34:52] am. After 4 part 2 I'm going

[1:34:54] to go over what we want last

[1:34:55] time least briefly just so

[1:34:55] that you know what we cover

[1:34:58] last time what the second part

[1:34:59] is when you go over the

[1:34:59] article specific some major

[1:35:01] changes. I included the

[1:35:05] consensus items. There's I

[1:35:09] think 6 of what the next steps

[1:35:09] are and then questions and

[1:35:13] comments at the end. We don't

[1:35:16] have any major project

[1:35:20] chapters one through of. Are

[1:35:23] you guys have all seen. We

[1:35:24] don't have any major changes

[1:35:26] to one of the big changes is

[1:35:30] that we're going to have 6

[1:35:32] chapters instead of 5 chapters

[1:35:33] we're going to have signs to

[1:35:36] their own chapter they will be

[1:35:36] chapter 5 that was sort of at

[1:35:37] the recommendation of our

[1:35:42] legal counsel just in case in

[1:35:43] the future we are ever

[1:35:45] challenge shifts. It will

[1:35:46] remain chapter and being

[1:35:46] spread out through multiple

[1:35:47] chapters, it just sort of

[1:35:51] helps us. So that's the big

[1:35:52] change. There's that chapter 5

[1:35:55] the signs. And that that will

[1:35:59] have 6 chapters

[1:36:01] >> so chapter 4 is all that

[1:36:02] site development in our

[1:36:05] previous workshops, we went

[1:36:07] over for so that talked about

[1:36:08] rules measurements. Buffers

[1:36:10] development standards fire

[1:36:11] safety lighting.

[1:36:11] >> bran improvements open

[1:36:15] space parking loading. Our 2

[1:36:16] include storm water

[1:36:16] subdivisions transportation

[1:36:24] and utilities. Really in part

[1:36:25] to not a whole changed from

[1:36:27] what our current code says a

[1:36:30] lot of these are sort

[1:36:31] engineering specific type

[1:36:33] standards and so we there's

[1:36:37] just a huge amount of change.

[1:36:41] Article 10 is on storm water.

[1:36:43] Basically the major change to

[1:36:46] most of these is that the

[1:36:47] engineering or public works

[1:36:47] department is going to create

[1:36:49] an engineering design manual.

[1:36:52] So a lot of those specifics

[1:36:53] about like road complexion

[1:36:59] and. You know water flow

[1:37:01] things that are specific to

[1:37:01] engineering standards are not

[1:37:04] going to be part of the uldc

[1:37:05] which will make it a little

[1:37:05] bit easier for them to update

[1:37:06] over time as they need to

[1:37:10] know. So. Nothing earth

[1:37:15] breaking shattering and storm

[1:37:16] water. Most of the changes

[1:37:17] again are going to be and

[1:37:18] changes. I'm annual we just

[1:37:20] took out all of the specifics.

[1:37:21] So the stormwater chapters up

[1:37:24] same as what we have now

[1:37:25] subdivisions again about the

[1:37:26] same as what we have now. The

[1:37:32] big change. If follow the big

[1:37:33] changes that a lot of our

[1:37:35] general standards had been

[1:37:36] located the subdivision

[1:37:37] section we instead have moved

[1:37:39] those out likable sections and

[1:37:43] the rest of chapter

[1:37:45] subdivision still has

[1:37:46] basically the same

[1:37:46] requirements for accuracy

[1:37:49] easements lots blocks

[1:37:50] orientation natural features

[1:37:52] monuments and those are

[1:37:54] monuments like the serving

[1:37:59] monuments. I'm like a little

[1:38:00] monuments that are in the

[1:38:02] corner of your property. The

[1:38:08] stakes that sort of park space

[1:38:10] public amenities roads and

[1:38:11] sidewalks storm water

[1:38:12] management utilities and and

[1:38:16] the subdivision section

[1:38:17] specifically for roads and

[1:38:17] sidewalks stormwater

[1:38:18] management utilities basically

[1:38:19] it says look at the

[1:38:20] requirements that are in the

[1:38:27] rest of chapter 4. Article 12.

[1:38:33] So the transportation. So

[1:38:35] basically it took the

[1:38:37] categories from what was kurt

[1:38:38] previously in our

[1:38:38] transportation section or the

[1:38:41] roads and sidewalks section.

[1:38:46] Again all of those specific

[1:38:46] engineering standards will be

[1:38:47] in the engineering design

[1:38:48] manual. They're currently

[1:38:49] working on that is being

[1:38:49] developed with this in mind.

[1:38:53] >> and so. This article just

[1:38:57] gives a lake. Overview tells

[1:39:01] you that you have to have a

[1:39:02] public public works permit. It

[1:39:03] gives you some general, you

[1:39:03] know minimum right of way with

[1:39:04] its turning right you guys

[1:39:09] that we require sidewalks that

[1:39:10] we want bike lanes a multiple

[1:39:10] trails and how to do street

[1:39:16] names we sort of at us as a

[1:39:17] skeleton so that the

[1:39:18] engineering design manual can

[1:39:22] fill in the gaps. Article 13,

[1:39:27] it's all about water.

[1:39:28] >> this is basically the same

[1:39:30] as our current water standards

[1:39:31] or utilities. Most of it is

[1:39:32] water-related some of that is

[1:39:38] not a water related. With

[1:39:38] utilities. This is really just

[1:39:39] a reorganization of all of the

[1:39:41] standards that we currently

[1:39:42] have so that they're a little

[1:39:46] bit easier understand. So we

[1:39:47] broke them down into potable

[1:39:48] water systems wastewater

[1:39:50] systems reuse water systems

[1:39:50] other utilities. So that other

[1:39:55] utilities is where. Table

[1:39:56] electricity. Those types of

[1:40:01] things would be drafted. That

[1:40:03] sort my brief overview of the

[1:40:06] chapter. Because this is sort

[1:40:10] of a. And sharing specific

[1:40:15] section.

[1:40:15] >> we don't have a whole lot

[1:40:16] of more details that we really

[1:40:17] need to go into of course

[1:40:17] we're happy to answer

[1:40:21] questions we did have 6

[1:40:22] consensus items that were sort

[1:40:23] of a combination of the part

[1:40:27] one and part 2 because one of

[1:40:28] the commissioners was absent

[1:40:28] for the workshop for the part

[1:40:34] one. So I can either go over

[1:40:35] questions now and then go

[1:40:36] through the consensus items or

[1:40:37] we can the consensus items it

[1:40:46] is up to commission.

[1:40:47] >> questions first. What was

[1:40:48] present it on to the consensus

[1:40:56] items. Look to see what they

[1:40:56] want no. Yeah I liked and I to

[1:40:57] know what the consensus items

[1:40:59] are okay.

[1:41:00] >> so we have 6 consensus

[1:41:04] items. I sort of lump them

[1:41:06] together by topic. So the

[1:41:11] first relates to large palms

[1:41:12] being substituted for canopy

[1:41:13] trees on a one to one ratio.

[1:41:20] This was.

[1:41:21] >> landscaping materials

[1:41:21] offers a landscaping

[1:41:27] landscaping. Master treeless.

[1:41:29] >> an article 3 of the

[1:41:30] chapter. So this is from part

[1:41:35] one.

[1:41:35] >> one of the commissioners

[1:41:36] has requested that we do not

[1:41:37] allow substitution on a one to

[1:41:38] one ratio that we keep it that

[1:41:41] the 3 to one.

[1:41:42] >> large palms as well as

[1:41:46] smaller palms. That would be

[1:41:49] my first consensus item.

[1:41:53] >> okay.

[1:41:57] >> so if you're on go from

[1:41:58] here about what want to ask

[1:42:04] questions. Man. Input half you

[1:42:06] got and with regard keep that.

[1:42:12] Yeah there go. I personally

[1:42:18] have to get of palm trees a as

[1:42:20] kind of petri site I think you

[1:42:22] know a lot of countries like

[1:42:27] themselves to I'm not big fan

[1:42:28] black and and and the other

[1:42:32] options there from my gauge

[1:42:35] citizens that I've talked to

[1:42:36] their awful like slump, but

[1:42:42] I'm curious as to what our.

[1:42:43] You know our promise people

[1:42:46] you know what what are they

[1:42:47] telling us. You know are they

[1:42:48] comfortable with this is that

[1:42:51] their recommendation.

[1:43:03] >> I don't remember where.

[1:43:04] >> ratio or the one to one

[1:43:07] ratio for the alms that we

[1:43:08] they're specifically large

[1:43:09] large alms they have over 20

[1:43:12] feet of spread

[1:43:15] >> palm fronds so you're

[1:43:16] looking at particularly large

[1:43:19] palm trees, the one to one

[1:43:20] ratio is used in other

[1:43:22] jurisdictions for these types

[1:43:25] of palms. Staff thinks

[1:43:29] separate allowing these in

[1:43:30] some instances you know

[1:43:33] landscaping code already.

[1:43:34] Doesn't allow you to

[1:43:34] substitute more then I think

[1:43:38] it's. 40% of your tree

[1:43:38] requirement with palm trees

[1:43:41] anyways. So this would be a

[1:43:46] substitution. That would allow

[1:43:47] some variation the types of

[1:43:49] trees that we would counted

[1:43:52] tours canopy trees I think it

[1:43:54] would just add variety.

[1:43:56] >> and with regard to number 2

[1:43:58] here. When we talk about palm

[1:44:01] trees as street trees, the

[1:44:04] fine street trees for us.

[1:44:09] >> so the city has a street

[1:44:11] tree requirements. For new so

[1:44:11] this would be a type of tree

[1:44:13] that developer could in the

[1:44:19] right of as a street tree.

[1:44:22] Street trees have multiple

[1:44:23] purposes there to provide

[1:44:26] shade they help with. As crazy

[1:44:29] as it sounds. Traffic and

[1:44:33] speeding. They help. And a lot

[1:44:38] of what so there. Well a palm

[1:44:40] tree is not going to provide

[1:44:41] the shade overstreet that an

[1:44:43] oak tree wilpon spot interfere

[1:44:47] with. The pavement. You're

[1:44:48] still going to get a lot of

[1:44:49] those other benefits of having

[1:44:51] the trees. And again it will

[1:44:53] probably provide some variety.

[1:45:01] Are streetscape.

[1:45:03] >> commissioner now the only

[1:45:04] reason why requested this is

[1:45:05] because the other poems that

[1:45:06] were in that section, many of

[1:45:10] them were 3 to one. The 2 that

[1:45:11] I had requested was the royal

[1:45:16] palms that cuban in florida.

[1:45:17] Be replaced at 3 to one also

[1:45:19] because the other ones are 3

[1:45:22] to that that is the reason why

[1:45:22] was requesting it and we need

[1:45:25] a consensus on it. It's not

[1:45:28] all palms are one to one.

[1:45:29] There are many other ponds

[1:45:29] that are 3 to one in that

[1:45:35] list.

[1:45:41] >> okay MISTER Image. I know

[1:45:43] she had just mention the royal

[1:45:43] but do queen palms fall under

[1:45:44] that category as large funds

[1:45:46] as well.

[1:46:01] >> I mean look at now.

[1:46:02] There

[1:46:03] another name that those would

[1:46:07] go by.

[1:46:13] >> queen bee bombs.

[1:46:14] >> I don't see queen palms

[1:46:15] specifically on the list and

[1:46:16] double checked, I tried to

[1:46:18] include florida native.

[1:46:21] >> and most of treeless came

[1:46:25] from our existing true but I

[1:46:25] did.

[1:46:26] >> I don't see that on there,

[1:46:27] but it could be a goes by a

[1:46:30] different name that could be

[1:46:30] true.

[1:46:32] >> my main thing when they're

[1:46:33] going 3 to one and I

[1:46:35] understand how big the royals

[1:46:36] get their normally they're in

[1:46:40] a great thing are 3 to one.

[1:46:40] >> so it's kind of hard group

[1:46:44] these large trees in an area.

[1:46:45] All right so I I could deal

[1:46:45] with the large palms as a one

[1:46:52] to one. And should they be

[1:46:52] allowed to street trees now

[1:46:54] this is where my my main

[1:46:55] question comes census on the

[1:46:56] developer who's maintained and

[1:46:58] all those palm trees. Because

[1:47:02] once they become on the story.

[1:47:03] That it could be the city's

[1:47:04] responsibility to make sure

[1:47:05] that those palms are trimmed

[1:47:11] and taken out of roadway and

[1:47:12] and you've already mentioned

[1:47:14] that yeah there are less

[1:47:14] damaging than the oak trees,

[1:47:16] but I believe in some of your

[1:47:17] areas or you've got re

[1:47:21] barriers that are going to be

[1:47:22] place to where the roots will

[1:47:23] not go towards the sidewalks

[1:47:24] and everything so. You know

[1:47:29] it's sort of like a. And I'm

[1:47:31] >> I think it depends on the

[1:47:34] ownership but I'm not.

[1:47:34] >> entirely sure how we deal

[1:47:36] with that now.

[1:47:40] >> public works director so if

[1:47:41] palm trees or whatever trees

[1:47:42] are planted. Within the city

[1:47:47] right of way that's an

[1:47:48] improvement to the right of

[1:47:49] way that the property they

[1:47:49] would be the responsibility of

[1:47:52] the property owners take.

[1:47:54] >> and if they don't maintain

[1:47:56] and we've got sanitation

[1:47:57] trucks going down there or

[1:47:57] getting battered problems

[1:48:01] oakland's whatever the tree

[1:48:02] MAY be.

[1:48:02] >> how are we going to rectify

[1:48:05] that we're going to code

[1:48:05] enforcement first. If it's a

[1:48:06] safety issue then public works

[1:48:11] will take care. I'm a little

[1:48:14] iffy on the on the street tree

[1:48:19] basis but I understand it's

[1:48:19] different and it MAY be more

[1:48:20] welcoming because we are in

[1:48:21] the south and tropical this at

[1:48:26] other so. I just didn't want

[1:48:27] big wants to be grouped

[1:48:27] together because that's going

[1:48:34] to nearly impossible.

[1:48:35] >> and just to clarify so that

[1:48:36] should that should want a 1,

[1:48:40] 2, 3 ratio 9 one to

[1:48:41] >> know for the large palms,

[1:48:44] we have a few that are one to

[1:48:46] one and there few other palm

[1:48:49] trees that are 3 to one ratio

[1:48:49] to this question was

[1:48:50] specifically about the one to

[1:48:54] one ratio on to want that.

[1:48:55] >> large it's a big secret,

[1:48:55] I'm not not favor of this at

[1:48:59] all palms are. Not trees and

[1:49:00] especially we're talking about

[1:49:06] canopy canopy goes over.

[1:49:08] >> whereas palms really don't

[1:49:09] provide that these are all

[1:49:10] palms, you have here planted

[1:49:15] at cocoa and also at culver's

[1:49:18] and people talk all the time

[1:49:19] about a sea of asphalt those

[1:49:20] parking lots because palms

[1:49:25] were used as opposed to. To

[1:49:26] actual trees, there's a reason

[1:49:27] again for canopy trees, it's

[1:49:28] to it's to provide.

[1:49:30] >> cooling shade.

[1:49:33] >> and not going to get the

[1:49:35] same type of cooling effects

[1:49:38] that you do with trains. So

[1:49:41] when you have the water that

[1:49:46] comes up out through so they

[1:49:47] the trunk and out to the

[1:49:50] leaves up to 15%. You can have

[1:49:51] your temperature reduce under

[1:49:52] trees that doesn't happen

[1:49:57] under pump. And things street

[1:49:57] trees. Palms are not going to

[1:50:00] give you that kind of shame

[1:50:01] and we're talking about

[1:50:03] providing shade for not just

[1:50:06] the roadway, but typically

[1:50:08] talking about sidewalks and as

[1:50:12] as the commissioner emerich

[1:50:14] said there are ways to

[1:50:15] accommodate the religious and

[1:50:16] that really is not as an

[1:50:18] exception when you're talking

[1:50:22] about problems with sidewalks

[1:50:23] because I've been up to all

[1:50:24] the developments up and

[1:50:25] sarasota it's city of sarasota

[1:50:26] and with the county and

[1:50:29] honore. And even when they did

[1:50:34] have some have some lifting it

[1:50:34] placed sidewalk and that's it

[1:50:35] they kept the trees they

[1:50:38] didn't take the trees out

[1:50:39] because that's the reason why

[1:50:41] you're walking sidewalks and

[1:50:44] biking on the sidewalks is

[1:50:44] because shaded you're not

[1:50:46] going to get that was was a so

[1:50:47] I'm not going to get chance

[1:50:55] for me for this what we want

[1:50:55] to do.

