[0:04] Yeah. I guess the

[0:07] the more of the gradient of the eye is allowable or

[0:11] These are just kind >> Well, that's that's a little harder for

[0:16] me. So, you did that today? You did a scan You did the This is a

[0:19] very >> Yeah.

[0:22] » Because this is all like Because if the logo we had a lot of

[0:26] the AI stuff and you you could earn the money and not do anything.

[0:30] » Sorry, Joe. >> The second one had a lot like the second

[0:33] one. >> Yeah, I guess.

[0:34] So, anyway, >> Me, too. I did not I did not like the

[0:38] frames. The frames had solutions. But anyway,

[0:41] um um

[0:43] he has amazing work and he does stuff on on science stuff.

[0:48] » Oh, okay. >> And he cannot use AI, right?

[0:51] » Yeah. >> And he does

[0:53] 3D like a It's very good.

[0:55] And he told me that what we do with the

[1:00] I know he does the sketch.

[1:02] » Yeah. >> He put on the board and then the the

[1:05] board is and they like and do the board. >> Yeah.

[1:08] » And we did a little bit of that with the uh the

[1:10] the board that was not AI. >> Yeah.

[1:14] » Remember we did the research large >> Yeah.

[1:16] » with the boards of one of the women. Just play there.

[1:20] We did more research. It's okay to do

[1:23] research too. >> Yeah.

[1:24] » So, the thing is in the in the post-production

[1:28] they need some reason.

[1:31] It's so much fun. Bring to the conference.

[1:34] I had a torture

[1:38] So, I think that is pretty awesome. But I did not see that because he did not go

[1:42] to YouTube to look at the AI.

[1:45] So, we need to have a >> Okay.

[1:48] » I'm saying, can you at least disclose

[1:51] » Something >> in the equation of how much AI you need

[1:54] what software >> Yeah.

[1:55] » It's one thing >> And how you

[1:57] plan to incorporate it in the hand painting. in the hand cream?

[2:00] » No. >> In the hand cream.

[2:02] » You know, but also because my concern

[2:05] I would like

[2:09] If the council says this is the top one, and the agreement

[2:17] So, it's just our statute represents only the top one because we want we

[2:21] don't want to have one top one. >> Yes.

[2:27] » I didn't know that. >> And they have a lawsuit.

[2:30] So, we need representation from them. This is my issue.

[2:34] » Yeah.

[2:38] » Um so, that is the issue. So,

[2:42] So, but this is all new. We have to We are working already with the framework

[2:46] all the systems to bring to

[2:49] the council. >> Okay.

[2:51] » But at this one, he was like, "Oh, I Yeah, I use a little bit."

[2:55] What if I What if I use a little bit? And I use a filter. I use AI to check if

[3:00] those were AI filters or not. I use this as a filter

[3:03] to see if it's if it's a true or false or not.

[3:06] » Okay, how you doing? It's always

[3:08] » All right. >> Yeah.

[3:09] Huh? >> the corporation

[3:11] » Yeah. >> Um

[3:13] Yeah, it shows us AI is getting better.

[3:17] » Then you're getting >> I know

[3:20] what what one thing

[3:24] » Yeah, they know Yeah.

[3:26] It was a year, last year. So, >> Yeah.

[3:30] » We're getting there. We're getting there, but no one ever tells

[3:35] » some discussions with developers and stuff.

[3:36] » Yeah, I work I work at Apple. It's my full-time job.

[3:40] I've been there for

[3:44] » Oh, yeah. >> Especially our president of sales.

[3:47] » Yeah, you can you cannot be, please, political things

[3:51] » I I I finally got caught.

[3:53] » Even you plagiarize yourself.

[3:57] » You have to give credit where credit's due.

[3:59] » Credit's due. So, that is important. So, let's keep on

[4:04] But, it's an interesting discussion because this is coming.

[4:07] » Oh, yeah. And then it And then those that don't

[4:10] give a crap about it, they're they're going crazy.

[4:43] I don't understand how both can be evil like

[4:47] Yeah. >> And now they are.

[4:52] » great relations

[5:03] That's my thing. People are betting on what will bad

[5:06] bodies perform. What if a catering guy heard it in

[5:09] practice?

[5:16] Oh, like a bunch. Yeah. What does he do for Fantasy Football?

[5:20] engineer Nice.

[5:26] Yeah. Well, I'm applying to Draft Kings for

[5:28] what it's worth. They do content mostly. So, I'm applying

[5:31] there.

[5:36] Yeah.

[5:45] I don't think so.

[5:48] Yeah.

[7:35] Oh, you can say that. Okay. It has frozen words.

[7:44] Okay. is this?

[7:55] » All right. Good evening, everyone. Welcome to Oviedo City Council Chambers.

[7:59] If everyone could please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance.

[8:03] » I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the

[8:08] republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and

[8:13] justice for all.

[8:18] » Please join me in a moment of silence.

[8:34] I would like to call our meeting to order. It is February 16th at

[8:37] approximately 6:30 p.m. and we have all members of council present.

[8:42] We're going to start on with the approval of the minutes. Do I have a

[8:45] motion? I know we have >> um

[8:49] uh ap- approve the minutes as amended on

[8:53] the table in front of you. There was um

[8:56] the way the way that one of the things was written before about a motion that I

[9:00] had made um admittedly it was uh my language that

[9:05] could be read a couple of different ways.

[9:06] » second. Second. Okay, continue. >> Oh, okay.

[9:10] Uh so, my langu- my language could have been read a couple of different ways,

[9:14] um but I feel like in context of the whole discussion that we have, that the

[9:19] highlighted language in yellow um accurately represents what we indeed

[9:24] passed. So, I move to approve the minutes

[9:29] as they are on the sheet in front of us. I don't know if I need to read it or

[9:33] not. >> Okay, so we have a motion to change in

[9:36] the minutes item number nine to read as a motion to adopt resolution number

[9:40] 2683-26 removing the two references for one year

[9:44] after the child's birth in section eight. Item D was made by Alan Ott,

[9:48] seconded by Megan Slatick. Do we have any discussion on this?

[9:51] » I I concur that this reflects what happened. Okay.

[9:55] » Any further? Okay. All those in favor,

[9:58] please signify by saying I. >> I.

[10:00] » All those against? The motion carries. We'll move on to public comment. I do

[10:05] not have any written requests to speak. Is there anybody in the audience that

[10:09] would like to address council at this time?

[10:14] Hearing none, I will close public comment and move on to the consent

[10:17] agenda. Um I would like to move off item number

[10:21] nine

[10:24] and make that into resolution 12A.

[10:30] » Sounds good. >> Are there any other changes?

[10:35] Okay. What is the pleasure of council?

[10:38] » I move we adopt the consent agenda with removing the one.

[10:44] » We have a second? >> Second.

[10:48] » Okay. Any discussion?

[10:52] I'll ask the clerk to call the roll. >> Mayor Slatick.

[10:55] » I. >> Councilmember Ott.

[10:57] » I. >> Deputy Mayor Tucker.

[10:58] » I. >> Councilmember Broderick.

[11:00] » I. >> Councilmember Britton.

[11:01] » I. >> The motion carries. So we will move on.

[11:04] We don't have any public hearings or first readings, so resolution number

[11:09] 4699-26, the forensic engagement for the Twin

[11:13] Rivers Golf Course Enterprise Fund. Mr. Cobb.

[11:20] » Uh thank you, Deputy Mayor. This is a request for council to approve a

[11:23] forensic engagement authorizing Forvis Mazars LLP to perform a phase one

[11:29] forensic investigation of the accounting books and records created and used by

[11:33] SSS Twin Rivers OPCO LLC, which is Down to Earth, the company that manages the

[11:39] golf course. And the

[11:44] We The staff received some some concerns expressed by a local resident and

[11:51] regarding personnel and operating and actually more on the operating side of

[11:57] things as far as Down to Earth and what they charge to the golf course fund. And

[12:02] we we did an investigation initially and determined that an audit would be

[12:07] necessary, a separate audit from the one that's normally done when with the

[12:11] city's annual audit. However, as we got in digging in further, we were able to

[12:16] resolve a number of the accounting issues, but we started to notice that

[12:20] there were some some operational issues that remained. And the one thing about

[12:24] it was that the initial audit that we were recommending would not actually

[12:28] address those operational needs. And so thank actually want to thank Mayor

[12:33] Slayton. She she turned us on to she got a reference to

[12:37] Forest Mazars and we talked with Mr. Bill Blend, who is with us tonight. We

[12:42] also have Mr. Alex Gershner, who is with us by Zoom.

