[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] #
[1:28:14] #
[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