[1:50:56] >> commissioner mcdowell I

[1:50:57] only spoke to number consensus

[1:50:58] because I thought we were just

[1:50:59] taking them one at a time but

[1:51:01] since they're being lumped

[1:51:02] together this is precisely why

[1:51:07] I the street trees. The palm

[1:51:07] trees for street trees, they

[1:51:12] don't offer sheet.

[1:51:14] >> they're just there for

[1:51:15] pretty nurse to commissioner

[1:51:15] and richest point I was

[1:51:16] concerned also about the

[1:51:18] maintenance of them.

[1:51:19] >> yeah the property owner

[1:51:22] supposed to maintain but. We

[1:51:28] know how that works

[1:51:29] >> I am amenable to and

[1:51:33] requested that they be removed

[1:51:33] for.

[1:51:34] >> palm trees being shade

[1:51:36] trees and street chains. This

[1:51:37] is why it is up for consensus

[1:51:45] request.

[1:51:46] >> so there's no other well I

[1:51:47] think mayor is I you know.

[1:51:50] >> the only concern I well I

[1:51:54] see the points.

[1:51:55] >> commissioner, I'm rich and

[1:51:55] mcdowell it and they are way

[1:52:00] to it. Regarding.

[1:52:01] >> shane issues cooling issues

[1:52:03] all the rest.

[1:52:07] >> we went through a hurricane

[1:52:11] and the majority of trees that

[1:52:12] came down.

[1:52:12] >> what black wall of trees

[1:52:15] oak trees trees that have

[1:52:16] lousy routes because basically

[1:52:18] they just topple over

[1:52:19] especially when they're

[1:52:20] incorrectly water which is

[1:52:22] what happens throughout the

[1:52:24] city. So the more they get

[1:52:24] water even though they're

[1:52:27] supposed only in their first

[1:52:31] year. When you trees, those

[1:52:33] routes stay hall, look at what

[1:52:33] we saw over the city trees

[1:52:35] down and they were trees.

[1:52:39] >> they were oaks and

[1:52:44] throughout the city, I mean

[1:52:44] everywhere I went people said

[1:52:46] they're not really going to

[1:52:49] make we plant trees again are

[1:52:50] they.

[1:52:51] >> so you know I appreciate

[1:52:52] the need for shade and all the

[1:52:54] rest that I just raise it a as

[1:52:55] an issue to be discussed

[1:52:59] because. By no means am I an

[1:53:01] expert in this area and. You

[1:53:04] know it's really a question of

[1:53:05] what we wanted to I mean if

[1:53:11] it's. You know, maybe I really

[1:53:11] don't matter to solve this

[1:53:15] problem, but but certainly

[1:53:16] doing the same thing over and

[1:53:18] over again and running the

[1:53:19] risk of these trees going down

[1:53:20] every time there's a major

[1:53:21] storm which is what's going to

[1:53:23] happen. You know just doesn't

[1:53:24] seem intelligent to me.

[1:53:27] >> and

[1:53:31] >> I don't know been a real

[1:53:32] suggestion just offering up an

[1:53:33] alternative perspective on

[1:53:36] this.

[1:53:38] >> okay and I I am respond to

[1:53:41] some of good because you know

[1:53:46] hoping I would something but

[1:53:47] yes, acadiana at a 150 mile an

[1:53:48] hour winds. We did have trees

[1:53:52] that went down. They the oak

[1:53:54] trees on sumpter had very

[1:53:58] canopies they offered a lot of

[1:54:01] resistance and eventually they

[1:54:02] succumbed that is is nature it

[1:54:02] doesn't mean that you're going

[1:54:05] throw the baby out with the

[1:54:06] bathwater there's a lot of

[1:54:08] people including myself i

[1:54:09] still have all the original

[1:54:10] trees that are left when my

[1:54:10] house was built 30 years ago

[1:54:13] and I know that they say.

[1:54:14] >> my house I didn't have one

[1:54:20] shingle that left my roof and

[1:54:23] again you see tree that fell

[1:54:24] his house, it's very dramatic

[1:54:25] and you're going to see that

[1:54:26] but you're also not saying how

[1:54:26] many houses were safe because

[1:54:29] they did have.

[1:54:30] >> I developed lots next to

[1:54:31] them and they they took the

[1:54:35] brunt of of that so as far if

[1:54:38] they're properly pruned and

[1:54:39] send out that the wind could

[1:54:42] pass through a little better.

[1:54:43] And again as commissioner

[1:54:44] mcdowell said the whole point

[1:54:46] of street trees and had and

[1:54:47] putting trees and development

[1:54:49] projects is for shade is to

[1:54:50] have places for people to

[1:54:51] gather and to to get some

[1:54:55] relief from the sun. And I'm

[1:54:56] no black alex that I that is

[1:55:02] not a common trait that's part

[1:55:03] tree. That's a well in part

[1:55:04] because the black all also

[1:55:07] called something there's a

[1:55:08] difference is a different

[1:55:09] species that says shady lady

[1:55:10] is not a black olive and shady

[1:55:11] ladies are not native, but

[1:55:14] they are florida friendly. And

[1:55:15] they are plant they plant them

[1:55:17] a lot as as street race.

[1:55:23] Around we used interchange

[1:55:27] they were all right so.

[1:55:28] Looking for for a consensus,

[1:55:31] yeah. I'll start with number 2

[1:55:36] because it seems to I will ask

[1:55:41] for consensus that palm trees.

[1:55:43] >> specifically the mural the

[1:55:45] royal on cuba, the royal palm

[1:55:46] florida be removed as a street

[1:55:49] tree.

[1:55:58] >> sure and rich. Agree with

[1:55:59] vice mayor.

[1:56:00] >> yeah, I'm going to go along

[1:56:00] with your son should go more

[1:56:06] than yes. I mean, yes. Have

[1:56:10] >> and I'm a yes. That removed

[1:56:13] it. This next one we might

[1:56:18] have a little bit conversation

[1:56:19] additional I don't know but to

[1:56:23] substitute up on the trees.

[1:56:25] >> to be 3 to one for the

[1:56:29] royal florida to be 3 to one

[1:56:31] as opposed to what it's on as

[1:56:37] want one. Is that only for

[1:56:39] those particular those are the

[1:56:41] only only ones that are and

[1:56:43] then but bismarck palms are

[1:56:44] huge so I left that they're

[1:56:45] huge and they're and they're

[1:56:46] again they're not even need a

[1:56:50] one of the cabbage palms are

[1:56:51] they. They are now owners are

[1:56:54] already 3 to one okay, so it's

[1:56:55] just these particular these 2

[1:56:55] are what ice I stuck with but

[1:56:59] if you want to add. It's mark

[1:57:00] palm. I thought they gave a

[1:57:01] little bit more she didn't

[1:57:03] have a little bit more

[1:57:05] distinction. Then the florida.

[1:57:09] And cuba, royal palms. Those

[1:57:11] are the only ones that are one

[1:57:13] to one o k and just to clarify

[1:57:14] canopy trees this would apply

[1:57:16] to development sites. We know

[1:57:17] doesn't know missus palms in

[1:57:23] this section table called the

[1:57:27] majority them are 3 to want to

[1:57:30] that I requested the consensus

[1:57:32] on are listed as one to want

[1:57:34] so I'm requesting a consensus

[1:57:36] change guess my question is

[1:57:37] what when where this be years

[1:57:39] we're talking about a 3 to one

[1:57:43] that would be used in terms

[1:57:44] south all.

[1:57:44] >> all over the city we have

[1:57:48] canopy tree requirements. For

[1:57:52] a couple of the larger palms,

[1:57:53] would allow them to be a one

[1:57:54] to one substitution for a

[1:57:57] canopy tree, however, a code

[1:57:58] specifies that you cannot have

[1:58:02] more than 50% of your trees

[1:58:04] substituted was pumps with

[1:58:05] pops so you would still get

[1:58:06] your canopy trees this would

[1:58:07] just be an alternative for

[1:58:09] some of them can count towards

[1:58:09] canopy trees as opposed to

[1:58:12] understory trees.

[1:58:16] >> so that so asking is that

[1:58:22] that without it.

[1:58:23] >> so we have multiple lists

[1:58:28] on the list. One list is

[1:58:29] canopy trees these poems are

[1:58:31] not listed as candy treats and

[1:58:34] there's another list of

[1:58:34] understory trees. Ponds are

[1:58:39] not listed understory trees,

[1:58:40] there's a 3rd list that's

[1:58:41] called palms there in this

[1:58:44] list for pumps. And then the

[1:58:45] next list which we've already

[1:58:47] talked about is street treats.

[1:58:51] I am requesting to have the

[1:58:53] ratio from one to one 3 to

[1:58:54] one. For these royal palm

[1:58:59] trees. I'm so not clear

[1:59:00] because you said it would as

[1:59:03] it can be.

[1:59:06] >> yet so there are 3 palm

[1:59:08] trees that 2 types of royal

[1:59:10] palms and the bismarck I'm ce

[1:59:14] that instead of doing a 3 to

[1:59:17] one ratio. As a replacement

[1:59:20] for a canopy a tree. We

[1:59:21] allowed to want a lot because

[1:59:24] they're particularly large on

[1:59:25] trees. So our palms, I know

[1:59:33] that they're not sure so.

[1:59:35] Commissioners request was to

[1:59:38] for the 2 royal palms to

[1:59:39] change that substitution ratio

[1:59:43] from one to to 3 to one.

[1:59:44] That's that's what this

[1:59:48] consensus item us.

[1:59:50] >> okay in order to qualify as

[1:59:51] a candidate it's still more

[1:59:56] than 50% can be correct. I

[1:59:57] commissioner is that that one

[1:59:58] to 3 what you're asking for

[2:00:03] rita want. Yes. So your yes.

[2:00:17] I'll be yes with that.

[2:00:19] >> this is where I'm a little

[2:00:19] stop because I I don't think

[2:00:21] that they're going to be a

[2:00:23] pleasing at 3 to one the size

[2:00:24] that they're at and I don't

[2:00:25] want to replace canopy trees.

[2:00:28] At all either. I would just

[2:00:32] assume make these. You know

[2:00:37] like extras if.

[2:00:37] >> you know if they wanted

[2:00:39] this in their yard doesn't

[2:00:40] count what we're asking them

[2:00:41] to do, but it could be an

[2:00:46] accessory try tree. I mean

[2:00:48] I'll be a yes to go along with

[2:00:49] the board but I'm really not

[2:00:51] in favor of putting 3

[2:00:57] >> on a property.

[2:00:57] >> and I get what you're

[2:00:58] saying but I but when you're

[2:01:00] saying no more than 50% can be

[2:01:01] palms that wouldn't be

[2:01:02] physically possible to have 3

[2:01:02] bismarck psi would.

[2:01:07] >> I think.

[2:01:08] >> on on a quarter acre lot

[2:01:09] that's just not going to

[2:01:16] happen is they are monster. So

[2:01:19] we have both of those taken

[2:01:20] care of that content right

[2:01:21] thank MISS Katie. And what was

[2:01:25] the next one.

[2:01:27] >> all right so the next

[2:01:27] relates to single family

[2:01:32] residential development. Sort

[2:01:33] of in a similar vein should

[2:01:33] there be a minimum entry

[2:01:36] requirement for residential

[2:01:37] development. Right now the

[2:01:39] code only requires shrubs the

[2:01:40] proposed new code requires

[2:01:45] shrubs and trees.

[2:01:46] Commissioners request was to

[2:01:49] not require trees as there's

[2:01:50] been some concern about how

[2:01:51] impact the drain field.

[2:01:57] However. That code does have

[2:01:57] some alternatives for accept

[2:01:58] trees in the front ship shape

[2:01:59] trees in the pack. So and so

[2:02:03] forth so. Are there is some

[2:02:06] flexibility the second one on

[2:02:09] the side is do we want to

[2:02:10] require residential

[2:02:10] development in the r one

[2:02:13] district to have a and do we

[2:02:16] want to size for that so we

[2:02:19] can take those. Together

[2:02:21] separately. Those are the 2

[2:02:28] for the side.

[2:02:29] >> okay so number three's

[2:02:29] about minimum tree requirement

[2:02:30] you're saying right now we

[2:02:31] don't have that.

[2:02:35] >> right now we only require

[2:02:36] shrubs and we don't have a

[2:02:37] tree requirement for

[2:02:39] single-family properties.

[2:02:39] Almost looks like it was taken

[2:02:46] out last minute. Most places,

[2:02:47] including cape coral, which is

[2:02:48] a very similar communities, is

[2:02:52] MAY. Have a tree requirement

[2:02:59] for single-family properties.

[2:03:00] >> you know how I knew that it

[2:03:08] was 35% the charity. Where's

[2:03:10] I'm sorry words the page where

[2:03:10] it's.

[2:03:15] >> you do have I'm sorry can't

[2:03:18] find it now.

[2:03:22] >> it's section 4 points 3.5.

[2:03:23] I don't know what page it's on

[2:03:23] because I have my notes that I

[2:03:27] submitted.

[2:03:28] >> this you know where that is

[2:03:32] about that trees.

[2:03:33] >> landscaping for single into

[2:03:35] family dwellings is on page 18

[2:03:40] okay up the draft code that I

[2:03:40] have it up on the screen. A

[2:03:41] case that's where saying that

[2:03:45] you had to have. To cap trees

[2:03:46] for every 7500 square feet

[2:03:51] correct. So a 10,000

[2:03:51] square-foot lot would be about

[2:03:54] 3 trees that doesn't quite if

[2:03:59] there. My yes. Okay so that's

[2:04:00] what you're proposing. Correct

[2:04:12] okay.

[2:04:16] >> to my request yes for surf

[2:04:17] a better that ability is not

[2:04:21] in our drive to did that added

[2:04:22] after draft.

[2:04:22] >> likability section was

[2:04:25] added based off of my notes to

[2:04:29] your chapter for comments. To

[2:04:31] clarify which properties

[2:04:32] apply. So this is my working

[2:04:37] draft. So what it is not. 100%

[2:04:40] the same as the one that

[2:04:42] submitted and since you

[2:04:45] brought up my notes for for

[2:04:46] when I submitted my questions

[2:04:50] comments thing last week. The

[2:04:54] thing that I received back

[2:04:54] didn't have any comments or

[2:04:55] answers to my questions it was

[2:04:59] blank.

[2:05:00] >> did they fall off some how

[2:05:03] did I get the wrong document.

[2:05:04] >> I'm not sure we we

[2:05:08] definitely created comments

[2:05:09] back.

[2:05:10] >> I see the man we'll make

[2:05:11] sure that you get I would

[2:05:12] appreciate it because I didn't

[2:05:14] I just received exactly what I

[2:05:16] submitted to you maybe it was

[2:05:17] sent to my fellow

[2:05:19] commissioners for today's

[2:05:19] discussion but usually the

[2:05:20] comments are also included I

[2:05:23] didn't receive anyhow so the

[2:05:27] reason why I had requested

[2:05:28] that we have this discussion

[2:05:29] is because when we approved

[2:05:35] the tree. Code we allowed the

[2:05:36] property owner for single

[2:05:37] family residential to

[2:05:39] determine if they wanted to

[2:05:40] have trees on their property

[2:05:44] or not the.

[2:05:46] >> overwhelming majority was

[2:05:46] it's single family residential

[2:05:51] there 80 by one 20 lot. This

[2:05:53] will require I have 80 by one

[2:05:57] 20 lot. It's approximately

[2:05:58] 10,025 square feet.