[12:47] But we talked about a forensic engagement.

[12:51] And this is then from what we learned from Mr. Blend is that this is a

[12:54] two-phase process. That what we're talking about tonight is phase one. And

[13:00] the the way I understand it is that the objective of phase one is to determine

[13:05] if there are any issues. And I will actually I'm glad Mr. Blend

[13:09] is standing up to cuz I'm going to let him get into the

[13:13] get into the different details of what the forensic engagement is.

[13:18] This what we've been They've quoted us a price of $20,000

[13:23] for this engagement. There is money in the reserve fund

[13:28] of the golf course of the golf course fund. There is a budget amendment with

[13:33] your resolution that transfers the $20,000 from the reserve to the

[13:38] accounting and auditing account. And so it's recommended after once he's

[13:43] finished and we have discussion, we recommend adoption of resolution

[13:46] number 4699-26.

[13:50] » Good evening. Yeah, I guess I'll just clarify

[13:54] kind of how we got to the idea of two phases.

[13:58] We certainly spoke with management, spoke with finance staff, got some

[14:03] background information, understand there's some issues that have been

[14:06] brought up potentially at what's going quote what's going on at the golf

[14:11] course. As indicated by your city manager, when you do have your financial

[14:15] statement audit, that's looking at your financial information, right? That's not

[14:19] really digging into If you look at the report, it talks about materiality, it

[14:24] talks about the fact that they'll only be responsible for a fraud that was

[14:29] material if somebody thought there was fraud. So

[14:32] with the concerns that are brought to your attention by the citizenry, the

[14:36] idea is that you want an in-depth look at that. So if you want that, you want

[14:40] to do that outside of the financial statement audit. And so you have several

[14:44] options to do that. We have a forensic team at the firm.

[14:48] Alex Gershner is on here. I don't see him so I don't know when he may want to

[14:52] jump in or not, but he certainly can jump in and I'll try to let him speak.

[14:58] But the idea is that rather than do what I would call the shotgun approach is go

[15:04] out there and start digging into everything and look at all kinds of

[15:08] things is we hear from the individuals, the interested parties, the ones that

[15:13] have brought these concerns to you, what staff has already looked at, and then

[15:18] try to narrow it down to what really appears to be significant issues, and

[15:23] then bring that back to you and determine how you want to proceed from

[15:26] there. Alex, I don't know if you want to add any context to what I just

[15:31] described. >> Yes, hello everyone.

[15:35] Can everyone hear me? >> Yes, we can.

[15:37] » Okay, thank you so much. My name is Alex Gershon.

[15:40] Bill Blanton and I work together at Harvey M. Lazarus. I'm a director on our

[15:44] forensics and valuation team. I think Bill described things very well

[15:49] and we we typically approach these or we we like to do a phase one which is

[15:53] really just the scoping where we have several conversations, look at some

[15:57] preliminary documents, and then discuss our preliminary observations. And at

[16:01] that point we can recommend some potential next steps and then it will be

[16:04] up to the city as to whether we continue with those next steps.

[16:11] » I mean, I can go on. I mean, I do whole sessions on how to do these types of

[16:16] engagements. Alex can add to that, but I think I'd open it up for questions or

[16:20] concerns they might have. >> Okay. Does anybody have questions at

[16:23] this time? >> So, what's entailed in the first part?

[16:28] » Mostly interviews with interested parties. So, we assume

[16:32] council members, mayor may want to have conversations with us. We'll speak to

[16:36] staff, the finance department. Then we'll go on to the golf course and talk

[16:41] to golf course management, do walk-throughs of the activities that are

[16:45] going on there, the operational activities as well as the financial

[16:49] accounting activities. And as Alex indicated, scope it from

[16:52] those procedures. >> And that's the first part. So, then from

[16:56] that part if if >> Then it would be based upon what we

[17:00] learn, come back to you and say, "Okay, this is what we've seen. We, you know,

[17:05] see these areas of being potential areas for further evaluation or investigation

[17:11] depending upon what we learn." Like can't answer the unknown, right? And

[17:15] then you would determine if you wanted to proceed or based upon what you're

[17:19] hearing, whether you think it's relevant for you to proceed, and then we would

[17:22] take your direction from there. So, um >> Okay, so then how much

[17:27] and estimated would the second part be? >> That Well, I I mean I that's that's the

[17:32] reason why I'm not a fan of the shotgun approach cuz we could you then you get

[17:37] all kinds of different pricing and we don't know what that is. So, I can't sit

[17:41] here today and tell you, but when we come back to you, we can definitely give

[17:45] you that information. I don't have that for you today. I don't have enough

[17:48] information. I haven't looked at don't perform those walk-throughs, heard those

[17:52] concerns. I understand there's some document or potentially a report an

[17:57] independent or report that somebody's been provided that we'll take a look at

[18:02] and evaluate um along with those other things that we're doing.

[18:06] » If I may jump in here, um at the one of the primary purposes of

[18:12] the phase one scoping and planning is to be able to come up with a a a stronger

[18:18] and more accurate estimate of what the phase two would cost because I think

[18:22] like Bill said, at this point, we just don't know enough to tell you what

[18:27] procedures we recommend. Then, depending on what you approve us to move forward

[18:31] doing, that will dictate what we estimate the price will be.

[18:35] » What what is this report you're talking about?

[18:38] » Um I I I guess I'll defer to the city

[18:43] manager. You discussed You discussed I believe inf- Maybe I

[18:50] Maybe my terminology is incorrect and may I I I want to suggest it a specific

[18:55] formal report, but information as I understand it was provided or

[18:59] communicated. >> There was public records requests for

[19:01] certain financial documents revolving around the golf course find and it was a

[19:06] review of those documents that we received a spreadsheet explaining the

[19:10] review of those documents. It was more looking at the profit and loss

[19:13] statements. And uh the there were questions within

[19:17] why is this this, why is this that. And so that that's what Mr. Berlin is

[19:20] discussing. It was a it was a spreadsheet that we received.

[19:24] » From a citizen? >> Yes. From a citizen.

[19:26] » From citizen. >> Does the citizen have experience?

[19:31] » Um experience in that the citizen has

[19:35] stated they have experience in the golf course industry.

[19:38] » Hm. >> I've got a quick question as well. To

[19:42] what extent do you compare our golf course to other golf courses and

[19:48] operational differentials in phase one? Because I think that at the at the end

[19:52] of the day like I think that's kind of what everybody's wondering is you know,

[19:58] how how do we compare? Do we get a gauge on that?

[20:02] » You can. You've got to first get into the specifics about your golf course,

[20:08] uh rounds, hours of operation, um what the customer base is, if you

[20:12] will, right? So there's a lot of variables in making that comparative cuz

[20:16] you don't if you have a nine-hole course versus an 18-hole course, right? There

[20:20] So before you can do good comparables, you have to really learn the operation.

[20:25] So we have extensive experience with uh municipal golf courses specifically. a

[20:31] nuance to that in a in and of itself. So yes, we have the ability to gather data

[20:36] from other similar type courses, but I wouldn't want to

[20:40] do that in To me, I don't think that would You could do that in phase one if

[20:44] you wanted to, but I don't would not recommend that initially.

[20:48] Unless you just wanted to do a straight-up analysis of comparing, you

[20:53] know, courses of similar types. Then then yes, the answer to that would be.