[2:05:59] >> and I would be required to

[2:06:01] have canopy trees and

[2:06:08] understory trees. Because it's

[2:06:11] more than 7500 square feet.

[2:06:16] >> so

[2:06:17] >> I took my situation and

[2:06:18] applied it to the pre platted

[2:06:20] lots because the majority of

[2:06:23] pre platted lots are more than

[2:06:24] 7500 square feet so that would

[2:06:31] have to double this and a lot

[2:06:31] of people especially after

[2:06:33] hurricane ian don't want any

[2:06:33] trees on their property

[2:06:36] because of the damage to their

[2:06:38] pool cages and their only

[2:06:38] knows what else and the cost

[2:06:39] to remove them after the

[2:06:43] hurricane. So is why I put it

[2:06:47] on there that we need to have

[2:06:48] this discussion. I can still

[2:06:52] plant a tree if I but this is

[2:06:53] mandating that I have a

[2:06:54] minimum of 4 canopy trees or

[2:06:56] its equivalent. On my

[2:07:00] property. What they found

[2:07:02] developing a new home. You

[2:07:07] can't make not. So I just

[2:07:09] wanted to have conversation

[2:07:09] with you guys because we took

[2:07:12] it out of the cold. Requiring

[2:07:17] trees. If they want to have

[2:07:22] trees they get credits. And

[2:07:25] that was it was their choice

[2:07:25] but this is now putting it

[2:07:29] back in that they must have.

[2:07:29] So I really hope that we can

[2:07:30] have a conversation about

[2:07:38] this.

[2:07:39] >> and this is that the

[2:07:40] development stage correct.

[2:07:48] Yeah correct understand okay.

[2:07:48] 2 things.

[2:07:49] >> one the I was out last week

[2:07:53] so emails until morning. But I

[2:07:54] did look at that e-mail this

[2:07:56] morning that was questions

[2:07:59] that you that the commissioner

[2:08:00] had that I would email that

[2:08:00] was sent to all of the

[2:08:01] commissioners and opened that

[2:08:03] document. If you look at that

[2:08:06] document. That cop there are

[2:08:10] small yellow boxes. Embedded

[2:08:11] in that document you have to

[2:08:15] hover over those yellow if you

[2:08:16] just try to print it out it's

[2:08:16] not you're not going to see

[2:08:17] the comments but in the

[2:08:21] digital form. A small yellow

[2:08:23] boxes if you hover over that

[2:08:23] it's going to expand and

[2:08:29] you'll see the response staff.

[2:08:30] Loved it I read all the

[2:08:31] responses this morning they

[2:08:31] were in the document that was

[2:08:36] sent off when I went print it

[2:08:36] out.

[2:08:37] >> I direct current all of it

[2:08:38] so they didn't show up so

[2:08:39] that's why I'm saying they

[2:08:40] there were no comments the

[2:08:42] comments are in the digital

[2:08:42] doc, I so if you if you just

[2:08:45] open the digital document on

[2:08:46] your pad.

[2:08:46] >> you'll be able to hover

[2:08:49] over those boxes see those

[2:08:51] comments. But yes, we're

[2:08:52] talking the development status

[2:08:53] would not apply to homes that

[2:08:56] are already existing. If

[2:08:58] you're if you're a lot is

[2:09:00] 12,000 square feet. Then you

[2:09:05] have. 2 canopy trees required.

[2:09:06] It doesn't round up to the

[2:09:14] next. Number you don't another

[2:09:14] tree wouldn't kick in until

[2:09:15] you have another 7500 square

[2:09:23] feet. Okay and it's very calm

[2:09:24] and I mean almost unheard of

[2:09:26] for a city not to have a tree

[2:09:29] with choir meant on

[2:09:31] single-family even with well

[2:09:32] and septic it's very easy to

[2:09:38] accommodate. Canopy trees and

[2:09:41] I do recall some of the

[2:09:41] discussions when that

[2:09:42] requirement was taken out I

[2:09:45] when I first started with the

[2:09:47] city and my recollection was a

[2:09:49] lot of the reason for it being

[2:09:50] taken out was because of

[2:09:50] problems with enforcement that

[2:09:54] had happened in the past and

[2:09:55] trying to ensure that those

[2:09:56] trees remain I can tell you in

[2:09:58] every jurisdiction, I've

[2:09:59] worked in. We have not had

[2:10:01] that issue because we we do

[2:10:01] enforce there methods for

[2:10:07] enforcement of that of and

[2:10:11] ongoing enforcement of so I'm

[2:10:12] confident we can enforce

[2:10:13] without any any problems that

[2:10:18] I don't. Quite understand all

[2:10:19] of forsman issues that

[2:10:20] happened in the past and

[2:10:21] issues with builders taking

[2:10:24] the trees out and moving them

[2:10:25] around but. Every jurisdiction

[2:10:26] fort and we've managed not to

[2:10:29] have that. Problem and so I

[2:10:33] think we can circumvent that.

[2:10:34] Respond.

[2:10:36] >> I got to floor right I'm

[2:10:41] middle of my question yeah. Do

[2:10:42] trees. Some certain free trees

[2:10:45] with they qualify as.

[2:10:47] >> they would have for the for

[2:10:48] the required trees they would

[2:10:51] have to be on our route tree

[2:10:53] list do you have an interest

[2:10:54] trees like orange are great

[2:10:55] fried or anything like that

[2:10:58] that grow fairly large.

[2:10:59] >> that could be sub staying

[2:11:05] by the people as well.

[2:11:08] >> there are there's does

[2:11:09] there's a citrus trees are

[2:11:09] understory tree right, I know

[2:11:16] that. Average high of. Average

[2:11:17] orange trees like 15 feet or

[2:11:18] is like the average high of a

[2:11:22] mango tree is like 30 feet. So

[2:11:24] it is something that we could

[2:11:24] look into where perhaps we can

[2:11:26] add it if they're not there

[2:11:30] already, some fruit trees like

[2:11:31] or avocado trees which are a

[2:11:32] little bit larger than your

[2:11:37] average citrus tree.

[2:11:39] >> as an it would give them

[2:11:41] options and it would benefit

[2:11:44] both you're getting a tree and

[2:11:45] b they're getting a product

[2:11:47] off of their tree they can

[2:11:47] boost to the neighbors say I

[2:11:48] got the most avocados a

[2:11:50] seasoned here take some. I

[2:11:50] mean it's just something to

[2:11:55] work with. I have no issues

[2:11:56] with having a couple on the

[2:12:00] developed properties, it.

[2:12:05] Okay. Vice mayor. I correct

[2:12:07] plant development communities,

[2:12:11] whether it be well up toledo

[2:12:12] village that's coming up any

[2:12:13] of others they all act

[2:12:13] requirements.

[2:12:19] >> case. They have both

[2:12:20] requirements for the

[2:12:21] subdivision and requirements

[2:12:23] for the end of lot and so I no

[2:12:25] reason why single family

[2:12:26] residential property should

[2:12:27] those same requirements just

[2:12:32] seems consistent to me. I.

[2:12:38] >> I just wanted to.

[2:12:39] >> thank you for the

[2:12:40] clarification about and that

[2:12:41] the math here so 10,000 square

[2:12:42] feet which is typically a

[2:12:43] quarter acre lot would just

[2:12:44] require 2 trees. And one has

[2:12:45] to be in the front is that

[2:12:49] what this is saying.

[2:12:50] >> it says at least one canopy

[2:12:51] tree or the equivalent number

[2:12:55] understory trees, a so this is

[2:12:57] another place for that that

[2:13:01] paul ratio could come into

[2:13:01] play where if they don't have

[2:13:01] enough for him in their front

[2:13:01] yard canopy tree they could do

[2:13:03] one royal palm in the front

[2:13:07] yard has a one to one ratio or

[2:13:08] they can do 3 small palms on a

[2:13:09] 3 to one ratio right. So

[2:13:12] that's that works and.

[2:13:13] >> and I just wanted to put it

[2:13:15] out there for the public

[2:13:15] record you can plant as as

[2:13:16] directors that you can have

[2:13:19] trees in the front. I just

[2:13:20] having a drain field doesn't

[2:13:24] mean you can't put anything.

[2:13:26] Their selection and placement

[2:13:27] yes, very important, but you

[2:13:31] can.

[2:13:32] >> I know from my own

[2:13:32] experience and you can drive

[2:13:33] around and see people of huge

[2:13:34] oak trees in front.

[2:13:39] >> I doesn't mean just because

[2:13:40] you have septic, you can't you

[2:13:45] can't do that. And just the

[2:13:46] fruit avocado mango trees,

[2:13:48] yeah, I like people having

[2:13:49] that option but again if

[2:13:54] you're talking about hurricane

[2:13:54] resistant. They're not all

[2:13:55] right there again, none of

[2:13:57] those are native and they

[2:14:02] failed miserably thailand.

[2:14:03] >> but that's what people want

[2:14:04] they're under story so other

[2:14:06] than the mango avocado.

[2:14:10] >> which are giant trace. Can

[2:14:12] have a problem with that with

[2:14:13] that orange tree falling on

[2:14:16] your house. And I think that's

[2:14:24] I hand. That.

[2:14:25] >> you might you do mention

[2:14:30] understory. Trees but you

[2:14:31] cannot substitute understory

[2:14:32] for all your canopy correct

[2:14:44] right you sort of everything.

[2:14:45] >> good is read anything about

[2:14:46] trees on people are ok what

[2:14:46] where their little option

[2:14:47] added hair okay, but you took

[2:14:52] care of everything.

[2:14:54] >> but I I appreciate that all

[2:14:55] commissioner mcdowell thank

[2:14:58] you for the clarity on that

[2:14:59] 7500 square feet because I

[2:15:02] read that multiple times and I

[2:15:04] kept I have seen 7500 okay

[2:15:06] 7500 nom on to the next 7500.

[2:15:07] so now I'm going to the fore

[2:15:14] canopy trees.

[2:15:14] >> my.

[2:15:15] >> concern and I know the

[2:15:15] mayor and totally opposite

[2:15:19] pages on one. People are not

[2:15:19] going to plant trees in their

[2:15:20] front yard to say have a drink

[2:15:25] field. If they have a septic

[2:15:26] and that's what the majority

[2:15:28] of our 80 by one 20 lott. R I

[2:15:29] can understand if they don't a

[2:15:34] septic system in their front.

[2:15:34] And there a preplanned the

[2:15:39] community 19 a conversation.

[2:15:40] You're in a pre-planned the

[2:15:41] community you're on tour. So

[2:15:42] you can plant them in your

[2:15:43] front yard but to require it

[2:15:44] for pre pro at community of

[2:15:47] pre platted house.

[2:15:49] >> that that to me is

[2:15:50] unrealistic expectation. Lot

[2:15:54] of builders in.

[2:15:54] >> you know.

[2:15:55] >> how are you going to put it

[2:15:56] in there because the builders

[2:15:59] have always said we have to

[2:16:01] bring in so much bill because

[2:16:02] of the septic tank, so how are

[2:16:03] they going to either one

[2:16:04] preserve a tree or plea to

[2:16:09] plant a tree on there with

[2:16:10] joint field, so it in the

[2:16:11] current proposal, it does not

[2:16:12] have to be a canopy tree.

[2:16:17] >> doesn't it says. At least

[2:16:19] one canopy tree or the

[2:16:20] equivalent number understory

[2:16:20] trees and palms shall be

[2:16:26] placed in the front yard. I

[2:16:27] don't see anybody putting any

[2:16:29] type of tree understory or

[2:16:30] canopy there is in there from

[2:16:36] there 0 reason absolutely no

[2:16:38] physical reason why an

[2:16:39] understory tree or palm trees

[2:16:41] cannot be placed in the front

[2:16:42] yard. On even on a house that

[2:16:46] has well and septic. The

[2:16:48] septic field does not take up

[2:16:52] the entire the front yard area

[2:16:56] on trees require very little

[2:16:58] area for root you put it on

[2:16:59] the periphery of the property

[2:17:00] to other side of the driveway

[2:17:05] put it up close to the house.

[2:17:05] Countries can be planted 2 to

[2:17:06] 3 feet from the foundation of

[2:17:07] a home without causing any

[2:17:09] damage at all. So there's

[2:17:13] there's no physical reason

[2:17:14] that would interfere with a

[2:17:19] septic system. It is obviously

[2:17:20] a the preference of the

[2:17:23] community but if you allow

[2:17:24] every single planet lot to

[2:17:28] clear their completely and not

[2:17:29] that any trees that it will a

[2:17:33] tree that sir which is why

[2:17:34] most communities require this

[2:17:35] even for properties that are

[2:17:44] on setting. Current. Code for

[2:17:45] tree code it says if you get

[2:17:46] your seo and you keep your

[2:17:47] tree for year after year I can

[2:17:49] remove that tree.

[2:17:50] >> that is being proposed to

[2:17:56] change as well.

[2:17:57] >> we're having properties be

[2:17:57] clear cut we hearing that and

[2:18:02] over from the community.

[2:18:03] >> that we don't want clear

[2:18:04] cutting and we were hopeful

[2:18:06] that that treat code that we

[2:18:07] instituted would help solve

[2:18:08] that with the conservation

[2:18:13] kind of

[2:18:15] >> and of course it has yet no

[2:18:19] it is should hasn't and and

[2:18:20] people used hurricane as a as

[2:18:21] a fig excuse to remove all the

[2:18:24] trees on their property.

[2:18:26] >> but what we're going to

[2:18:26] have our entire neighborhoods

[2:18:27] that have no trees if we

[2:18:31] continue down that path. So

[2:18:32] that's why we are proposing

[2:18:33] after seeing the effects and

[2:18:36] the impacts of that tree

[2:18:37] ordinance that's why we are

[2:18:37] proposing some changes

[2:18:39] because. You know unintended

[2:18:48] consequences are the. That's

[2:18:49] where we we there were

[2:18:50] unintended consequences from

[2:18:51] that we're going to see those

[2:18:53] on a grand scale. We don't.

[2:19:04] Make some reversing decisions.

[2:19:05] And that mitigation that's one

[2:19:09] component of tree.

[2:19:10] >> ordinance because before

[2:19:11] they clear cutting and we

[2:19:12] weren't getting anything the

[2:19:13] change 36 inches in diameter

[2:19:18] which absurd. And that's

[2:19:19] what's allowing us to have

[2:19:20] such a wonderful tree fund

[2:19:21] that were actually. Trying to

[2:19:27] decide how to use that money.

[2:19:27] Yes palms. I know if somebody

[2:19:31] had to not harm palms in their

[2:19:32] front yard. I mean they didn't

[2:19:33] seem to have a problem because

[2:19:33] that they have an extensive

[2:19:35] system as well.

[2:19:39] >> and it.

[2:19:40] >> director right thank you

[2:19:41] for bringing that up that you

[2:19:41] can still have the drain field

[2:19:44] doesn't take up your entire

[2:19:47] front yard and and people do

[2:19:48] plant palms in their front

[2:19:49] yards with snow. No problem so

[2:19:50] that is an option here

[2:19:51] understory and um's I think

[2:19:56] again you have you have

[2:19:58] addressed every concern and

[2:19:59] there is really no reason why

[2:19:59] people can son trees around

[2:20:03] around their house. So you're

[2:20:04] looking for a consensus on

[2:20:06] that first item. That was

[2:20:15] number 3. We want to should

[2:20:15] there be a minimum farm and

[2:20:19] the residential development.

[2:20:22] Commissioner emerge. Tell you

[2:20:26] what staff recommended. I mean

[2:20:35] yes well, and yes, I'm a yes.

[2:20:35] Your your direction and the

[2:20:38] second one is about.

[2:20:41] >> raj for require a garage.

[2:20:45] For residential development.