[20:57] » And I don't I don't know that that's what I would be looking to get out of

[21:00] this. Um that doesn't hurt, but Mr. Cobb, I have a question for you, which

[21:04] is how often do we maybe audit's not the right word, but

[21:08] audit our golf course on a deep level since we've owned it.

[21:12] » We have not done one. >> So, I I'm not against auditing it and

[21:16] you know, transparency makes a healthy budget. But uh as far as is the goal

[21:20] here to make sure we're doing everything the right way or is the goal here to

[21:24] check our profit versus a city operating a golf course somewhere else. Um

[21:29] » Well, it's to check our what how we are operating against

[21:33] what the contract says and probably also compare with

[21:38] standard pricing for other places to see if we are in range or if we are

[21:44] you know being charged something substantially

[21:46] different than others. Just so we know because it is a a choice

[21:51] for us you know, whether we proceed.

[21:56] » Yeah, and just as a simple example of why, you know, you got to get the deep

[22:00] understanding of it is kind of what you alluded to. Some golf courses are

[22:04] strictly run by municipal management, right? Municipal staff. That's going to

[22:08] be different than one that's outsourced similar to the one that you have. And

[22:12] then who's it outsourced to, right? So, again, there's there's variables in

[22:18] that. >> And and maybe just a

[22:21] I I don't know if it's tacky to bring it up, but you guys did the Joel Greenberg

[22:25] audit, correct? >> Correct.

[22:27] » So, you know, if you hire a friend and then you pay the friend something that

[22:31] is not market rate, that would be the sort of thing that you would uncover,

[22:34] correct? >> Correct.

[22:36] As we look at things, yes. As we look at Yeah, again, what what what we would get

[22:41] into in that regard is, okay, well, what are they doing on procurement, right?

[22:45] How do they procure? Who are they doing Who are their vendors? What are they you

[22:48] know, what's our understanding of that? Again,

[22:52] going in, we could go, oh, let let's just go look at vendors. We just want

[22:55] you to validate that. Well, maybe that's not where the issue is. Maybe it's in

[23:00] I I I don't know, something to do with payroll, right? I I I don't want to I

[23:04] don't want to throw things out there that might be misconstrued, but that's

[23:08] the idea of this is getting a better, a fuller understanding, a detailed

[23:13] understanding of what the operations are, what the potential issues are,

[23:17] what's been already brought up, and then evaluate that. Alex, I don't know if you

[23:21] want to add more context to that or expand upon that, but

[23:25] » No, I I think you covered it it well, Bill. Um you know, phase one is a is a

[23:30] light touch. We we review select documents. We have several

[23:34] conversations. These are scoping conversations, and then we come back to

[23:38] you with a recommendation for various areas that we could potentially look

[23:42] into based on what we've seen to date, and then we take your direction as to

[23:46] how we'd like to how you'd like to move forward.

[23:48] » Okay. Will um

[23:52] phase one or phase two address any uh I would say generally accepted accounting

[23:57] practice recommendations? Would that come in the phase one or

[24:00] would that wait till the phase two if we have it?

[24:03] » We're certainly going to look at the accounting activities and how things are

[24:06] reported. Yes, as part of phase one. If we If we look into that and then we

[24:10] found out something was being reported incorrectly, um inventory's being

[24:15] expensed, if you will, right? We We would evaluate things like that.

[24:19] » Okay. And you provide recommendations on how to do it properly?

[24:24] » Yes. >> If If I may jump in here, Bill, um

[24:29] a any assessment of accounting at any level of detail would occur in phase

[24:33] two. Phase one is scoping. If we catch wind of anything that we we feel like

[24:39] might warrant some further analysis related to how things are being booked

[24:44] from an accounting standpoint or even an operational standpoint, that will be

[24:48] part of our observations that we share with the city, and then depending on

[24:53] what we see in those observations, if there's something that may warrant a

[24:56] further look at generally accepted accounting principles, uh uh then we can

[25:00] absolutely do that. >> Okay.

[25:03] » It >> You did say in phase two, I thought

[25:05] that's what you had asked. >> know if it'd be in phase one or phase

[25:08] two. >> I mean, we're we're going to have to

[25:10] look at that to see what they're doing, right? So, from as you alluded to, that

[25:14] that touch, that view of it, and then oh, well, this is an area of concern.

[25:18] Doesn't seem like they know what they're doing, if you will, right? And then we'd

[25:21] have to dig into it. >> So, I want to back us up for a minute

[25:23] here, cuz this is kind of a weird topic. And and this is not with you, this is

[25:27] more with the city. Um

[25:30] and maybe this is a question for Mr. Boop or Mr. Cop, have we internally in

[25:34] the city had concerns about the way our operator is operating our golf course?

[25:48] » I've not had any concerns with the way the golf course has been operating

[25:52] itself, per se. Uh we've not had any had any concerns in

[25:56] regard to the accounting. Now, when this information was brought forth to us, we

[26:00] took a look at how some of the accounting was done.

[26:04] Uh could the accounting be have been done better? Absolutely, yes, it could

[26:07] have been done better. But, you know, you get three or four accountants in the

[26:11] room, they're going to give you three or four different ways to do the same

[26:13] thing. Okay, now, from an operational perspective, I can't

[26:17] answer that, because I don't have any experience in regard to golf course

[26:22] operations. If I had experience in regard to golf course operations, I

[26:25] could give you a better answer to that. And I think a large part of this is is

[26:30] the golf course being operating being operated

[26:34] efficiently. Is it being run correctly? And those are assertions that have been

[26:39] made to us that I've told Mr. Cop, I don't feel comfortable addressing,

[26:42] because again, I don't have any experience in those areas.

[26:45] Does that help? >> Okay, yeah, it does. So, but you think

[26:48] in general, what I'm hearing is we don't have any red flags that have come up to

[26:52] us, but there's nothing wrong with more information and a check every now and

[26:56] then. >> Correct.

[26:57] » Okay, and that's what I felt on that. >> Correct. Absolutely.

[26:59] » Thank you. Do we have any other questions?

[27:02] » How long is phase one? >> I think

[27:07] Alex, I'm thinking not too long. >> It would depend on the level of

[27:14] cooperation we get in terms of scheduling our various meetings.

[27:18] I think at the at the low end it would be a few weeks to have a a few

[27:22] conversations with various people looking at various schedules,

[27:26] looking at some very preliminary documents and then coming back to you

[27:29] with observations. It could certainly take you

[27:32] five, six weeks if people are slow to get together with us, but I would say

[27:37] probably three to four weeks is a decent estimation, but only an estimation at

[27:42] this point. >> Okay. Anybody else?

[27:47] All right, thank you. >> All right, you're welcome. Thank you.

[27:50] Uh Deputy Mayor, before you go into your your motion and discussion,

[27:55] I wanted to let you know that part of your resolution does include a waiver of

[28:00] the purchasing policies. Uh we wrote that in there because

[28:05] we view it as time is of the essence. Uh the purchasing policy does allow the

[28:09] city council to waive uh the the different aspects of purchasing during

[28:15] times like this. We currently our contract is an automatic renewal

[28:19] contract in which if we decide not to renew, we have to

[28:23] give at least 90 days notice. And so we want to make sure that we get through

[28:27] this process quickly so that we can, if we do decide not to renew the contract,

[28:32] we can do so with and meet that 90-day notice. And so that's part of your

[28:36] resolution that it does call for. Council does approve a waving of the the

[28:40] purchasing thresholds. >> Okay, thank you.

[28:43] What is the pleasure of council? >> I move we adopt resolution number

[28:47] 4699-26.

[28:51] » We have a motion. Is there a second? >> Second.

[28:54] » Any discussion? >> I think it's a a good thing after 9

[28:57] years to take a good good hard look.

[29:05] » I I mean I just struggle with this. I mean I I understand doing doing the

[29:08] audit. I mean I understand trying to figure out and I also see that's $20,000

[29:14] to for something that we're not sure if

[29:17] there's really an issue, but I don't know.

[29:24] » Anybody else? Okay. I'll ask the clerk to call the

[29:27] roll.

[29:31] Mayor Slayton >> I.