[2:20:46] >> so one of the changes and

[2:20:49] the proposed is that all

[2:20:53] properties are our one would

[2:20:53] have to have an attacker. They

[2:20:54] would have to have a garage

[2:21:00] that was at minimum size. Sort

[2:21:01] of as a way of maintaining the

[2:21:01] character existing character

[2:21:08] of our want districts. Are our

[2:21:09] the district are existing

[2:21:16] single-family sticks. So. Our

[2:21:18] thought process there was that

[2:21:20] if are one requires garage and

[2:21:21] it will help maintain sort of

[2:21:22] similar characteristics for

[2:21:26] the development. There's been

[2:21:26] some discussion about whether

[2:21:29] or not we should require and

[2:21:32] then. As opposed like a

[2:21:32] carport parking pad or

[2:21:35] something along those lines.

[2:21:38] And if we do require garage.

[2:21:39] How big should encourage and

[2:21:41] and the code we specified it

[2:21:43] would be I think 10 by 20

[2:21:47] which is a single-car so it's

[2:21:51] not overly burdensome.

[2:21:54] >> all interesting. Vice

[2:21:58] mayor.

[2:21:59] >> this will be for just

[2:22:01] clarification soupy for our

[2:22:07] one. Right. I am an advocate

[2:22:10] of I just you know I I know

[2:22:12] many people who have moved

[2:22:18] into this area moved planned

[2:22:19] developments like well, im

[2:22:26] park chose to leave that kind

[2:22:27] environment for single-family

[2:22:27] home looked all over port town

[2:22:33] some beautiful homes. But were

[2:22:33] turned off by general look of

[2:22:38] a neighborhood in the street

[2:22:39] GOD knows what will over the

[2:22:40] sidewalks the streets to

[2:22:42] swales the side of houses and

[2:22:45] decided to go elsewhere

[2:22:47] because it just looked awful

[2:22:48] and so I'm a big advocate

[2:22:51] garages. Think that's also of

[2:22:57] the problems but it's a. If I

[2:22:57] >> that was part of the

[2:23:01] consideration here is that.

[2:23:02] Times and other parts of the

[2:23:05] country you have a basement

[2:23:05] that you're able to keep stuff

[2:23:09] all of your stuff in and in

[2:23:10] florida. Obviously we cannot

[2:23:10] have basements and so a lot of

[2:23:14] people use their so then if

[2:23:16] you don't require the garage

[2:23:16] instead do a car part or

[2:23:19] something along those lines.

[2:23:23] Oftentimes you have storage of

[2:23:23] that those things under the

[2:23:24] carport are in the side yard

[2:23:29] or. Somewhere else. So this

[2:23:31] would at least for the r one

[2:23:32] districts require the and

[2:23:34] there are 2 district we had

[2:23:38] some mike's ability where it

[2:23:38] because we're allowing tiny

[2:23:39] homes and those types of

[2:23:40] things are smaller dwelling

[2:23:44] units in our 2 district. We

[2:23:46] would allow like a carport or

[2:23:47] something but they would have

[2:23:47] to have some type of enclosed

[2:23:49] storage on the property as

[2:23:50] well so that's how we worded

[2:23:52] it to allow some flexibility.

[2:23:57] We design and districts.

[2:24:02] >> commissioner I'm and again

[2:24:04] this is for new construction

[2:24:06] and just yeah I'm I'm in

[2:24:07] agreement with the having a

[2:24:08] garage or and just think what

[2:24:10] my dimensions or single cars

[2:24:11] 10 by 20.

[2:24:12] >> and I think that should be

[2:24:19] the minimum.

[2:24:20] >> commissioner 1000 ship

[2:24:21] question no I didn't have a

[2:24:23] question I was advocating not

[2:24:26] to have a large because it to

[2:24:27] the cost of the house not

[2:24:27] everybody wants grant and I

[2:24:30] think state statute also does

[2:24:36] not allow design. For the city

[2:24:40] to hinder design of of

[2:24:40] single-family home.

[2:24:41] >> and you know, I'm not I'm

[2:24:45] not up on the state statute on

[2:24:46] that but I do believe that

[2:24:47] this is something that can

[2:24:48] help cut down on the cost we

[2:24:51] have code enforcement.

[2:24:52] >> that make sure that things

[2:24:53] are not full debris in crop.

[2:24:57] You know laying around that's.

[2:24:57] Don't know what the exact

[2:25:02] terminology is it's a single

[2:25:06] family home that somebody is

[2:25:07] building and I'm not talking

[2:25:09] about in the preplanning

[2:25:10] communities, but this is more

[2:25:11] of a property rights I should

[2:25:15] not be required to build one.

[2:25:17] I can put it in a car or or a

[2:25:18] pat to help keep my cost

[2:25:20] building a home down we're

[2:25:25] looking for affordability here

[2:25:25] and I am against happened this

[2:25:28] in our coating requirement,

[2:25:29] totally different when you're

[2:25:31] talking about a preplanned the

[2:25:31] community like in one parker

[2:25:35] kept her now. This is also

[2:25:36] it's and with preplanned the

[2:25:40] community.

[2:25:44] >> I can speak to the statute.

[2:25:46] It prohibits the city

[2:25:47] regulating the architectural

[2:25:52] static. Elements of

[2:25:53] single-family property it does

[2:25:55] not prohibit city or county

[2:26:00] from acquiring a good watch.

[2:26:00] That's a structural and

[2:26:01] functional element that under

[2:26:06] the purview 2 cities and

[2:26:07] counties that clarity you're

[2:26:07] welcome and I'm I'm not

[2:26:09] familiar with any other

[2:26:10] jurisdiction in the state

[2:26:14] that. Does not require a

[2:26:16] garage for single-family home.

[2:26:17] Something we can look at that

[2:26:21] I it would. Very surprising.

[2:26:25] most do require a garage.

[2:26:29] Anything else I appreciate you

[2:26:30] brought this phone bank. I did

[2:26:34] yeah.

[2:26:35] >> because I'm thinking of

[2:26:36] years ago we had a builder all

[2:26:38] state that that. I don't know

[2:26:43] if they had it was an option,

[2:26:43] but some people they put the

[2:26:48] french doors garage door do we

[2:26:48] require that there be a garage

[2:26:51] doors or option that if

[2:26:51] people. No they're just going

[2:26:56] for storage which. Most people

[2:26:57] that's why we have 6 vehicles

[2:27:00] that can go on a driveway.

[2:27:01] That they can put doors on

[2:27:04] instead of garage door.

[2:27:09] >> we did not specify. What

[2:27:11] type of door the garage have

[2:27:11] to have so I don't know that

[2:27:12] there would be anything

[2:27:16] prohibiting. Property owner

[2:27:17] from using storage space

[2:27:21] there. It prohibit a property

[2:27:27] owner from converting it to

[2:27:30] living space. They want let's

[2:27:31] say you have a 2 car garage

[2:27:32] and you want to convert a

[2:27:32] portion of that to living

[2:27:36] space you would be able to do

[2:27:36] so as long as the remaining at

[2:27:39] the size requirement. For the

[2:27:45] garage space for the we did

[2:27:46] not get into the weeds as to

[2:27:49] what type of garage that

[2:27:49] should have.

[2:27:50] >> but right now it has to be

[2:27:53] a garage door code or I don't

[2:27:59] know that our current.

[2:28:01] >> specifies that and the new

[2:28:02] code also does not specify so

[2:28:03] I don't see any reason why

[2:28:04] they wouldn't be able to do

[2:28:13] french doors on the

[2:28:13] >> they

[2:28:15] >> are why oregon's on

[2:28:15] services assistant director,

[2:28:21] the current draft uldc.

[2:28:22] Includes some line which

[2:28:26] speaking to the door requires

[2:28:27] operable door capable of

[2:28:29] allowing allowing vehicular

[2:28:34] now that is very dissimilar

[2:28:36] from other communities code

[2:28:38] requirements, which really get

[2:28:42] into the details about

[2:28:43] operable overhead so if a

[2:28:45] garage could be designed.

[2:28:48] >> 2.

[2:28:52] >> some other. The work sure

[2:28:53] that would still allow vehicle

[2:28:57] access. Then it could be

[2:29:03] incorporated current class.

[2:29:04] >> obviously the coach changed

[2:29:05] the years because there's

[2:29:09] houses out there that at. You

[2:29:09] know those french doors

[2:29:14] commission without them. So

[2:29:15] the current draft as they

[2:29:18] stated has to have a operable

[2:29:18] garage door to allow make

[2:29:22] vehicle to go in. But the part

[2:29:23] that also makes me have pause

[2:29:29] is no garage shall be used as

[2:29:30] living quarters on last

[2:29:31] another garage is constructed

[2:29:36] prior to that conversion.

[2:29:38] These days there are so with

[2:29:39] the cost of housing there are

[2:29:41] so many people that are trying

[2:29:42] convert their garage into

[2:29:44] additional living space.

[2:29:45] >> and there are many that are

[2:29:49] trying to do it legally.

[2:29:50] Because they want to have a

[2:29:52] safe place with the proper

[2:29:53] ingress and egress is and all

[2:29:53] the air conditioning and all

[2:29:55] the proper requirements, but

[2:29:59] give them additional space

[2:30:00] space is a garage how many

[2:30:04] people use their and k. And

[2:30:05] and that is considered living

[2:30:10] space. And. I just. I go back

[2:30:15] to enforcement. You know how

[2:30:16] do you have say no you can't

[2:30:21] have an space inside of a

[2:30:23] garage because kind of like a

[2:30:23] family or family room which is

[2:30:28] living space in a garage. And

[2:30:30] to require a garage be

[2:30:32] additionally constructed when

[2:30:33] people want to comfort their

[2:30:35] for additional living space.

[2:30:38] Just seems to me as very

[2:30:44] burdensome property owners. I

[2:30:46] can't agree to this because

[2:30:47] it's my and if I want to

[2:30:49] legally convert my garage,

[2:30:52] keeping a board that chopper

[2:30:52] double okay and why shouldn't

[2:30:56] I be able to. So I'm not in

[2:31:00] favor of this change.

[2:31:01] >> I would like to add or

[2:31:03] clarify something there when I

[2:31:04] state living space I'm talking

[2:31:05] about living space from the

[2:31:10] florida building perspective.

[2:31:13] So for the building there is a

[2:31:13] separation requirement, 3rd

[2:31:14] different construction

[2:31:15] requirements for living spaces

[2:31:20] for garages and garages. I

[2:31:22] mean there's a reason that

[2:31:23] it's built the way that it is

[2:31:24] is vented the way that it to

[2:31:25] help ensure life safety issues

[2:31:31] so when we're talking about

[2:31:32] living space like converting

[2:31:33] your garage to living space.

[2:31:34] I'm talking about creating

[2:31:37] something that is like a

[2:31:38] dwelling unit or an extra

[2:31:39] bedroom that is compliant with

[2:31:42] the florida building code, not

[2:31:47] necessarily you know tv and

[2:31:47] couch in the garage that you

[2:31:48] just happen to just keep the

[2:31:51] tv the couch in there, I'm

[2:31:51] talking about actual

[2:31:56] conversion into. Another

[2:31:57] bedroom, another dwelling

[2:31:58] unit, another you know

[2:31:59] someplace review actively live

[2:32:05] because. Building code

[2:32:07] requires different separation

[2:32:08] if there's carbon monoxide

[2:32:09] issues, there's all sorts of

[2:32:10] other life safety issues.

[2:32:10] >> that's what I mean by

[2:32:12] living space. In this

[2:32:15] instance.

[2:32:18] >> okay.

[2:32:21] >> but just to clarify. Right

[2:32:23] now we don't require a or is

[2:32:25] that just part of the code and

[2:32:29] talking about changing it. As

[2:32:30] the city want to require a

[2:32:33] garage.

[2:32:33] >> so I don't think that right

[2:32:41] now we require

[2:32:41] >> commissioner emerge.

[2:32:45] >> you're talking about living

[2:32:46] spaces and the garage and the

[2:32:48] little guys are recessed by

[2:32:49] about 4 inches and that's for

[2:32:51] in case anything happens

[2:32:52] inside the house for water or

[2:32:53] anything to get out of the

[2:32:58] house. And like you said, most

[2:33:00] garages are not under air just

[2:33:01] like most lynn eyes are not

[2:33:02] under air. So if you choose

[2:33:07] use it as living space. You're

[2:33:08] either going to be burdened

[2:33:08] with me either have a portable

[2:33:09] ac unit or anything out there

[2:33:13] so. Yeah it is. Good for

[2:33:14] storage and everything like

[2:33:16] that, but you know where

[2:33:20] people choose to live. Years

[2:33:21] ago I slept in a garage with

[2:33:22] no air and stuff because that

[2:33:23] was the only place that was

[2:33:26] available for me. But I was

[2:33:28] trying to nickels together to

[2:33:35] make 7 extra but. In the in my

[2:33:37] opinion it's the aesthetics of

[2:33:38] the neighborhood to keep

[2:33:38] everything the same we have

[2:33:44] all port which is often the

[2:33:47] biscayne areas and and you

[2:33:48] have called carports you know

[2:33:48] you don't have the garages.

[2:33:49] Those were the houses built in

[2:33:52] 50's and 60's and as you

[2:33:53] progress we've gone up just a

[2:33:56] little bit. Into the garage

[2:33:59] area. So that's why I do

[2:34:00] support the garage new

[2:34:04] construction. And you know it

[2:34:06] is part of the house, I mean

[2:34:07] people can use that extra

[2:34:10] space out there choose to do

[2:34:12] it. If you have a garage door

[2:34:13] a nobody see what's going on

[2:34:17] behind that dam door. That's

[2:34:18] it that's all I got there on

[2:34:23] cover of this. Vice mayor.

[2:34:27] Yeah get goes back to.

[2:34:31] >> solana there virtually no

[2:34:32] municipality step you know I

[2:34:33] know that.

[2:34:39] Requirement mean.

[2:34:43] >> it.

[2:34:44] >> you only need to drive

[2:34:50] around the city to see how

[2:34:51] looks on many many streets

[2:34:53] where there are not or even

[2:34:56] where there people just

[2:34:57] insistent leaving their after

[2:34:57] household stuff out along the

[2:34:58] side of the and.

[2:35:03] >> if your neighbor. You know

[2:35:06] it affects you so I get it,

[2:35:08] I'm a property rights too but

[2:35:10] at the same time we all in

[2:35:11] this part of the community

[2:35:12] we're not out in the wild west

[2:35:15] we're not sitting on a 100

[2:35:17] acres where nobody sees we

[2:35:17] live next each other there's

[2:35:18] some common decency and

[2:35:21] courtesy that goes along with

[2:35:21] having a property that's

[2:35:27] maintained kept out having a

[2:35:28] is going to lend itself to

[2:35:28] that and it's not going to be

[2:35:31] a cure all. And it brings with

[2:35:36] it some enforcement issues.

[2:35:39] You know for a new bills I

[2:35:40] agree and you I don't want

[2:35:43] tell everybody looked here for

[2:35:44] 2030 years you got know, but

[2:35:46] any new I see no reason why it

[2:35:46] shouldn't include a garage

[2:35:52] just. Seems like it it makes

[2:35:54] our city that much more

[2:35:55] appealing that much more

[2:35:58] attractive and like I say I

[2:35:59] many people do not buy

[2:36:00] single-family homes in this

[2:36:01] community because of the fact

[2:36:03] that their neighborhood that

[2:36:04] they look at and there are

[2:36:07] some make homes. But you look

[2:36:09] around the neighbors and it's

[2:36:10] such a they just shot goal

[2:36:14] moved some of the community

[2:36:14] and that's our think it really

[2:36:18] is that's a so.

[2:36:18] >> thank you commissioner

[2:36:22] mcdowell them and it's all

[2:36:22] about choices if somebody

[2:36:23] doesn't want to buy a house

[2:36:24] next to somebody that has a

[2:36:25] carport that's their choice.

[2:36:26] But at the same time we're

[2:36:31] trying to make housing

[2:36:32] affordable and by not allowing

[2:36:33] conversion of a garage into a

[2:36:34] living space done legally that

[2:36:40] to me is just wrong. And so I

[2:36:41] know I'm in the minority and

[2:36:43] I'm not going to change

[2:36:44] anybody else's mind just like

[2:36:45] nobody's going to change mind

[2:36:46] but it's all about choices and

[2:36:47] trying to things affordable

[2:36:51] and that's what my goal thank

[2:36:55] you for bringing

[2:36:56] >> word I do agree with said

[2:36:58] the vice mayor is talking

[2:36:58] about people who have store

[2:37:00] everything they own on the

[2:37:02] side of their house ice,

[2:37:03] especially notices and the

[2:37:04] older developments where they

[2:37:04] don't have a garage carport

[2:37:07] or. Places like holiday park.

[2:37:11] And then we just. Coming to an

[2:37:13] enforcement you know if we're

[2:37:14] going to ok we'll put a code

[2:37:14] in place that you can do that

[2:37:16] well then it just becomes

[2:37:22] another. Another problem we do

[2:37:23] share property lines. Yes,

[2:37:25] it's our property. But share

[2:37:25] property lines with her

[2:37:26] neighbor and that's going to

[2:37:32] affect. Our life former

[2:37:33] commissioner luke one said it

[2:37:35] was a choice of people to live

[2:37:36] in a municipality which is

[2:37:37] going generally have higher

[2:37:38] standards than if you live in

[2:37:38] unincorporated parts of the

[2:37:44] county. Just we do think of of

[2:37:48] each other and how what we do

[2:37:51] yeah, I was not be in favor of

[2:37:58] free. I'm taking us away. So

[2:38:06] you want I think they you it.

[2:38:13] >> I'm going to get a but

[2:38:17] >> deals flexible for

[2:38:17] flexibility with buffer design

[2:38:17] when a fence or a wall is

[2:38:18] included for says.

[2:38:23] Not including also.

[2:38:24] >> our tight d and type ii

[2:38:24] buffers both had

[2:38:33] for alternative where. If you

[2:38:33] included offense and this is

[2:38:35] just a place to 4 foot fence.

[2:38:40] You could have a smaller. For

[2:38:42] it would reduce so take wood

[2:38:43] reduced from 15 feet to 10

[2:38:44] feet if you included some type

[2:38:48] of barrier. So a fence or wall

[2:38:49] and then that would be reduced

[2:38:50] from 10 feet to 5 feet if you

[2:38:53] include the law. These are our

[2:38:56] least intense. First of these

[2:39:00] are small as buffers and again

[2:39:02] it just provides some there

[2:39:06] was direction too. Not have a

[2:39:08] lot of that flexibility or not

[2:39:09] reduce the size if they

[2:39:10] decided to include the fence

[2:39:11] intent with the buffer is to

[2:39:16] help. Reduce the visual impact

[2:39:20] of potential in compatibility

[2:39:20] ease. Staff believes that with

[2:39:22] the your help mitigating that

[2:39:26] more than just you know that

[2:39:28] extra 5 feet of the buffer if

[2:39:29] you were to do action

[2:39:30] landscaping you doing at the

[2:39:32] same. So we would recommend

[2:39:38] keeping the flexibility. So

[2:39:39] the question for a consensus

[2:39:40] is should the city allow

[2:39:41] flexibility design for reduce

[2:39:42] spot for one offenses included

[2:39:48] and the buffer area.

[2:39:49] >> ok and kim ju just

[2:39:50] reference where that is again

[2:39:56] and there. And here the page.

[2:40:02] >> this

[2:40:05] >> should be about page 22. I

[2:40:12] commissioner emrich.

[2:40:17] >> on 2 scenarios. You're

[2:40:20] going from 15 down to 10 or 10

[2:40:21] down the 5 craft can you show

[2:40:25] or tell

[2:40:26] >> what type areas these would

[2:40:26] be and are they just single

[2:40:30] residential are they. You know

[2:40:31] from the 10 down the is that

[2:40:32] like a mobile I mean.

[2:40:40] >> so we have. This is our

[2:40:41] matrix so we're talking about

[2:40:45] all of ease. Andy is so it

[2:40:47] would be like a single-family

[2:40:49] home next to property.

[2:40:56] >> or.

[2:40:57] >> our 2 property next to

[2:40:57] arwen properties so these are

[2:41:01] the.

[2:41:01] >> these are the areas where

[2:41:05] you basically have compatible

[2:41:07] uses maybe one is slightly

[2:41:08] more intense than the other so

[2:41:08] we're requiring some type of

[2:41:12] but it's a pretty minimal

[2:41:14] buffer just to sort of a

[2:41:14] systemically separate provide

[2:41:18] some visual separation there.

[2:41:19] >> yeah I can understand that

[2:41:20] your role you're only talking

[2:41:21] four-foot fence. So it's not

[2:41:24] really a 6 foot. Keeping your

[2:41:25] eyes out of the property thing

[2:41:31] but. I I struggle with going

[2:41:32] from 10 down to 5. I think you

[2:41:33] know maybe minimum should be

[2:41:38] at least 10 all the way across

[2:41:39] the board. I can see going 10

[2:41:43] down 5 I can 15 going down the

[2:41:44] but I can see that I'm going

[2:41:45] down the fire. I think that's

[2:41:49] just cut that way too close. I

[2:41:55] so

[2:41:57] >> alright, vice mayor yeah I

[2:41:58] commissioner with regard to

[2:42:00] but I also want to make clear.

[2:42:04] When it comes to other I have

[2:42:06] no problem if we're talking

[2:42:07] compatible properties or one

[2:42:11] twos threes but when we get

[2:42:11] into areas where with all that

[2:42:17] development we're doing. Yeah,

[2:42:18] I want to make sure that the

[2:42:20] city has the ability to I'm

[2:42:21] very concerned about areas

[2:42:24] where we're building.

[2:42:25] Commercial or industrial in

[2:42:27] closer proximity residential

[2:42:32] and I want to make sure that.

[2:42:35] You know if at all possible

[2:42:37] what we're keeping the natural

[2:42:38] trees said are there if at all

[2:42:41] possible to totally blocked

[2:42:43] for some of those people saw

[2:42:44] what might be commercial or

[2:42:45] industrial property and to

[2:42:50] make sure that there's rich

[2:42:51] enough but for us and fencing

[2:42:51] standards and everything else

[2:42:53] to make darned sure that you

[2:42:53] know we're doing much to

[2:42:56] protect. A welding. Property

[2:43:00] owners.

[2:43:02] >> so there are 2 that sort of

[2:43:05] go to that south. On the

[2:43:09] buffer matrix which. Tried to

[2:43:09] make a little bit bigger city

[2:43:13] you can see a little bit are

[2:43:14] usually so basically are

[2:43:16] useless go from we just

[2:43:21] intense to most the top of the

[2:43:22] column to the bottom and then

[2:43:25] from the front of the road to

[2:43:27] the back. And so you can see

[2:43:29] that lake when you have a new.

[2:43:31] You have activity center next

[2:43:36] to enact property. Required

[2:43:39] buffers and a buffer a buffer.

[2:43:44] Is a 50 foot buffer with

[2:43:47] canopy trees for understory

[2:43:48] trees, the continuous at a

[2:43:49] minimum wall of 6 feet and you

[2:43:50] have to have a 5 so you're

[2:43:55] looking. 13 feet of elevation

[2:43:59] between those uses that. That

[2:44:00] new activity center's

[2:44:00] developer has to put in to be

[2:44:03] able offer from the

[2:44:04] potentially single-family home

[2:44:08] that's next door. We

[2:44:09] definitely have increased

[2:44:14] buffer sizes heights.

[2:44:15] Education and a b and c

[2:44:18] buffers really. The second

[2:44:22] thing is that.

[2:44:23] >> over at the height and

[2:44:27] sitting in this matrix that's

[2:44:30] scene minimum berm. Which for

[2:44:38] the first 2. Requires a 5 so

[2:44:38] they have to create

[2:44:39] essentially a 5 foot mountain

[2:44:43] that for will sit on.

[2:44:43] >> and then you have

[2:44:45] additional.

[2:44:47] >> 6 feet because the top of.

[2:44:50] >> you have put the ball. So

[2:44:51] then you have a six-foot wall

[2:44:55] on top of that.

[2:44:57] >> the tie, buffer you have a

[2:45:00] 3 and then you have a six-foot

[2:45:04] wall but you also have. And

[2:45:05] the you have a canopy trees

[2:45:09] per 100 linear feet the type b

[2:45:09] you have 5 can 100 linear

[2:45:13] feet.

[2:45:16] >> most canopy trees have the

[2:45:17] spread of 30 so I mean you're

[2:45:19] talking about a pretty dense.

[2:45:25] >> coverage in those. Areas,

[2:45:26] no minimums on high though

[2:45:27] with those kind of patriots 1,

[2:45:29] 2, so the materials.

[2:45:34] >> so we have. Material

[2:45:35] standards at planting they

[2:45:36] have to be a minimum 8 feet I

[2:45:37] believe 4 inches wide. So

[2:45:41] that's your minimum when you

[2:45:42] plant it, most canopy trees

[2:45:45] are going to be anywhere from

[2:45:46] 25 to 50 feet in height. So i

[2:45:51] mean. With a type a buffer

[2:45:53] you're looking at between

[2:45:57] >> the wall.

[2:45:58] >> the canopy tree you're

[2:45:59] looking at probably 80 feet

[2:46:05] of.

[2:46:06] >> dense vegetation and wall

[2:46:07] do it to make sure that you

[2:46:08] can't see whatever's going on

[2:46:14] in the property next door.

[2:46:15] >> is a slightly steps down

[2:46:16] version but again you're

[2:46:19] looking at so I probably 52 60

[2:46:22] feet worth of coverage. And

[2:46:24] then on top of these

[2:46:26] requirements and I. I think we

[2:46:32] put them in chapter.

[2:46:40] >> and our.

[2:46:40] >> forget the name check but

[2:46:43] anyways in areas of transition

[2:46:48] that's what we call it. Where

[2:46:49] we have new zoning districts

[2:46:50] that are next to existing

[2:46:53] potentially nexus existing

[2:46:53] single family.

[2:46:54] >> we required that any

[2:46:55] buffers that was required

[2:46:56] there.

[2:47:00] >> has to be increased by 10

[2:47:01] feet to be able to help

[2:47:02] mitigate the existing use to

[2:47:03] the news so we did add that

[2:47:06] into those requirements. So

[2:47:07] there are quite a safeguards

[2:47:11] to make sure that the buffers

[2:47:12] are going to be adequate for

[2:47:13] whatever type of development

[2:47:20] comes be q. Commissioner

[2:47:20] mcdowell.

[2:47:22] >> and so while we were

[2:47:23] talking about fence. I'm glad

[2:47:23] that it has evolved into the

[2:47:26] buffering section because you

[2:47:27] know.

[2:47:32] >> if you live in our won

[2:47:32] which is for all intents and

[2:47:33] purposes a preplanned the

[2:47:34] community and something is

[2:47:34] going to go up in a mixed use.

[2:47:36] That's right next to you

[2:47:38] buffering is a d which is

[2:47:42] like. Not quite bear base.

[2:47:46] It's more. Aesthetic it's it's

[2:47:49] not offering is like. Is

[2:47:52] buffering is the most

[2:47:53] intensive type offering

[2:47:58] possible. Dea and the ins. So

[2:48:02] much and I was talking about

[2:48:09] our one to and max one.

[2:48:10] >> our want to annex one would

[2:48:11] be like a single-family home

[2:48:18] potentially 2 town houses.

[2:48:23] >> small strips enter its.

[2:48:24] >> very low.

[2:48:24] >> that low intensity it's not

[2:48:25] especially use it as a side.

[2:48:29] There's a lot of. Intrusive

[2:48:31] minister mx one too.

[2:48:33] >> and and I don't like that

[2:48:36] being a deep. It needs to be a

[2:48:40] little bit more protected

[2:48:41] because of the sights and

[2:48:42] sounds you're not just

[2:48:43] protecting the esthetic lee

[2:48:46] you're also the sounds of

[2:48:47] things and that really doesn't

[2:48:53] happen. I don't see where it

[2:48:56] is addressed in offering

[2:48:57] matrix from mx one existing

[2:49:00] single family home. To an end

[2:49:02] next one with the restaurant.

[2:49:06] It's in the same zoning

[2:49:07] because it's being changed the

[2:49:10] house is

[2:49:11] >> where is that in this

[2:49:15] section. So it's in a

[2:49:22] different section.

[2:49:22] >> as part of our previous

[2:49:23] conversations on transitional

[2:49:26] design elements. We have a

[2:49:26] whole section in chapter 3

[2:49:30] that that.

[2:49:31] >> speaks to all the

[2:49:32] requirements.

[2:49:36] >> one of them.

[2:49:37] >> is that buffer shall be

[2:49:39] enhanced in the areas that are

[2:49:39] transitioning where a

[2:49:40] single-family home is adjacent

[2:49:41] to a permissible primer used

[2:49:45] for the au sable that is not

[2:49:46] single family in these areas

[2:49:47] the required buffer should be

[2:49:50] increased to the next level.

[2:49:51] So I misspoke it wasn't 10

[2:49:52] feet it's to the next level

[2:49:58] up. So for example if the

[2:49:59] required buffer is in each for

[2:50:00] that ad type buffer then be

[2:50:07] required. So essentially. You

[2:50:09] up and then it says in

[2:50:10] instances where in a type

[2:50:11] required an additional 10 feet

[2:50:12] will be added to the required

[2:50:12] buffers eyes because buffer is

[2:50:16] already.

[2:50:17] >> sizable so we're just

[2:50:18] adding a little bit of extra

[2:50:21] to

[2:50:22] >> mitigate any potential in

[2:50:23] compatibility and this must

[2:50:25] be. Someone knew I knew that

[2:50:29] we had talked about in zoning

[2:50:33] district house versus the new

[2:50:34] development. I just I was

[2:50:36] expecting to see it here so

[2:50:37] forgive me for that I'm glad

[2:50:37] that you do have a cover they

[2:50:39] can't wait to see what the

[2:50:42] final outcome of that draft

[2:50:43] looks like. But as far as the

[2:50:49] fence part. It's only a foot

[2:50:50] fence in some regards and and

[2:50:52] to my fellow commissioners

[2:50:53] reducing it, 5 feet from 10 to

[2:50:57] 5 that's like nothing. So I

[2:50:59] would be more inclined to

[2:51:04] remove though. Reduction in

[2:51:05] that buffering area for the d

[2:51:19] buffers. Consensus.

[2:51:20] >> making consensus now for

[2:51:22] that long we have it for the

[2:51:24] fences yeah because dna only

[2:51:24] if if I remember correctly the

[2:51:26] minimum height is 4 feet and

[2:51:29] that does not. And it doesn't

[2:51:33] have to be opaque does it.

[2:51:34] >> it does have pick I'm sorry

[2:51:35] it does have to be does it say

[2:51:39] it has to be opaque. Decker

[2:51:40] defenses doesn't really say

[2:51:44] opaque. Take buffer.

[2:51:46] >> include.

[2:51:52] >> decker defense. Says does

[2:51:59] it say it has too.

[2:52:04] >> to double check and wear.

[2:52:05] Where that language is but I'm

[2:52:06] fairly certain that it that it

[2:52:07] has to be fake.

[2:52:12] >> his past. Okay and then are

[2:52:14] we requiring offense. Or is it

[2:52:17] a MAY.

[2:52:19] >> if you have.

[2:52:24] >> don't have a fence. Then

[2:52:25] you have to have the larger

[2:52:26] buffer that's how that works

[2:52:26] if you have a fence, then you

[2:52:28] can have the smaller for size

[2:52:31] so for d. If you don't want to

[2:52:34] include offense. You have a 15

[2:52:34] foot buffer. You do include a

[2:52:35] fast and you have a 10 foot

[2:52:39] buffer. Theoretically you

[2:52:39] could include the sense of the

[2:52:40] 15 foot buffer, if you wanted

[2:52:47] to. But it's it would only be

[2:52:48] required and smaller sides of

[2:52:52] way. Yeah that.

[2:52:53] >> mayor if we could get a

[2:52:54] consensus that the city.