[29:33] » Councilmember Ott >> I.

[29:34] » Deputy Mayor Duggar >> I.

[29:36] » Councilmember Bradford >> Nay.

[29:38] » Councilmember Britton >> I.

[29:40] » And the motion carries. We will move on to discussion discussion item number 13,

[29:45] which is a land development code amendment.

[29:47] Mr. >> Should we maybe do the resolution first,

[29:50] number nine? >> Oh, yep. You know what? We're going to

[29:53] back up to number 12A, which I snuck in there. Thank you.

[29:57] Um number nine, now number 12A, resolution number 4701-26,

[30:03] the mural final design award. I believe this is Dr. Correa, but

[30:10] » Actually, I was going to ask you, do you want to have the same presentation over

[30:13] again uh that you had with CRA? You can. She's

[30:16] prepared to do so. >> I I don't think that's necessary. I

[30:19] think we just need a discussion on this one.

[30:21] » I I think I think that's the thing. One of the thing I I know that um Mr. Ott

[30:25] and I spoke about today. Uh if the council does This is one of

[30:30] the things where you have complete legislative on. You don't have uh

[30:34] there's no there's no You're not applying anything to this. This is

[30:37] discretionary. And so you have you can if you feel

[30:42] uncomfortable with the recommended um

[30:47] uh designs you can say look we we're not we can't

[30:52] approve these designs and we want to send it back to the public arts board

[30:56] and say go do another do go do another call to artist and

[31:00] » Is this something we can table and ask to come back or do we need to reopen the

[31:05] meeting? >> if you if you here's the thing with the

[31:07] question of the AI if you send it back I think you need to send it back and say

[31:11] do another call to artist and put in there no AI with direction on any of

[31:16] your concerns. Uh if you if you uh

[31:22] and which I would say you would want to you would want to say actually I would

[31:26] ask Mr. Mr. Mr. Voss here to say no action on it to be honest if we could

[31:31] take no action and just send it back to the the public art board. Uh the thing

[31:36] about it is is that with the 15 items that you've had there is a there is a

[31:40] there is a question of just how many of them actually used AI to make their

[31:44] design. And so it would seem to me that if you

[31:47] had these concerns about the 15 items and particularly the top four uh even

[31:52] though I do know that Dr. Correa mentioned in the the CRA meeting that I

[31:56] believe it was number four didn't use AI.

[32:00] Um but the thing is is that my thinking is is that if you're going to you want

[32:05] to send it back to the to the public art board I would I would recommend sending

[32:09] it back with direction to go back out try again and then also if you want to

[32:14] give any uh direction on hey don't allow AI or other type of stuff that you have

[32:21] concerns about. That would be my recommendation to you I don't know if

[32:24] Dr. Correa has anything else that she would like to to recommend as well but

[32:28] that would be my thought is that my my thought would be don't take action

[32:33] but I want to make sure that I that's okay with Mr. Voss.

[32:37] » Yeah on on that point I think it would be appropriate if if that were the

[32:41] direction the council wanted to go. You don't need to take any action on the

[32:44] resolution that's before you and then just give direction back to the public

[32:48] art board if that were >> Okay, so might be like a motion to not

[32:51] take action and then we have a discussion about it.

[32:56] » Or don't even >> Or don't even have a motion on it.

[32:58] » Give direction no motion. >> Yeah, it would just be give direction.

[33:01] Have your discussion now, you know, to figure out where you want to go and then

[33:04] » Can we get do I need to get consensus right now to do that? So can I have

[33:07] consensus to do that? >> Yes, send it back.

[33:10] » Okay, so now we're good on that. And now we can go into discussion mode, so here

[33:13] we go. >> So good evening, Deputy Mayor, Mayor,

[33:16] Council members. So I think we are absolutely okay to receive it

[33:21] back, to take it back to public art board and to open again if that is the

[33:26] direction. I just need direction then to

[33:32] what level of AI? No AI allowed cuz then that's what is missing from right the we

[33:38] don't want to open again with the same open questions. So

[33:41] it's a percentage, it's no AI, it has to be you know

[33:45] » have to they have to paint it, right? Like that's the idea is that that artist

[33:49] will do the painting on the wall. >> And that is not in question. I mean this

[33:53] artist can paint can paint base we saw that, right? The issue is that it's the

[33:59] generation of the design is the are we allowing generation of the design

[34:05] being done by, you know, partially, completely by AI, no AI? So that's the

[34:10] direction that we need. >> Is there a way to ask them to give

[34:13] credit where credit's due? What parts of their sketch or their

[34:18] concept was AI and what is not? >> Some some cities we have researched and

[34:22] some cities do that. But some cities also have a level of 30%

[34:27] is allowed, 40% you're eliminated. Um so >> Yeah, might

[34:33] » I want to hear from council what is what is the tolerance level here.

[34:37] » My concern would be whether there's something in a in the the concept that's

[34:42] copyrighted by someone else. And >> You're absolutely right.

[34:46] » up as a mural and then we get in trouble.

[34:47] » So, let's put these into actionable things we can give back to her. So, I

[34:51] personally I would like to say no AI. Um, I don't there's not going to be AI

[34:56] on the wall when they paint it. So, in unless anybody up here wants AI to be

[35:00] used in submission. >> Well, I I would not want AI to be used

[35:03] in the submission, but I do not necessarily object to somebody using AI

[35:08] to get a general layout idea, but whatever is turned in should be the

[35:12] artist's own hand having made the thing. >> They can they can AI

[35:16] » They can they can AI. Yeah, AI at home. Yes.

[35:19] » That's fine with that. Um, is everybody on board with that? So, no AI and then I

[35:23] guess the only question I had on there is we had you said two or three people

[35:27] submit multiples. Do we mind if they put more than one

[35:30] submission or is that still okay? >> I'm fine with it.

[35:33] » I don't mind. >> We're still okay with that? All right,

[35:35] is there any other tweaks? So, no AI, you can still have multiple submissions.

[35:40] And then um, I guess I would ask and this is like optional, can they put a

[35:44] link to their current works if they have it if they're submitting?

[35:48] » Rather than we we requested. >> You do have to.

[35:50] » And that is in the application. >> Okay.

[35:52] » Um, so several um,

[35:56] listed murals that they have painted or work that have painted. Um, the top

[36:01] designer was the one that gave really the pictures of previous murals.

[36:06] » And just to answer your um, issue on the copyright, so in the agreement um, the

[36:12] artist will have to make a um, um, declaration that uh, he owns the

[36:18] copyright and he's selling the copyright to us. So, that is already in the

[36:22] agreement. >> Okay.

[36:23] » I think that covers it. >> But I have one more thing. So, you know,

[36:27] one of the things we talked about today was that the um the prompt for this, pun

[36:31] intended, is the 100th anniversary anniversary of the city and beyond,

[36:37] Oviedo past, present, and future. One of the things that caused uh some of

[36:44] these submissions to not be scored as highly by the board, and and correct me

[36:48] if I mischaracterize, was that they didn't um

[36:53] » They missed the >> adequately capture this idea of past,

[36:57] present, and future. And you know, when you go through and

[37:01] you look at all of them, very few of them actually seem to.

[37:06] And I I almost wonder uh is that perhaps um

[37:13] too limiting of a of a prompt? Or maybe something that, you know, we got 15

[37:18] submissions and and uh you know, maybe that's a thing

[37:23] that's not going to be workable. Um because so many so many submitters

[37:28] didn't choose to >> In our experience,

[37:31] » Yeah, go ahead. Sorry. >> is because people don't read. Right?

[37:35] They don't read the the call to artists. So, we are having the same problem with

[37:38] the with the sculpture, and we had the same problem before. So, before we had

[37:43] um for the two murals that we did a call to artists, we had the same issue. Some

[37:47] were graphically were graphically beautiful, but did not have any

[37:52] relationship to Oviedo. And when we were asking for the black history in Oviedo,

[37:56] and the one that it the artist that won was the one that did the research,

[38:00] right? So, some people just don't read the the call to artists, or maybe they

[38:05] have already a mural design in mind, and they

[38:10] propose. >> made up by our art board, the theme?