[2:52:57] >> should not. Reduce the

[2:53:01] buffer when 2 I keep it a

[2:53:06] tent. We're 15 for 15. So the

[2:53:13] city should not reduce the

[2:53:14] buffer when offenses included

[2:53:14] so they'll have to come up

[2:53:15] with the correct language

[2:53:16] based on our consensus, okay,

[2:53:17] so we'll be keeping it at the

[2:53:21] 15 and the time.

[2:53:25] >> much.

[2:53:26] >> do that. But I was good

[2:53:32] with the we do that on the 15

[2:53:33] foot buffer down to 10 foot

[2:53:36] buffer, but the other one one

[2:53:36] and then not walk 5, 5, was

[2:53:40] too short. I'm good with the

[2:53:46] consensus. Look at with that.

[2:53:48] Station.

[2:53:52] >> just double your page city

[2:53:58] is just make sure 4 feet is

[2:54:01] >> so that the last consensus

[2:54:08] item is in regards to box.

[2:54:10] >> part 2 chapter staff

[2:54:11] reduced setback requirement

[2:54:16] for docs multi-family

[2:54:18] properties from 20 feet to 15

[2:54:19] feet. So this is set back from

[2:54:24] outside. Line. It so that the

[2:54:30] reduction it's just to make it

[2:54:31] a little bit are usable user

[2:54:33] friendly have more half. More

[2:54:35] dock. Access or multifamily

[2:54:41] properties. So the consensus

[2:54:43] item should we require

[2:54:44] setbacks for docs we could do

[2:54:45] 0 set back which would allow

[2:54:49] for an our connectivity

[2:54:51] between sites or we can do

[2:54:52] reduce setback at 15 feet or

[2:54:53] the current gold standard is

[2:54:58] 20 feet. So should we require

[2:54:59] act how large should that

[2:55:02] setback be if any.

[2:55:06] >> was this in the cold again

[2:55:17] ma'am.

[2:55:19] >> I like it's in the marine

[2:55:20] improvements, it was in part

[2:55:22] but I think point which so. It

[2:55:41] is page 41.

[2:55:55] Number 6 all talk

[2:55:56] for fear structures must be

[2:55:57] set back a minimum of 15 feet

[2:55:57] from the nearest property

[2:56:00] line.

[2:56:01] >> yeah, that was changed

[2:56:03] after we had the discussion on

[2:56:03] part is changed between part

[2:56:06] one and part 2. Remember

[2:56:11] correctly whenever its right

[2:56:12] about that.

[2:56:12] >> improvement section that

[2:56:13] was brought forward in the

[2:56:14] initial part one discussion.

[2:56:17] >> needed some tweaks and

[2:56:18] staff knew that going into the

[2:56:22] workshop.

[2:56:23] >> and that's why I was like I

[2:56:24] didn't ask for consensus on

[2:56:25] this but that's because you

[2:56:26] guys changed it. And I asked

[2:56:31] change so. Why was a change 25

[2:56:35] 2.15.

[2:56:35] >> I believe the reason was

[2:56:40] just allow for more space.

[2:56:43] Staff would support. 0 set

[2:56:46] back if we want to go that

[2:56:46] direction. Again this is just

[2:56:50] from the side property lines.

[2:56:50] >> for commercial or

[2:56:56] multifamily.

[2:57:04] >> if I MAY mayor goodman. The

[2:57:10] dax would be going. Where give

[2:57:10] me give me some examples of

[2:57:11] bodies of water where these

[2:57:14] docks would go because if

[2:57:16] there next if they're in a

[2:57:20] proposed zoning change area.

[2:57:21] Next to single family

[2:57:22] residential or r to

[2:57:27] residential even maybe even

[2:57:28] multifamily residential, those

[2:57:29] docks are getting closer to

[2:57:33] those property where would

[2:57:33] where would something like

[2:57:38] that to place.

[2:57:40] >> potentially a lot like the

[2:57:41] myakka you're one of there's

[2:57:44] some areas that we're in

[2:57:48] corporating and to get a whole

[2:57:50] lot of fun faces on the myakka

[2:57:51] hatchee critique why would we

[2:57:52] allow docks on the myakka head

[2:57:58] she we there.

[2:58:00] >> all right well, I

[2:58:01] potentially exposed rocks

[2:58:01] could be used for something

[2:58:02] other you could do outdoor

[2:58:12] seating I

[2:58:17] >> I don't know a lot about

[2:58:20] taking correct the public

[2:58:21] interest. You got past MISS

[2:58:23] Katie eye-catching creek. On

[2:58:24] the title side of our

[2:58:24] structures.

[2:58:28] >> there's areas there. But I

[2:58:31] also you have the coco plum

[2:58:31] which has commercial one side

[2:58:34] residential another. There's

[2:58:35] some england they're

[2:58:38] commercial. And residential

[2:58:44] probably family as well.

[2:58:46] >> okay so water a body of

[2:58:51] water. Could like a lake and

[2:58:52] I'm thinking of a lake that

[2:58:53] doesn't happen development,

[2:58:57] you're overnight. We do blade

[2:58:57] and price.

[2:58:58] >> there's a big beautiful

[2:58:59] like back there. There's also

[2:59:03] a link work shire that have

[2:59:04] like docks on it if it was to

[2:59:06] get developed.

[2:59:06] >> it could.

[2:59:11] >> that's all private though.

[2:59:12] >> yeah I understand that

[2:59:12] those are private that's what

[2:59:13] we also have to think about

[2:59:14] you know as private and public

[2:59:17] in.

[2:59:19] >> think those are both.

[2:59:25] Parcel. Water body. Person

[2:59:26] doesn't cure sep 2 separate

[2:59:28] parcels.

[2:59:34] >> I think. I'm not seeing a

[2:59:35] huge change here but at the

[2:59:37] same time the 25 foot staff

[2:59:41] initially requested was 25 so

[2:59:42] maybe we should just keep it

[2:59:44] 25 feet. It can always ask for

[2:59:48] a waiver.

[2:59:49] >> a lorry barnes system

[2:59:53] director development services.

[2:59:55] Existing code has a 25 foot

[2:59:56] setback and when when I look

[2:59:59] at I can tell you I could not

[3:00:07] ascertain. That 25 foot

[3:00:08] setback for a dock on

[3:00:09] multifamily was incorporated

[3:00:13] the code to begin with. And

[3:00:14] many cases exceeds the

[3:00:14] building setback requirement

[3:00:19] on a multifamily property. As

[3:00:22] katy said we would even

[3:00:23] support going 0 because when

[3:00:26] you think about impacts of

[3:00:30] residential on the adjacent

[3:00:30] property owner. What what what

[3:00:31] are the impacts what are we

[3:00:36] trying to. What negative

[3:00:37] impact or potential negative

[3:00:41] impact are we attempting to

[3:00:44] medicaid and if incorporated

[3:00:45] to 0 back there could be

[3:00:46] connectivity between that

[3:00:46] stocks, especially public

[3:00:49] access is permanent. Providing

[3:00:55] a walkable area. Coke bottle

[3:00:57] lake for example it could be

[3:00:57] subdivided in the future of

[3:00:58] the property along the bank

[3:01:01] could be subdivided the future

[3:01:02] and when you think about a

[3:01:06] mixed use component developed

[3:01:06] adjacent to a multifamily

[3:01:10] property and then cannot thing

[3:01:13] that waterfront access way

[3:01:18] from that adjacent property.

[3:01:20] What if we created we've

[3:01:21] created a disconnected site

[3:01:24] along the waterfront. So when

[3:01:29] we propose the 15.

[3:01:31] >> the thought process was why

[3:01:33] are we restricting the size of

[3:01:35] docks on multifamily and let's

[3:01:36] you know, let's let's reduce

[3:01:37] that a little bit to a large

[3:01:43] allow a larger. Structure.

[3:01:44] >> but further consideration

[3:01:45] conversations with katie I

[3:01:49] completely agree that.

[3:01:51] >> you 0 stop MAY just very

[3:01:52] well be appropriate to allow

[3:02:04] for that connectivity.

[3:02:07] >> commissioner yeah just

[3:02:07] double checking because there

[3:02:09] is some waterfront coco plum

[3:02:13] and hillsborough that. I'm

[3:02:15] trying to see if it's

[3:02:19] multi-family that's next to.

[3:02:29] Residential. I think as you're

[3:02:30] suggesting the 15 foot to go

[3:02:36] from 25 to 0. I don't think I

[3:02:37] could be amenable to that but

[3:02:39] the 15 yes, and if a developer

[3:02:39] comes in wants to change it

[3:02:43] you can ask for weight. To go

[3:02:44] down to the 0 and if the

[3:02:44] commission at that time says

[3:02:54] yeah. You know we they can

[3:02:55] always come in and ask for a

[3:02:58] waiver I just was asking why

[3:02:59] what was the change purpose.

[3:03:09] From 25 to 15. That.

[3:03:09] >> I just question about the

[3:03:12] when you're talking about even

[3:03:13] a 0 chris that is from the

[3:03:14] property line that would be on

[3:03:18] the side. Correct.

[3:03:19] >> so if we have a 0 foot

[3:03:23] setback it would allow

[3:03:24] adjacent properties to connect

[3:03:25] the dot docks together

[3:03:26] essentially so that you have a

[3:03:27] continuous waterfront carry a

[3:03:30] right.

[3:03:31] >> much like that picture you

[3:03:36] had there. But I was. They had

[3:03:37] a picture up there now and

[3:03:38] missed it and think

[3:03:39] commissioner mcdowell wear

[3:03:44] that we have just people that

[3:03:45] water but it restaurant out

[3:03:48] there, but. Okay so this

[3:03:52] picture that shows. 0.

[3:03:56] >> setback is that.

[3:03:56] >> which is say if each one of

[3:03:57] those buildings is somebody

[3:03:58] else's property is that what

[3:03:59] you're saying yes, believe uk

[3:04:03] okay.

[3:04:08] >> I looking for.

[3:04:09] >> consensus to to propose

[3:04:10] something get a about a

[3:04:12] consensus to change it to keep

[3:04:12] it at the staff recommendation

[3:04:20] of 15 feet. Much.

[3:04:24] >> I would 0% setback. I can

[3:04:35] deal with that. An that many

[3:04:37] >> yeah and I would go for the

[3:04:38] 0 as well the whole idea if

[3:04:39] it's to utilize the waterfront

[3:04:41] utilites the water that. Well

[3:04:44] little we have of it here. So

[3:04:46] I prefer 0. Commissioner

[3:04:51] mcdowell.

[3:04:55] >> my consensus was for edge

[3:04:59] to it in the for multifamily

[3:04:59] got so this picture does need

[3:05:02] that what we're talking about.

[3:05:06] picture is this pictures

[3:05:07] commercial when we're talking

[3:05:08] about is one multi-family to

[3:05:13] another multifamily creating

[3:05:13] connectivity.

[3:05:14] >> maybe they don't want

[3:05:15] people coming I am not favor

[3:05:18] of a 0 set back and there

[3:05:18] there's a reason you suggested

[3:05:25] the 15 stick with that.

[3:05:26] >> ok pictures now multi she

[3:05:31] yes.

[3:05:34] >> so clear that have with for

[3:05:38] that here clear that

[3:05:42] >> you get

[3:05:45] >> that is my last consensus

[3:05:46] item so for the next

[3:05:47] >> basically hour.

[3:05:52] >> chapter.

[3:05:54] >> 5 which assigns is mostly

[3:05:55] time as we had planned on

[3:05:56] having it with chapter 4 so

[3:06:01] that should be coming and then

[3:06:02] we have a natural resources,

[3:06:03] environmental resources

[3:06:03] chapter that will be the last

[3:06:06] one. So we're sort grounding

[3:06:12] all at this point will do

[3:06:13] probably workshops will do

[3:06:14] workshops for chapter 5

[3:06:16] chapter 6 and then we'll bring

[3:06:16] it back with our and it's

[3:06:27] 04:00am. Just exciting.

[3:06:29] Questions comments concerns

[3:06:30] commissioner goodell is still

[3:06:33] on their yeah yeah so based on

[3:06:33] what you said are we going to

[3:06:34] be talking about chapter 5

[3:06:35] chapter 6 in the next

[3:06:39] workshop.

[3:06:40] >> right breaking them up they

[3:06:41] will be broken up it will be

[3:06:43] it will have a discussion on

[3:06:44] chapter 5 and then we'll have

[3:06:46] a discussion on chapter 5 will

[3:06:47] be like JANUARY and 6 will be

[3:06:51] like FEBRUARY yes tentatively

[3:06:58] s.

[3:07:00] >> and so since our workshop

[3:07:01] in JANUARY is right after the

[3:07:03] holidays and we're supposed to

[3:07:05] get these 2 weeks beforehand

[3:07:06] and that we have holidays in

[3:07:07] between that you said that the

[3:07:08] sign code is already pretty

[3:07:09] much done.

[3:07:13] >> maybe we can get it.

[3:07:14] >> sooner than that 2 weeks so

[3:07:15] that way then we have a little

[3:07:19] extra time the holidays to

[3:07:19] review that's possible please

[3:07:20] we can do our best to get it

[3:07:21] to you or.

[3:07:26] >> I don't know. We haven't

[3:07:28] discussed. Official timing yet

[3:07:29] as to how we want to do it,

[3:07:33] but that sort of general doing

[3:07:33] well.

[3:07:34] >> hopefully sooner rather

[3:07:35] than later because I'm sure

[3:07:36] you don't want to be answering

[3:07:40] my questions during the

[3:07:40] holidays. I'm the only other

[3:07:41] question that I have is you

[3:07:44] were talking about a new co

[3:07:45] that's going through public

[3:07:50] works something engineering.

[3:07:51] Designing yeah, engineering

[3:07:56] design manual. How does that

[3:07:58] get approved, I mean is that

[3:08:01] if it's being referenced in

[3:08:03] this cold wouldn't that design

[3:08:05] manuel have to then also be

[3:08:05] approved by the commission

[3:08:06] since it's being referenced in

[3:08:11] this co.

[3:08:14] >> so it's created separately

[3:08:15] and reference adopted by

[3:08:20] ordinance I resolution. So

[3:08:21] that they can then change it

[3:08:27] as the standards change.

[3:08:29] >> all right so when are we

[3:08:31] going to see that because if

[3:08:32] this uldc takes effect and you

[3:08:32] still working on this

[3:08:38] engineering. And it's being

[3:08:39] reference but you guys have

[3:08:39] been headed to prove jeff

[3:08:43] what's that look like.

[3:08:44] >> commissioner mcdowell were

[3:08:45] hoping to planes at the same

[3:08:50] time. If in the event the

[3:08:51] engineering design standard

[3:08:56] manuals it's delayed then we

[3:08:57] will re incorporate those

[3:08:59] technical standards into the

[3:09:04] uldc to get it adopted without

[3:09:06] delaying any further the uldc

[3:09:08] and then make appropriate

[3:09:09] amendments to remove those

[3:09:11] technical standards down the

[3:09:14] road that is not our the

[3:09:15] engineering division assures

[3:09:16] us they are working very hard

[3:09:18] with their consultants. They

[3:09:21] do have a draft prepared. And

[3:09:27] it it completed and this

[3:09:28] friend right along with the

[3:09:32] uldc.

[3:09:34] >> what why do we go to

[3:09:35] engineering design manual to

[3:09:36] begin with when everything was

[3:09:38] pretty much already in the

[3:09:39] uldc.

[3:09:41] >> many cities separate the

[3:09:41] engineering the technical

[3:09:42] standards from the unified

[3:09:45] land development code because

[3:09:47] the members members of the

[3:09:48] general public that that

[3:09:53] information and very technical

[3:09:57] and it's not information that

[3:10:00] most individuals need to delve

[3:10:01] into per se it's something

[3:10:02] that our engineers are looking

[3:10:06] for the developers engineers.

[3:10:14] So so that's one reason is to.

[3:10:15] >> substantial

[3:10:15] >> technical jargon and the

[3:10:18] uldc and make it a more

[3:10:19] user-friendly document for the

[3:10:24] majority of people. The second

[3:10:26] reason is by incorporating it.

[3:10:27] I reference whether them as

[3:10:31] part of the unified land

[3:10:31] development it's the

[3:10:32] engineering department needs

[3:10:32] to change a technical

[3:10:37] standard. That you know based

[3:10:40] on changes in materials or

[3:10:41] lessons learned they're able

[3:10:43] to make that change with one

[3:10:46] public hearing by resolution

[3:10:48] rather than ordinance which

[3:10:49] would be required of all those

[3:10:50] standards one for PRESIDENT

[3:10:53] The uldc.

[3:10:55] >> public input. Thank you.

[3:11:00] Okay. So chapters, 5, will be

[3:11:03] coming back. For us next year

[3:11:07] too.

[3:11:07] >> do we have any public

[3:11:15] comment. Jasmine bowman.

[3:11:16] >> development sites

[3:11:17] preserving implanting are not

[3:11:18] the same plant in young trees

[3:11:18] is nice, but young trees do

[3:11:19] not have the roots structures

[3:11:23] to mature trees. Sure resource

[3:11:24] center urban flooding,

[3:11:27] preventing erosion oil there

[3:11:29] serving at least mature trees

[3:11:30] and development sites should

[3:11:32] be a requirement every day I

[3:11:33] see a lot that I see lots that

[3:11:35] are completely clear but every

[3:11:36] living and then too much

[3:11:37] houses crammed onto 2 and a

[3:11:40] lot. How is this being allowed

[3:11:43] we're fortunate to still have

[3:11:44] trees in north port preserving

[3:11:44] some of them should be

[3:11:45] prioritized about every

[3:11:47] building every lot. And in

[3:11:59] person we have carolyn rice.

[3:12:00] >> came to speak on one item

[3:12:01] and I have several now I've

[3:12:03] heard some of the discussions.

[3:12:04] I'm going back to the palm.

[3:12:09] >> issue.

[3:12:10] >> some of the things that

[3:12:13] came to my mind is that most

[3:12:15] of the palms except for the

[3:12:17] sabal palm which is also the

[3:12:17] cap which I'm sorry have which

[3:12:20] is a state most of those palms

[3:12:24] are not native to this area.

[3:12:25] And having had palms on my

[3:12:29] property having planted them.

[3:12:30] They have not survive some of

[3:12:30] that frost and freeze is that

[3:12:34] at.

[3:12:38] The other thing is that palms

[3:12:39] have a I football root system

[3:12:39] which is extensive root

[3:12:42] system. Those are very prone

[3:12:43] to blowing over in a

[3:12:46] hurricane. Because it's not an

[3:12:49] extensive branching out

[3:12:50] system. So they're just as

[3:12:51] likely as oak tree to be blown

[3:13:00] over. The oxygen that's going

[3:13:01] to be generated by a canopy

[3:13:02] tree as opposed to a palm

[3:13:03] tree, it's not the same.

[3:13:06] Nowhere near the same. Because

[3:13:09] you don't have a 40 foot.

[3:13:13] Canopy growth regular tree as

[3:13:14] opposed to a 20 foot for a

[3:13:25] tree. It's a liability. The

[3:13:30] falling palm fronds. If you

[3:13:30] look at the royal palms, their

[3:13:31] palm fronds if they come down

[3:13:33] to hit somebody that's a huge

[3:13:36] liability right there. As a

[3:13:37] candidate the tree that's

[3:13:40] losing leagues or a court.

[3:13:46] That liability is not there.

[3:13:50] That to the suffering. I'm

[3:13:51] going to go back to the 3.20

[3:13:52] project which is the one

[3:13:53] that's closest to my heart for

[3:13:56] obvious reasons.

[3:14:04] The. Buffering. As proposed

[3:14:06] which I'm not sure understood

[3:14:06] all of it with the fencing

[3:14:10] etcetera but. Putting in a

[3:14:16] foot trees. Is in no way going

[3:14:17] to view from a house to a

[3:14:21] industrial building. It will

[3:14:22] take years before thao's trees

[3:14:26] are going to block the view.

[3:14:33] Have a 40 foot canopy. Adding

[3:14:37] a 10 foot to an easement. It's

[3:14:37] only going to create more of a

[3:14:42] flooding problem. When you

[3:14:46] ways raise up those that

[3:14:49] water's got to go someplace.

[3:14:50] We don't have a sewer system

[3:14:54] out there. So any that are

[3:14:58] created for the buffering

[3:14:59] zones, I've got a force that

[3:15:01] water out to the street area

[3:15:01] because it's going to be

[3:15:02] higher than the elevation of

[3:15:04] street.

[3:15:12] >> thank you comments.

[3:15:12] >> okay so that poses out that

[3:15:16] item, looking for what what

[3:15:20] you want to do you want tackle

[3:15:20] the next one you want break.

[3:15:21] And come back tackle the next

[3:15:26] one or what. Minutes back. We

[3:15:30] okay with that.

[3:15:31] >> and that we then we can

[3:15:31] wrap it up and then what we

[3:15:34] want it will and won't be

[3:15:36] somebody has use the restroom.

[3:15:40] >> right okay, so 10 minutes

[3:15:41] all right so we'll come back

[3:15:59] 1237.

[3:16:02] >> yes should have your better

[3:16:06] you it just

[3:16:13] it

[3:16:13] >> I'm stacey low emergency

[3:16:14] management coordinator for the

[3:16:16] city of north port and I'm

[3:16:16] going to tell you the

[3:16:19] difference between flood zones

[3:16:20] and evacuation zones are in

[3:16:23] sarasota county. We call them

[3:16:24] evacuation levels. So flood

[3:16:25] zones are generated by fema

[3:16:26] and they're used to determine

[3:16:29] the likelihood that you'll

[3:16:30] flood and they're used to

[3:16:31] determine if you need flood

[3:16:32] insurance if you have a

[3:16:35] mortgage on your home. Now the

[3:16:36] evacuation zones are based on

[3:16:37] storm surge data that comes

[3:16:40] from the national hurricane

[3:16:42] center. And they use

[3:16:43] topography as well as

[3:16:43] hurricane vulnerability for

[3:16:46] storm surge for the area and

[3:16:47] we use those to determine who

[3:16:49] needs to evacuate during a

[3:16:50] storm so it's important to

[3:16:51] understand that there is a

[3:16:53] difference if you're

[3:16:54] interested in finding out what

[3:16:54] evacuation zone you are and

[3:16:55] which we highly recommend you

[3:16:56] do. You can use your search

[3:16:59] engine of choice. And type

[3:17:01] sarasota county know your

[3:17:02] level and that will take you

[3:17:03] to the sarasota county

[3:17:17] government website.

[3:17:23] >> water nurse. Well that's

[3:17:24] kind of the my

[3:17:27] >> your house is not flooding.

[3:17:31] Within us after storm event.

[3:17:32] >> water should be in that

[3:17:33] swell to 72 hours after the

[3:17:33] storm.

[3:17:37] That allows the filter to get

[3:17:41] the stuff came room and the

[3:17:42] road out of the water so that

[3:17:43] when reaches the habitat it no

[3:17:44] longer has those contaminants

[3:17:48] and also provides an

[3:17:49] opportunity to slow down

[3:17:50] waters so that the water

[3:17:54] doesn't go so fast that their

[3:17:54] roads.

[3:17:56] >> roadways any other

[3:17:57] infrastructure, so when you

[3:18:00] see water it's only you know

[3:18:01] up to 72 hours since the last

[3:18:02] rain that is letting is doing

[3:18:16] its job.

[3:18:20] >> mine in the van pull it

[3:18:22] from product facility manager

[3:18:22] with the city of north port

[3:18:23] and today we're going to be

[3:18:26] talking with you guys about

[3:18:26] our free swim evaluation. It's

[3:18:28] important that we do need from

[3:18:30] a valuation so kids

[3:18:31] registering for swim programs

[3:18:32] they get placed in the right

[3:18:34] class what we're looking at

[3:18:35] doing something you ation is

[3:18:37] every swim level has what's

[3:18:38] called exit skill assessments.

[3:18:39] So what we do is we have your

[3:18:40] child get in the water and

[3:18:42] will go through a series of

[3:18:43] different movements can eagle

[3:18:44] into the water I can you show

[3:18:46] us your phone call can you

[3:18:48] show us back shows elementary

[3:18:49] back different strokes within

[3:18:49] and what we're doing is we're

[3:18:52] trying to where your child

[3:18:52] test to before it becomes a

[3:18:55] challenge for at that point

[3:18:56] once we assess that that will

[3:18:57] let you know and you can go

[3:18:58] ahead and sign your child up

[3:19:00] for that appropriate level

[3:19:02] there. It's important that we

[3:19:03] have these so that way when

[3:19:04] we're teaching a level one we

[3:19:07] don't have kids that should

[3:19:08] potentially a level 2 and a

[3:19:08] level one class because

[3:19:10] they're not learning the

[3:19:11] appropriate skills that they

[3:19:13] needed that point in time

[3:19:14] right now when we're in full

[3:19:15] summer we have some people

[3:19:18] come between 8.10 deduce from

[3:19:19] evaluation just as you can

[3:19:20] hear the water splashing in

[3:19:21] the background slide.

[3:19:22] Everything like that, but any

[3:19:23] day of the that open you can

[3:19:25] come in at any point in time

[3:19:27] enough for evaluations we

[3:19:28] always have a certified so

[3:19:29] much doctor on site that have

[3:19:30] your child take a swim

[3:19:44] assessment.

[3:19:52] >> stacey la salle and the

[3:19:52] emergency management

[3:19:53] coordinator for the city

[3:19:55] of north port and I'm going to

[3:19:56] be talking about having an

[3:19:57] evacuation plan it's a point

[3:19:59] have an evacuation plan ahead

[3:20:00] of time and it's very

[3:20:02] important to write it down

[3:20:05] because that way you have it

[3:20:05] somewhere present everybody in

[3:20:07] your family can see it and

[3:20:09] keep it fresh in their minds

[3:20:09] and you also share it with

[3:20:12] people in your family or your

[3:20:12] neighbors so that they know

[3:20:14] what your plans are ahead of

[3:20:15] time and how to get a hold of

[3:20:17] your way to look for you after

[3:20:19] a disaster for your evacuation

[3:20:20] you should have multiple

[3:20:21] routes to get to location.

[3:20:25] You're planning to go to just

[3:20:27] because traffic was traffic on

[3:20:28] 75 might be gridlocked there

[3:20:29] could be some very good back

[3:20:31] roads to get to where you're

[3:20:33] going that could get you there

[3:20:35] more quickly without stuck in

[3:20:36] traffic when you're making

[3:20:37] evacuation plan. We usually

[3:20:39] tell you 4 different things

[3:20:41] you should stay home if you

[3:20:42] are not in his own that's

[3:20:45] being evacuated and if your

[3:20:47] home is built to withstand the

[3:20:49] forecasted storm if you can

[3:20:50] stay home. And you evacuate

[3:20:52] your next option should be to

[3:20:54] go to a friend or family home

[3:20:55] that is outside of the

[3:20:56] evacuation area and it is

[3:20:58] structurally sound to us and

[3:20:58] the storm option would be go

[3:21:04] to a hotel. They're much more

[3:21:05] comfortable than I've

[3:21:05] accusation. Center's 4th

[3:21:06] option would be to go to one

[3:21:06] of our evacuation center

[3:21:07] sarasota county has fallen

[3:21:09] back away shuns center's.

[3:21:10] Those can be found on their

[3:21:24] website.

[3:21:29] >> at the city of north port

[3:21:30] we are here to

[3:21:31] >> serve you. And there are

[3:21:35] many ways to connect with us.

[3:21:36] You will always find friendly

[3:21:38] faces when you come to city

[3:21:39] hall. You first walk in there

[3:21:42] we'll see our customer care

[3:21:43] center. The care center helps

[3:21:43] customers to

[3:21:44] call into the city to get

[3:21:45] answers they need in a timely

[3:21:48] fashion.

[3:21:48] >> our care center has helped

[3:21:49] more than 10,000 customers

[3:21:52] last month alone. Next to the

[3:21:54] call center.

[3:21:54] You'll find a self-service

[3:21:58] kiosk for code enforcement and

[3:21:58] building divisions. Using the

[3:21:59] qr code or by visiting

[3:22:00] our website you can schedule

[3:22:03] your appointments with ease.

[3:22:05] >> have you checked out our

[3:22:06] website from employment

[3:22:07] opportunities to building

[3:22:07] codes you can find just about

[3:22:08] anything using the search bar.

[3:22:13] Finally you can download the

[3:22:14] north report app and

[3:22:15] submit non-emergency issues to

[3:22:15] city hall in less than a

[3:22:18] minute. The app is help

[3:22:19] correct more than 12,000

[3:22:22] issues across the city. No

[3:22:23] matter the method you choose

[3:22:25] the city is here for you and

[3:22:26] together we will build

[3:22:33] stronger community.

[3:22:39] >> why do we flood. During

[3:22:41] significant rain events port

[3:22:42] nearly always floods in

[3:22:45] certain areas of the city.

[3:22:47] This is thanks to the locally

[3:22:47] named myakka hatchee creek

[3:22:48] also known as the big slew

[3:22:53] watershed.

[3:22:55] >> the 195 square mile

[3:22:56] drainage area flows through

[3:22:59] desoto manatee and sarasota

[3:23:00] counties then through our city

[3:23:03] to exit at charlotte harbor.

[3:23:05] As the city of north port is

[3:23:06] located at the low end of the

[3:23:08] big slew watershed drainage

[3:23:10] system. The city's current

[3:23:11] flooding and water quality

[3:23:12] conditions are attributed not

[3:23:15] only to the city's growth. But

[3:23:18] also to upstream runoff in the

[3:23:19] desoto manatee and sarasota

[3:23:19] county portions of the big

[3:23:23] slow. During significant rain

[3:23:28] events ponding can also occur

[3:23:28] ponding occurs and low-lying

[3:23:29] areas that are characterized

[3:23:33] by poorly drained or super

[3:23:34] saturated soils with

[3:23:35] back-to-back rainfall events

[3:23:36] the ground is totally

[3:23:37] saturated which increases the

[3:23:43] runoff during a storm. The

[3:23:44] city works hard to maintain

[3:23:45] its stormwater conveyance

[3:23:46] system which is comprised of

[3:23:47] roadside swales draining into

[3:23:51] 79 miles of named waterways.

[3:23:53] >> and 132 miles of retention

[3:23:54] ditches that interconnect with

[3:23:55] each other and with the myakka

[3:23:58] hatchee creek. There are 64

[3:24:00] water control structures of

[3:24:02] which 23 are gated water

[3:24:06] control structures 5 are gated

[3:24:08] drop structures, 28 are fixed.

[3:24:08] We're structures and 8 are

[3:24:13] dropped structures. The

[3:24:14] control elevations of these

[3:24:15] structures are designed so

[3:24:16] that water is retained in the

[3:24:17] waterways and a step-down

[3:24:20] elevation system

[3:24:20] configuration.

[3:24:22] >> this means the water levels

[3:24:24] in the waterway segments

[3:24:25] between structures

[3:24:25] progressively decreases in

[3:24:26] elevation from north to south

[3:24:29] and from east to west. This

[3:24:31] system configuration allows

[3:24:32] both retention of storm water

[3:24:34] runoff for water quality

[3:24:34] treatment and storage for

[3:24:38] potable water use in

[3:24:39] preparation for a storm, the

[3:24:39] gates are opened as needed to

[3:24:45] convey flood waters.

[3:24:48] >> the city has an ongoing

[3:24:48] program to inspect and replace

[3:24:51] old corroded structures since

[3:24:53] 2006 13 of the high priorities

[3:24:56] structures have been replaced

[3:24:57] or rehabilitated the city also

[3:24:59] has a program to clear the

[3:25:00] ditches of sediment deposits

[3:25:03] that have accumulated over and

[3:25:03] clear fallen chasing and then

[3:25:12] my our back.