[38:13] » Yes. >> Yeah, I'm

[38:15] Yeah. But I mean, our board did make it up. Well, yeah, that's what I'm saying.

[38:18] I mean, is it does it make sense to to change that? Maybe, I don't know. But if

[38:22] that's what If that's what the board wants to

[38:25] continue with, then that's okay. But, also

[38:30] maybe I would say if they wanted to change it, I might be okay with that

[38:33] because it seems like we didn't get that when we asked for that.

[38:37] » So, is that the direction from the council to

[38:39] » you can ask for direction here. >> Yeah, I don't know.

[38:41] » Does anybody want to change the theme? >> No.

[38:44] » I think we'll leave it as is. >> Yeah, I don't necessarily want to

[38:47] either, but it was something that that I thought of.

[38:50] » So, no AI and then we're good. No AI, no limitations to the number of

[38:54] the applications, right? >> as many times as you want as long as

[38:57] it's themselves. >> Perfect.

[38:58] » Thank you. >> Thank you.

[38:59] » All right. Um now we are up to item number 13. Um a

[39:05] land development code amendment related to special event and outdoor sales

[39:08] events. Mr. Powell. >> All right. Thank you, Deputy Mayor. If

[39:11] you remember back in our in our uh last work session, uh

[39:15] you had a discussion about special event permits and about waiver of fees and and

[39:21] um outdoor sales events. And the direction

[39:24] that you gave us at the work session was to bring back uh for discussion some

[39:29] ideas on how to address the issues. And so, uh the development services staff

[39:34] has put together some recommended uh changes to section 2-291b

[39:40] as well as to section 3.5i and j of the land development code. And I'll turn it

[39:45] over to Dr. Correa and let her uh walk you through the the three changes

[39:50] that we're recommending. >> Thank you.

[39:53] So, um again, this is an update on the discussion that we had. Um um we can if

[39:59] we can move forward. So, these are the criteria for special events. Um

[40:04] uh we are not changing those. Um

[40:08] activities held within the right-of-way, um activities on non-city property with

[40:12] more than 200 attendees, um city signature event, um non-profit

[40:17] events with off-site signage, food trucks if they are not approved on a

[40:21] site plan, and then activities requiring city services, um, uh, and that is shows

[40:27] in the exempt section for, um, schools and churches.

[40:33] So, next slide, please. These are like the exemptions. So, activities held

[40:38] within, um, a city park that do not require street closure,

[40:43] activities sponsored by the city as approved by resolution, activities as or

[40:47] programs implemented by the city as a government function, and events

[40:51] organized by places of worship, schools when the activity is contained within

[40:55] the limits of the property, um, uh, or, uh, of the places of, uh,

[41:01] worship and schools, and when the activity does not require city services.

[41:07] Um, this is the, um,

[41:10] requirements for outdoor sales events. So, outdoor sales events is really for

[41:14] this, the, you know, the, um,

[41:18] uh, seasonal tree, Christmas trees, and the the fireworks. Um, they usually do

[41:23] not require, you know, any city services. They are contained on a

[41:27] property, and, um, and they usually happen twice a

[41:31] year, maximum twice a year. Next slide. So,

[41:35] these are the amendments that we did for the special events after our discussion.

[41:40] So, we removed the, the restriction of not having only one event per calendar

[41:46] year, and we, um, reduced from 14 days to

[41:51] three consecutive days. Um, so, the duration of the activities

[41:55] said no special event permit shall be issued for more,

[41:58] for more than three consecutive days. And the three consecutive days duration

[42:03] may be extended upon written request to the land use administrator or designee.

[42:07] Most of our special events are less than three anyway.

[42:11] Um, no more than one sing single special event permit shall be issued per month

[42:16] for the same applicant property and event.

[42:20] That is the change that, um, we are proposing.

[42:23] And the next change, the next slide, is for the outdoor sales event, just

[42:27] removing the four farmers market events. There will be no, um, limitation on the

[42:32] number of recurring events because now we are, um,

[42:37] allowing special events to have, um, um, to be, uh,

[42:43] once a month. Um, this language was not in the

[42:47] proper place anyway because farmers markets are special events for us.

[42:52] Next slide, please. And that is, um, the section in the code of ordinances that

[42:57] we are changing just to include that, um,

[43:03] we are all waving the temporary sign permits and not the tent, um,

[43:09] um, permit fees because they are issued by the building services. So, we

[43:14] just removed the tent and we just made a,

[43:18] um, inclusion that it's temporary signs, not permanent signs, that are we are

[43:21] waving the fees. And in the work session, you all asked me how much a

[43:26] tent permit is, um, cost and it's $79. And we do not, um, issue any permit for

[43:34] bounce houses. That That That was another question that I had in the work

[43:38] session. >> You said the tents were $79?

[43:40] » $79. Usually they are minimum, so it's $50

[43:44] for the minimum fee, 25 for the, um, a plan review, and $4 for the state.

[43:52] » Got it.

[43:55] » So, uh, I think that's all I have. Next slide is just the question, so

[44:00] » Okay. >> I just want to ask if you have any

[44:03] questions. >> Does anybody have any questions?

[44:06] » We talked about this in our work session.

[44:08] » Yeah. Okay.

[44:10] » Uh so so you said this but

[44:14] I don't think I quite heard it right. Um where the slide that says amendment to

[44:17] the LDC uh

[44:20] one I'm sorry sorry one article three section three

[44:26] Are there page numbers? >> So we have two

[44:29] » Basically uh where you took out the farmers

[44:31] market. >> And for the next one from the outdoor

[44:34] sales event. >> So and I think you said this no more

[44:38] than two non-recurring outdoor sales event permits per parcel shall be issued

[44:42] within a calendar year. >> Yeah, but farmers market are not outdoor

[44:47] sales event. They are actually special events. So because now they are allowed

[44:52] um once a month, that's fine. We don't We

[44:55] did not need that distinction there. >> Right. Okay, so it's because they are

[45:00] now special events. >> Well, they are special events cuz if

[45:03] they were just selling groceries and in produce they could be outdoor sales

[45:09] event. But they have grown to have more entertainment. They have food trucks.

[45:13] They So they are more in the category of special events. And special events we

[45:17] are allowing once a month anyway. So we would remove that.

[45:22] » So is the historical society applying for a special event permit for every

[45:26] farmers market right now? >> They are now starting to.

[45:29] » But they previously did not. >> For many years that was under the radar,

[45:34] but I think it has grown us also to be a a bigger event.

[45:40] » Now, is that only because they are wanting to exceed the footprint of land

[45:44] owned by the city cuz I'm looking and I don't know if this is for for now or for

[45:48] discussion time, but you know, 3.5 there's the number of attendees limit

[45:53] which I think is not related to the size of the property

[45:57] and we probably should discuss scaling that.

[46:01] Um and then there's you know, who owns the land versus who

[46:06] is organizing the event on the land. And for something like the the farmers

[46:11] market, it that seems like an awful lot of work for staff to require a special

[46:16] events permit if the market is willing to stay contained on the property that

[46:21] is leased to the organization. >> So, they are not, right? They are in

[46:25] fact the >> They they are. They are going to the

[46:27] school, yes. >> So, we are fine even for this recurrent

[46:30] special events, we are fine and we have discussed we have discussed that with

[46:34] um, Mr. Cobb to allow if you don't change the layout you we can have we can

[46:40] issue one permit for the whole year with the understanding that if you put a

[46:44] tent, you have to um, have a a uh, the tents inspector inspected. If

[46:51] you have a food truck >> But not if it's a 10 by 10 or smaller,

[46:54] correct? >> If it's small tent, no. If it's a large

[46:56] tent, the one that requires inspection. If you have a food truck, they need to

[47:00] be inspected by fire every time a food truck is comes to the site.