[3:25:17] >> I after the last you know a

[3:25:19] you can convey escape to thank

[3:25:19] her her presentation and also

[3:25:22] feel phone calls from.

[3:25:26] Residents and they have

[3:25:27] nothing but good things to say

[3:25:29] about when they deal with and

[3:25:31] it always makes them feel at

[3:25:31] ease because she is so

[3:25:32] knowledgeable and just the way

[3:25:36] she comes across is very

[3:25:37] positive so I just wanted to

[3:25:40] if you can share that with

[3:25:41] her.

[3:25:46] >> started out to mention

[3:25:53] >> we're moving to item c.

[3:25:53] Discussion and possible

[3:25:54] direction regarding suggested

[3:25:58] agenda items for the 2020 for

[3:26:00] a convocation of governments

[3:26:01] based on the inter local

[3:26:03] agreement school facility

[3:26:04] planning. City manager this is

[3:26:08] your item.

[3:26:09] >> it is not a mere up first

[3:26:09] of all apologize like this it

[3:26:13] is item last year in board

[3:26:17] review topics NOVEMBER 22nd.

[3:26:20] This 8 of the publication is

[3:26:23] still coming in JANUARY but we

[3:26:23] missed to the station for the

[3:26:24] so we reached out to them and

[3:26:26] they said if we were give some

[3:26:29] direction by the end business

[3:26:29] today. That we find that we

[3:26:32] spoke with staff that doesn't

[3:26:35] have any new wooden items or

[3:26:38] their but we can update on 2

[3:26:39] of the items which is which

[3:26:40] are important to us.

[3:26:45] Wait the traffic light that we

[3:26:51] are installing. Port high with

[3:26:52] you the board voted on and

[3:26:53] gave approval that we're

[3:26:56] moving forward believe that

[3:26:57] the schedule of that traffic

[3:26:58] light will be during the

[3:27:00] offseason of this upcoming

[3:27:01] school year. You MAY remember

[3:27:02] that we asked the school to

[3:27:05] participate in the funding of

[3:27:05] the item but they were unable

[3:27:06] to commit to doing so time say

[3:27:10] we will move forward. Yeah, I

[3:27:14] we're going school board issue

[3:27:16] up the. Technical college in

[3:27:17] there exhilaration of for the

[3:27:22] year expanded. A's expanding

[3:27:22] next phase of the our team

[3:27:25] that they're working with not

[3:27:29] only news school

[3:27:31] superintendent but as well as

[3:27:32] doctor below leadership over

[3:27:32] at the college you MAY

[3:27:35] remember that we win it myself

[3:27:36] in the mirror, but the school

[3:27:36] board got their blessing few

[3:27:41] months ago as well. So post

[3:27:42] that blessing with the school

[3:27:43] board we have been working any

[3:27:46] mask arenas it working in

[3:27:46] developing contacts within the

[3:27:50] business community to further

[3:27:51] and get their support for

[3:27:52] upcoming expansion of the

[3:27:53] college which would mean

[3:27:58] better more training or. The

[3:27:59] health care professionals that

[3:28:01] we need for upcoming hospitals

[3:28:02] as well as different

[3:28:03] programming that will benefit

[3:28:07] the city of north port. As we

[3:28:08] continue on that some of the

[3:28:12] school board members have been

[3:28:12] successful unhelpful in

[3:28:15] lobbying for some of the

[3:28:16] funding gap between that

[3:28:17] project what is needed the

[3:28:18] total of that project. It's

[3:28:21] 22 million dollars school

[3:28:23] board. We had funding in the

[3:28:24] out years 18 million dollars

[3:28:28] even if they decide to look

[3:28:28] all 18 million which that

[3:28:30] asked to say the least it was

[3:28:32] still be appointing at so

[3:28:35] working with them not only for

[3:28:36] the programming to be decide

[3:28:36] the poem that the funding and

[3:28:41] how it will be. Salt as well

[3:28:42] as the program hospital as

[3:28:45] well so I'm sure I will we

[3:28:46] know when the update on that

[3:28:47] at this school board that's

[3:28:51] that's a multi into multiple

[3:28:52] effort and we're just a part

[3:28:56] of that but we are. And as you

[3:28:56] raise those issues up and get

[3:28:58] to that project the we will be

[3:29:03] soliciting our partners in

[3:29:03] state leadership roles that

[3:29:04] will allow for funding to

[3:29:11] occur as so time just like

[3:29:12] ward in this city contributed

[3:29:13] to building of the shed

[3:29:14] installed library over there

[3:29:18] or the sec. I'm going we

[3:29:20] contributed to that there will

[3:29:21] be a petition asking the city

[3:29:21] some point in time to help

[3:29:27] with the when doubt. I said

[3:29:28] all that say we don't have to

[3:29:29] have any new item to the list

[3:29:30] this board item that they

[3:29:32] would like us to consider and

[3:29:33] discuss anything to do. He

[3:29:37] would have to discussed been

[3:29:38] there and then bring back to

[3:29:41] you before we vote because

[3:29:42] they have to be submitted

[3:29:42] after the business after today

[3:29:47] of the business.

[3:29:49] >> okay so again this clarify

[3:29:49] we are going to bring up the

[3:29:54] traffic light.

[3:29:55] >> I will be with the traffic

[3:29:55] light during our conversation

[3:29:56] because it will be an

[3:29:59] opportunity to do so. But we

[3:30:03] do have any new items to to

[3:30:03] the occasional estes or direct

[3:30:07] other okay.

[3:30:08] >> also think that's important

[3:30:09] because I again I am a lot of

[3:30:11] people don't realize that

[3:30:17] traffic concerns or hat our.

[3:30:17] The responsibility of that

[3:30:18] municipality that and they

[3:30:21] assume that the school board

[3:30:22] was paid for crossing guards

[3:30:27] and all that, but they do it.

[3:30:29] >> so was moore's was still

[3:30:30] specifically the fact that if

[3:30:34] we get the traffic and

[3:30:38] something happened happened

[3:30:41] subsequent that I didn't want

[3:30:42] the school board say we did in

[3:30:43] what the potential is there

[3:30:43] any way and not be supporting

[3:30:44] us sure is that they supported

[3:30:47] us in the effort of the

[3:30:48] traffic light. Can mid to for

[3:30:51] this

[3:30:52] >> all right I have anything

[3:30:58] from. My fellow commissioners.

[3:30:59] Commissioner mcdowell yeah, I

[3:31:03] just want this letter dated

[3:31:04] the 20 seconds was already

[3:31:06] sent to them are you sending

[3:31:07] it tonight at the close of

[3:31:12] business. Letter dated the 20

[3:31:13] seconds I don't know there's a

[3:31:14] letter in the back material

[3:31:18] support from the city of port

[3:31:18] and stated the 22nd, I'm

[3:31:19] asking if it was sent or are

[3:31:22] you sending at the end of

[3:31:23] business today. That was last

[3:31:28] letter is already sewing me.

[3:31:29] Is it too late to add

[3:31:34] something. In addition

[3:31:34] everything I just yes, yes,

[3:31:39] sir.

[3:31:39] >> it is that it is the will

[3:31:40] of his board to add something

[3:31:41] we will add it to the only

[3:31:45] thing that we have discussed

[3:31:46] without getting any direction

[3:31:47] from border are the same 2

[3:31:51] item that I you can't.

[3:31:52] >> the reason why I'm asking

[3:31:52] is because we do only get to

[3:31:57] meet with the school board 1,

[3:31:58] 2, year. And I I have heard

[3:31:59] from many parents about the

[3:32:03] concerns about safety at

[3:32:05] school. From the fights in the

[3:32:05] hallways, the never ending

[3:32:12] fights in the bathrooms. And

[3:32:12] this is ongoing problem, it's

[3:32:15] not isolated incident and I

[3:32:16] know that it's cool and

[3:32:19] everybody seems to fight in

[3:32:21] school. I remember being in

[3:32:23] high school myself that this

[3:32:25] is now moving entry school and

[3:32:25] even going down and and in the

[3:32:30] middle school. And I think

[3:32:30] maybe a conversation on school

[3:32:33] safety will be paramount. And

[3:32:35] to find out what they're doing

[3:32:38] to help the students in

[3:32:39] addressing these safety

[3:32:41] concerns with the fighting and

[3:32:43] the inability for many

[3:32:44] students to even go into the

[3:32:45] bathroom because it's so

[3:32:49] unsafe. The only thing that I

[3:32:49] wanted to bring up because

[3:32:50] this is our only chance to do

[3:32:54] so. Ok do what we think about

[3:33:02] that. Much to

[3:33:02] >> to add that is item for

[3:33:08] discussion.

[3:33:09] >> this is quite difficult

[3:33:12] because we can't really

[3:33:15] oversee those items bn school

[3:33:15] board resource officers up

[3:33:16] there we can find out if they

[3:33:20] planned on doing anything but

[3:33:21] I'm just asking is it more of

[3:33:21] a conversation that have on

[3:33:27] here. Monthly meeting city

[3:33:28] manager that you have with the

[3:33:28] mayor and stuff like that

[3:33:29] going forward because that's a

[3:33:33] meeting every single month.

[3:33:36] >> commissioner so what I say

[3:33:37] it says we don't know what

[3:33:41] items they are going to

[3:33:41] discuss it, I'm happy to

[3:33:42] respond back to them know that

[3:33:45] the updates on the 2 items

[3:33:47] will be coming forward and

[3:33:48] then introduce those

[3:33:48] conversations that you're

[3:33:49] having right now get the get

[3:33:54] into. During the meetings

[3:33:55] we've all attended then there

[3:33:55] is always an opportunity and

[3:33:57] an encouragement from the

[3:33:59] school board for us too speak

[3:34:03] about what's important to us.

[3:34:04] I don't believe that that item

[3:34:04] is something that's going to

[3:34:07] be so unique that there

[3:34:07] wouldn't be the opportunity

[3:34:08] for discussion and

[3:34:09] conversation for security of

[3:34:12] our students in our schools.

[3:34:13] >> yeah, I'm just curious on

[3:34:14] what would be the proper place

[3:34:16] a proper time to discuss that

[3:34:17] to where we could have a lake.

[3:34:20] Commissioner mcdowell says it

[3:34:23] is going to be a longer

[3:34:24] conversation when it comes to

[3:34:25] our children and what's

[3:34:29] actually going on. Within

[3:34:29] those school boards and what

[3:34:30] the resource officers are

[3:34:31] doing what the school still on

[3:34:32] that you know that and I know

[3:34:34] there's timelines on this

[3:34:37] upcoming meeting so.

[3:34:38] >> I would think that the

[3:34:39] complication would be the

[3:34:40] direct the best audience to

[3:34:41] have that conversation and

[3:34:43] then we follow up sort of

[3:34:49] routinely about the progress

[3:34:53] or their plans in council

[3:34:54] government meetings and that

[3:34:55] would be my suggestion even

[3:34:57] get ball rolling and then

[3:34:57] continuing that's that's what

[3:34:58] I was sort of us over that.

[3:35:02] >> vice mayor.

[3:35:06] >> yeah I can get that can

[3:35:07] more put up at the meeting I

[3:35:11] don't know that we need this.

[3:35:12] This is time sensitive get out

[3:35:17] today. I can't imagine that.

[3:35:19] this it's such important

[3:35:20] subject that I can feel it's

[3:35:21] not going to come up in some

[3:35:21] way shape or form anyway. And

[3:35:24] if it doesn't any of to bring

[3:35:29] it up. It's opportunity speak

[3:35:30] >> you're saying that it's too

[3:35:31] late to add that set the

[3:35:33] agenda item way. But we can

[3:35:37] just bring it up we were

[3:35:37] there.

[3:35:38] >> additionally you are asking

[3:35:42] bay. It's a topics as a board

[3:35:43] and you decide on all of those

[3:35:44] topics and then that letter is

[3:35:47] set to school board and they

[3:35:47] are where they have that is in

[3:35:52] the put it on there divide it

[3:35:53] was what I'm saying is this

[3:35:54] year since we got the ball and

[3:35:57] we've missed that deadline.

[3:35:59] They're still asking us and

[3:36:00] allowed us to submit that

[3:36:04] thought that, but I would

[3:36:05] careful too and anything new

[3:36:07] when I talked to today because

[3:36:09] you with the board did not

[3:36:12] officially upon it an official

[3:36:13] about to go back in a big too

[3:36:13] I love that you have are for

[3:36:14] you see in the book I think

[3:36:15] that would be fine if I would

[3:36:18] say something like the topic

[3:36:20] did not come in the agenda and

[3:36:24] I said to them and said think

[3:36:24] MADAM Chair roads there chair

[3:36:25] right now were able to submit

[3:36:30] the topic of school safety is

[3:36:31] important court. I would like

[3:36:33] to put it on the record now

[3:36:34] that we have conversation that

[3:36:35] we think that is the important

[3:36:39] item top of it. He bore in our

[3:36:40] peers were not ready to

[3:36:41] discuss it at this time of a

[3:36:43] follow up through the school

[3:36:44] superintendent and their

[3:36:45] border representative during

[3:36:50] the cop meetings think

[3:36:51] >> appreciate commissioner

[3:36:52] mcdowell bring that up it is

[3:36:53] it is a concern and I think it

[3:36:55] needs to be out there. So that

[3:36:57] are aware of this eye made

[3:37:02] aware of this for quite some

[3:37:02] time with.

[3:37:05] >> school board adopted their

[3:37:05] police resource officers

[3:37:10] anymore I I think that we just

[3:37:11] need to make our concerns now

[3:37:12] now no one has anything to do

[3:37:14] with the other but it's also

[3:37:17] on an unfortunate. Byproduct

[3:37:19] of what's going on. In

[3:37:26] general. Out there so I really

[3:37:27] would like to have brought up,

[3:37:27] however you think that should

[3:37:29] be dot thank you, MADAM Aaron

[3:37:33] is the point of reference.

[3:37:36] >> when we started doing as we

[3:37:37] continue to do our own state

[3:37:37] the measures in this building

[3:37:40] in other city buildings. We

[3:37:41] look at what the schools were

[3:37:47] doing an example how to begin

[3:37:47] our processes and I know that

[3:37:49] based on the climate of

[3:37:52] country the county in the

[3:37:53] state. They are always for

[3:37:56] ways processes so working lots

[3:37:57] I think he could be helpful

[3:38:01] for us all.

[3:38:03] >> commissioner dow the only

[3:38:04] reason I was hoping that this

[3:38:08] might be an agenda item at at

[3:38:08] convocation government meeting

[3:38:12] JANUARY with the school board.

[3:38:14] Was because many have brought

[3:38:17] this to my attention and this

[3:38:22] isn't open. Meeting where is

[3:38:23] cobb meetings that are held

[3:38:24] monthly are pretty much closed

[3:38:26] meetings and citizens can't

[3:38:27] hear the results and what's

[3:38:31] what steps are taking place. I

[3:38:31] really think this conversation

[3:38:33] needs to be had. And hopefully

[3:38:36] we can get some some concrete

[3:38:38] information that the parents

[3:38:43] can take a little bit of. Hope

[3:38:44] that things are being

[3:38:44] addressed instead of being

[3:38:50] swept under rug because this

[3:38:51] involving almost daily and

[3:38:53] it's going on the bus is now 2

[3:38:54] and it's happening at the bus

[3:38:55] stops. I get a lot of phone

[3:38:59] calls on this so. Hopefully we

[3:39:01] can have a bigger conversation

[3:39:02] at this JANUARY meeting with

[3:39:06] the school

[3:39:07] >> yes, and I would encourage

[3:39:08] parents to contact the school

[3:39:09] board and their voice known at

[3:39:11] those at those just tell it is

[3:39:21] a concern all right. Okay. And

[3:39:22] my board is clear here any

[3:39:28] public comment all right. All

[3:39:28] right so I think that's it

[3:39:35] we're which all right do I

[3:39:38] before. All right so it is

[3:39:38] 1251 in this workshop session

City Commission Workshop on 2023-12-04 9:00 AM - Amended to update presentation for Item 23-1694

Agenda

Transcript