[47:06] » Okay. >> Right? Even if it is permitted to be

[47:09] they hop the curb and they are on the Lotta House property, could that

[47:13] hypothetically be approved in the one-time permit to allow

[47:17] » We can approve in the layout. >> In the layout in the initial layout.

[47:20] » Because for the layout, police wants to check, right? The perimeter of the

[47:24] special event to be secure. So, we need to have the layouts. If they don't

[47:27] change the layout, we can issue the special event permit for the whole year.

[47:31] You have to show insurance and all the required documentation, but we would be

[47:35] fine with that. But in the permit, it will be

[47:39] there will be specified this is >> your food truck spot. And then if they

[47:42] And then part of the food truck >> the inspection every time a food truck

[47:46] comes to the site. >> Okay. And then that would be an

[47:49] additional fee for the inspection every month.

[47:52] » but that's that's required by the by by fire in the yes.

[47:58] What why why is that that the food truck because they have a food license

[48:02] already, right? But then every time they put it in park

[48:06] now they have to have a re-inspection. >> Because apparently the issue is that

[48:10] when they move the lines may loose up. So they need to inspect on the property

[48:16] when they are uh when they park to see that is secure.

[48:21] » So someone's act like actually touching the gas lines and

[48:24] » That the fire marshal would do the fire inspection. Yeah.

[48:27] » Oh. >> You want to come up and answer that?

[48:30] » We also learned that recently.

[48:35] » Good evening. Um the majority of the food trucks that do any kind of food

[48:39] preparation cooking and stuff they use propane.

[48:42] And whenever you're in travel transit from one location to another, a lot of

[48:46] times those propane fittings could um come loose, create a leak, and that's

[48:51] what creates the the the explosions and things like that. Um in Seminole County

[48:56] we do have a basically a a food truck permit

[49:01] that the vendors can use or they can apply for. We go out and do a thorough

[49:05] inspection of the food trucks at that point. They they're issued a sticker. If

[49:09] we see that sticker on a food truck at at our regular events, we just basically

[49:14] go in with a what we call a um it's a gas detector

[49:17] and we just check and make sure there's no leaks.

[49:21] And that their that their suppression system is in compliance and in date.

[49:25] » Okay. >> We do do that every time. Yes.

[49:27] » So it's a fire inspection not necessarily a kitchen like a like a

[49:32] inspection of a restaurant would be necessarily.

[49:34] » I think it's for the safety of the >> Yeah. Correct. Okay.

[49:37] » the food truck and everybody around, right? For

[49:40] » Yep. >> Okay. All right. Thank you.

[49:42] What is the pleasure of counsel? >> I

[49:45] » I'd like to change some things. What about you?

[49:48] » Uh who You you would start talking to >> Well, I'm

[49:51] just a quick point where this is just a discussion item here. We're not

[49:55] » Oh, well, yeah. I guess I should say what is the direction of council.

[49:59] » just direction. >> Yep.

[50:02] I mean, I Yeah, this is what we went over at the work session. So, I guess I

[50:06] will You were not there. >> I wasn't there.

[50:08] » So, so what is your input here? >> So, I I think that saying

[50:13] that activities on non-city properties that have more than 200 people are

[50:17] automatically trigger Yeah, that that automatically triggers the need for a

[50:21] special event. May not make sense. So, if it's at the

[50:25] mall, for example, like that is a place that is prepared as it was a originally

[50:30] a DRI. It's a development of regional impact. It is designed to accept to

[50:36] probably tens of thousands of cars and people every day. So, this 200

[50:42] needs to be somehow scaled to the size of the property or

[50:47] I don't know. >> So, I think, Mayor, the issue is that

[50:52] you are in the mall, you're occupying the parking lot, right? So, again,

[50:57] police needs to check the perimeter of the event

[51:00] to be safe. So, if it's a large event with

[51:04] you know, attracting a large crowd, this is something that police

[51:08] would like to see just for the safety of the crowd.

[51:13] So, even if you have >> not historically required that. So,

[51:16] there I'm not I'm not I'm not going to call out events, but I know a lot of uh

[51:22] we'll we'll just say houses of faith around the community routinely, like

[51:25] churches are designed to attract people. The people sometimes stand in the

[51:30] parking lot. Sometimes the people stand inside the buildings. The people go all

[51:34] the places. Sometimes they stay outside for a long time. Sometimes they eat

[51:38] outside. And I think all of this is fine, and that we should not be

[51:42] regulating, you know, whether people after church

[51:47] eat together outside. Or if they want to go to the mall and

[51:52] eat in the parking lot in the mall. We have to treat people as the grown-ups

[51:57] that they are. And I just like to see 200, you know, let's call it 2,000 or

[52:02] something. I I don't know what an appropriate number is, but it would

[52:06] probably be related to the size of the property in some form or fashion.

[52:12] » Yeah, so houses of worship is something that uh

[52:15] Yeah, caught my attention, too. And so houses of worship and schools don't have

[52:19] to get permits to have events. And you know, they can have They can do

[52:24] all kinds of stuff there on their own private property. And those are um

[52:30] uh those are usually located within neighborhoods, right? Residential, like

[52:33] especially elementary schools, it's right in the middle of the neighborhood,

[52:36] you know, church is the same way. Uh you know, my thinking is that I like

[52:40] that. Um I would like to somehow see that extended to, you know, like you

[52:44] said, the mall because the mall is commercial property.

[52:49] It's a lot It's a lot farther from where the events are held at the mall to

[52:55] residential, right? I mean, it's a long way across the parking lot and then

[52:58] across the road and wall and in part of the mall, right? Not not even

[53:02] the whole thing. A lot of it is adjacent to you know, commercial and all this

[53:05] other stuff. So,

[53:08] yeah, you have this huge parking lot that was built for the mall in its

[53:12] heyday to have a store in every um uh

[53:15] you know, retail the place where you could put a store

[53:19] and have enough cars there to to support Black Friday, right? And now, you know,

[53:23] a lot of the mall doesn't have stores in it. We're not using all of the parking

[53:27] lot. >> Oh, it does have stores. Don't be

[53:29] disparaging the mall. It's 95% full. >> Is it really?

[53:32] » It is. Yeah, there's a lot of stores.

[53:35] Lots of other pop shops. >> Okay. I'm sorry. It's been a while since

[53:39] I've been in >> You should go. It's amazing.

[53:42] » Yeah. Okay. Um

[53:44] » All right. We're going to go getting a little off

[53:45] » we get um is there a way to do some of the smaller

[53:49] events that are held there? Um you know, some of the night markets

[53:53] and and stuff like that. I mean, the the impact to the

[53:58] surrounding area is is got to be minuscule.

[54:02] » You're right. There So we check impact, right? So we we check impact to the

[54:06] neighborhood. And what you're saying the mall is less the neighborhood the issue.

[54:11] The issue in the mall is to protect the crowd of the event, right? Because this

[54:17] So you have schools and and um places of worship. It's it's in their

[54:22] nature to have events of their own, right? It's not attracting

[54:27] um a circus or, you know, or or a market, you know, a different market in

[54:34] the mall in the outside. We have those events in the mall while

[54:38] the mall is also under operation. So that parking lot is still being used

[54:44] for the mall. So it in in if you have 2,000 people in the mall, you want to

[54:49] protect the perimeter of the event because you want to protect the crowd

[54:54] going to the event. >> Also, how much does a special event

[54:57] permit cost? >> Um today 800 100 180 dollars.

[55:03] » 180 dollars? Have we had anybody complain about having to do a special

[55:07] event permit at the mall? >> I I don't think so. I Not that I know

[55:11] of, but >> But I I do So if I'm summarizing what

[55:14] you said right, and which is what I understand, is that the places you

[55:17] mentioned, their primary use is to do what you're talking about.

[55:20] » Mhm. >> These special event permits is a

[55:21] secondary use that's a higher impact than what they were originally designed

[55:25] for. So it's a safety issue. >> So today I had a request for a circus in

[55:30] the mall. It's fine. Um we can we can do that, but that's a

[55:34] special event. We need to see, you know, where the tent is going to set up, you

[55:39] know, where, you know, how to protect the crowds because

[55:43] unfortunately things happen, right? With crowds as well, so.

[55:48] » All right. Well, that that makes some sense.

[55:50] Um so, on

[55:53] the same one, section 3.5, development permits, going down to

[55:58] section two, uh I would like to

[56:02] not see just events organized by places this is exempt activities it's events

[56:06] organized by places of worship and public and private elementary, middle,

[56:11] and high schools provided all of the following conditions are met.

[56:15] I I would like to uh

[56:18] eliminate all but the first one and and keep it that

[56:21] as as long as the activity >> at?

[56:24] » I don't know. This is attachment the fourth one down, I think.

[56:29] The uh maybe not the fourth attachment. So, the four in our little open up

[56:33] thing, it's the fourth one down, I think.

[56:36] » Yep, attachment. >> So, at the top it says

[56:39] Oh, now I'm at a different one. At the top it says section 3.5 development

[56:43] permits. >> Okay. And then how

[56:46] » So, it's down at the bottom there's two and then subsection D.

[56:50] » up attachment three? Okay. So, the

[56:54] » There we go. Yeah. So, scrolling just So, at the top I'd like to change 200 to

[56:58] something scaled to other things cuz it's unclear to me whether

[57:04] going over 200 then makes you I I think maybe you're exempt anyway

[57:11] under the next subsection. So, if that's the intent that you're exempt over 200

[57:16] so long as certain criteria are met, I I would just say as long as it's wholly

[57:20] contained within the limits of the property owned by the place of worship

[57:25] or school. So, if a place of worship or school uh condones an activity that they

[57:30] consider harmonious with its purpose, then

[57:35] we should not require a special event permit because they've allowed somebody

[57:39] to come on campus and you know, host a concert like the same this is outside

[57:43] city limits, but you know, St. Luke's concert series. Well, that's not an

[57:46] organize that's not something organized exact well, maybe it is organized a

[57:49] little bit by the church, but um you know, that

[57:53] » What are you I'm confused at what you're getting at here. What are what are you

[57:55] trying to get >> Okay, I want you to leave I want to

[57:58] delete uh we're in the wrong place. >> Yeah.

[58:00] » Go down scroll down I want to delete everything but number one. Uh the

[58:04] uh I want to the two I and the three I uh get rid of those.

[58:09] I don't think the activity should have to be organized by the place of worship

[58:12] or school. It just needs to be there with their consent.

[58:16] Um and I'll and I guess we could say the

[58:19] city doesn't the activity doesn't require city services is a good one to

[58:23] leave in there. >> I mean, these are tax-exempt places. So,

[58:26] if you take that out, then they can for-profit host things and not have to

[58:30] get permits. So, I don't if I'm reading that right.

[58:34] If that if that's what you're saying. >> Well, I so I what I'm thinking is the

[58:38] American Legion has you know, the Wreaths Across America

[58:43] and the Memorial Day crosses that go out there and they get a special events

[58:48] permit, which is waived, but it's a lot of

[58:52] permits and and repeating of the same thing that was applied for in the

[58:56] previous year and a lot of staff time when cemeteries are a place where people

[59:00] go to have commemorative events. Like that's what the cemetery is for and

[59:05] that's what they're doing at the cemetery. So, it seems like you know,

[59:10] the the church allows that space to be occupied for that kind

[59:14] of activity. I don't know. Maybe I'm making it too

[59:16] complicated. They can repeat it over and over, but then it's extra work for staff

[59:22] and the fees are waived and we keep just we just keep doing the same thing every

[59:26] year.

[59:30] » It It's hard to say how you would enforce organized by the place of

[59:34] worship or school. >> Yeah, like how would you know? They

[59:36] would Some snitches get stitches. They'd be like, "That concert wasn't organized

[59:40] by the church." So, we're Now the city's going to go get them.

[59:43] » All right, hold on. Let's Let's bring it back in here. So,

[59:46] I think No, but for what we're looking at here

[59:49] as far as what we want to change, I think essentially the proposed changes,

[59:53] it seems like everybody's on board, but there's questionable more changes.

[59:56] » Yes. >> So, as far as direction we have is yes

[59:59] on the changes proposed. >> Mhm.

[1:00:01] » Um I would like to

[1:00:04] I guess table your input and see if you can sit down with staff and come back

[1:00:08] with something concrete we would like to change for

[1:00:10] » Okay. >> discussion.

[1:00:11] » All right. >> Does that work? Because that That works.

[1:00:13] I just don't see anything cohesive here on what we want to do.

[1:00:15] » Okay. >> Okay, well, are you guys okay with that?

[1:00:17] » Do we want to >> The 200 attendees.

[1:00:20] » Um I don't think we should change that right now, but

[1:00:23] that could be something we look into and come back with. Is there anybody else

[1:00:26] that would like to change that right now?

[1:00:28] » No. >> Okay. So, I No, we're going to we're

[1:00:30] going to table the rest for right now and move on with the direction we have.

[1:00:33] So, and come back from there. So, I will ask if you want any more changes, you

[1:00:37] meet with staff and come back on that. So, we're going to move on from this.

[1:00:41] » Thank you. >> All right. So, we're going to move on to

[1:00:43] the city manager's report. >> I have no report, Deputy Mayor.

[1:00:46] » Okay. The city attorney's report. >> Deputy Mayor, I have nothing to report.

[1:00:51] » Councilmember Britton. >> Okay, I got a few items and and I'm sure

[1:00:55] uh you can check them off your list if you're on it. We We did have the Relay

[1:00:59] for Life golf tournament uh on uh last Friday. Again, it was a very

[1:01:03] successful tournament. Everyone had a good time.

[1:01:06] Uh I'm not sure how uh

[1:01:11] how the scores added up, but I think uh other than that, we had a good time.

[1:01:16] That's all I can say. Um

[1:01:19] last Friday, I I the mayor and Mr. Ott uh

[1:01:22] and I attended the Babe Ruth opening day,

[1:01:25] and I was really impressed with with that that event and the fact that that

[1:01:30] organization I read online that they have 980 kids

[1:01:34] and players, but if I added up what they were saying,

[1:01:37] they I think they had over 2,000 when you add up the

[1:01:40] the rec leagues, the travel leagues, the softball leagues, and and all of that,

[1:01:44] which is really cool because that's that many kids that are busy

[1:01:48] doing something other than getting in trouble.

[1:01:51] So, uh, that's why we have these parks and and these programs.

[1:01:55] Uh, I should say that at the, uh, Relay for Life, I was approached by the golf

[1:02:00] course, and they want to set up a senior golf program,

[1:02:04] and I suggested in conjunction with the, uh, senior center across the street. So,

[1:02:08] that's something that they're interested in starting, and I turned them on to

[1:02:12] Sean Fitzgerald. Jack, I don't know if that's the right person or not, but

[1:02:15] » Yes, Sean and Michael McGarvey. >> Okay. So, I think they're going to work

[1:02:19] on that. I think that's a pretty pretty good, uh, synergy between those two

[1:02:22] organizations. Um,

[1:02:27] I wanted to ask about the status, uh, that came up a couple weeks ago, Bobby,

[1:02:31] about the review of Lockwood Boulevard between

[1:02:34] the, uh, bridge and uh,

[1:02:38] senior center.

[1:02:42] I think I made a comment then that maybe a barrier was would be better, but I was

[1:02:45] looking at the bollards on on, uh, Mitchell Hammock down down at the corner

[1:02:50] of 434. Maybe those those would work. I don't know.

[1:02:53] » enough room to put in those bollards. >> What's that?

[1:02:55] » Bollards will not work in that location. There's not enough room.

[1:02:59] Yes, sir. >> Okay. So, what, uh, are you

[1:03:01] » Staff has a report. They've prepared it. >> Okay.

[1:03:03] » I've reviewed it. Mr. Cobb has reviewed it. He and I are meeting tomorrow to

[1:03:06] discuss it. >> Okay. And there'll be maybe some

[1:03:08] recommendations? >> Yes, sir.

[1:03:10] » Okay. Other than other than what we already know?

[1:03:13] » Yeah, I mean, I agree with you. I I if you think about it, the

[1:03:16] I mean, you're right on top of each other coming around that curve.

[1:03:19] » Yeah. >> Um so, something should be done.

[1:03:22] But, if you think about it for the bollards

[1:03:24] like on Mitchell Hammock, >> Yeah.

[1:03:25] » there's a there's a tiny concrete median. If you go out there and look at

[1:03:28] that bridge where you come around, there's no shoulder. You've got Jersey

[1:03:31] barrier coming up through there. There's no room to to really You have to really

[1:03:34] squeeze the lanes, and so it's even going to be even tighter

[1:03:37] » Yeah. >> from the curve. So, I would not

[1:03:38] recommend bollards >> not sure if we need them on the bridge,

[1:03:40] but the curve is what >> Yeah, well, now I agree we should try

[1:03:43] and do something, and that could be like uh rubber pavement markers on the inside

[1:03:48] on the on top of the double yellow line. They kind of let people wake them up

[1:03:51] real quick once they hit it cuz they know they've gone too far. Something

[1:03:54] like that. More of a safety improvement, maybe,

[1:03:57] is what kind of what I'm thinking. >> Okay.

[1:04:00] » So. >> All right. I'll wait to hear from you.

[1:04:02] » But, I'll get the transportation planner, get his thoughts tomorrow, and

[1:04:06] find out what what he thinks. >> Okay.

[1:04:08] » So. He's smirking over there.

[1:04:11] » I got uh two things left. One is uh

[1:04:15] the city walking challenge. I think Mr. Boob is up there on the list. I don't

[1:04:19] know how he walks that many steps, but uh

[1:04:21] » Paul, you're getting farther ahead in these.

[1:04:23] » Oh, is Paul? >> Yeah.

[1:04:25] » Okay. I I see some names up there, and I'm not on the list, so I'm trying.

[1:04:29] It's uh I turn my numbers in every week, so that that's uh pretty cool. I'm I'm

[1:04:33] enjoying uh participating in that. And finally, this is just a

[1:04:37] uh uh

[1:04:40] Windows policy thing. I'm I'm looking at the flags back there, and I wish someone

[1:04:44] would just straighten up those flags back on the back wall. Just

[1:04:47] looks uh it looks sad that they've they've been up there, and they're

[1:04:50] tilted, and not not uh

[1:04:54] not straightened out, so it'd be nice if we can do that.

[1:04:56] » I literally have my notes written on my paper right here.

[1:05:00] » And that's all I have. Sorry. >> Bobby's on it.

[1:05:03] » I think we're also just like staring right there, too.

[1:05:06] Um all right, I'm up next. So, I did have a

[1:05:09] count on meeting um the on February 4th, and it was in Casselberry this time. And

[1:05:14] they talked about two different things, um, which I thought were both good. But

[1:05:18] the first one is the city of Casselberry got, essentially, a grant matched with

[1:05:22] another grant with federal government for a $21 million project to,

[1:05:27] um, basically do a complete street,

[1:05:31] um, retrofit over on, uh, 436. And when they brought it up, it looked

[1:05:39] like everything we discussed about in our transportation plan put into one

[1:05:44] project. So, um, pretty cool. Also, very interested on how they got funding to do

[1:05:50] that. And I also know that area cuz I, you know, went to high school back in

[1:05:53] the day over there. So, it's a it's a good area to be doing that, but they're

[1:05:57] they're essentially road dieting their lanes a little bit. They're adding

[1:06:01] subouts where all the turn lanes are to make it

[1:06:03] safer for pedestrians and and cars coming around fast. And then they're

[1:06:07] also adding a mobility trail, um, not in the road, nice and out, like you know I

[1:06:12] like. Um, so, keep an eye on that. They said it'd probably kick off it, you

[1:06:16] know, it's going to take a while. So, 4 years out, but fully funded,

[1:06:21] huge project, and a good thing to watch for what we're looking to do here in the

[1:06:24] future. Um, the other thing they talked about

[1:06:27] has to do with us. So, if you remember a while back there was an opioid

[1:06:30] settlement that we agreed on council to send our money's over to the county to

[1:06:37] be a part of with several other cities. And it's been a few years, so they have

[1:06:41] some results from that and it's it's really good news. So, on the

[1:06:45] federal national level of overdose deaths, most places are averaging down

[1:06:50] 30% in overdose deaths, which is great. Um, but Seminole County has kind of

[1:06:56] turned into the golden standard cuz we're down 50%.

[1:06:59] Um, and that's a huge part of this program. So, I know we've all heard our

[1:07:04] sheriff talk about looking at as a, um, treatment issue and a condition

[1:07:09] versus a criminal issue. And I think that has a

[1:07:12] lot to say there. But one of the things they're doing, and I have some goodies,

[1:07:17] is they're giving out Narcan for free. So, they made a very big case that you

[1:07:22] should not be paying for Narcan anywhere in Seminole County, and that goes for

[1:07:25] citizens or businesses, and they have gotten these out to businesses all over

[1:07:29] the county, so they're easy to access. And the other thing they

[1:07:34] have is these little drug disposal things

[1:07:36] that you put drugs you don't want anymore, and it dissolves them and you

[1:07:40] can throw them away in the trash. So, I know our drug disposal at the police

[1:07:44] station gets full sometimes, so this is kind of like a good alternative. But

[1:07:48] they are putting stations up. They have like 20 different locations where

[1:07:51] anybody can go get that for free, and I think on the side here, there's a little

[1:07:55] QR code, if you see it. It teaches you how to use Narcan.

[1:07:59] Um and they have them in a bunch of the

[1:08:02] cities, and they're asking for other cities to put stations. So, like

[1:08:06] Castleberry had one where while we were there. So, I was mentioning this over to

[1:08:10] the city manager to see if we can find a location to put it at City Hall and then

[1:08:14] spread the word. Um

[1:08:16] the whole point of Narcan is it's not for you, it's for someone who needs it,

[1:08:20] and hopefully you never need it, but they can't use it themselves. So, the

[1:08:23] more places that have it available, that's how we get this number that we

[1:08:26] have, which is a 50% reduction in deaths. So, I thought that was pretty

[1:08:30] cool. And then the last thing I have here is

[1:08:33] we all got invited because it is Black History Month,

[1:08:36] um to an event February 28th. So, I believe you got an email from Jackson

[1:08:40] Heights Washington Heights at Oviedo High School, and they are

[1:08:44] doing a Stony the Road We Trod Black History

[1:08:47] event, so just throwing that out there. Next up, Mayor Slayton. All right, well,

[1:08:52] y'all covered most everything. We had Babe Ruth opening night on Friday, and

[1:08:57] coming up this Saturday, we are all invited to Little League's opening day.

[1:09:01] So, I think it's pretty great that we have not one but two phenomenal uh

[1:09:05] baseball softball organizations here in Oviedo. That's all I've got.

[1:09:10] Council member Oropesa. >> I Yeah, I think you guys have covered uh

[1:09:14] most things. Um but we had uh the four chaplain service uh

[1:09:19] uh ceremony over at uh the American Legion the other night uh or the other

[1:09:23] day. And uh it was uh it was really good.

[1:09:28] That's all I got. >> Council member Bradford.

[1:09:31] » Yes. So, Chief, I mean, uh I'm glad we were able to do the grant appropriation

[1:09:36] tonight as we get closer to get that high water brush truck, you know.

[1:09:40] Hopefully, I mean, it's something that we not need, but it's good to have it

[1:09:43] when when you need it. So, uh I'm excited about that.

[1:09:47] Um and other Chief, we had the barbecue with the heroes today. So, that's a

[1:09:51] great how you guys are getting out there in the community and interacting, you

[1:09:55] know. So, I know they had the vest out for kids to wear and you know, the

[1:09:59] badges and stuff for them. So, it's great again, you know, I know this had a

[1:10:03] couple weeks ago was coffee with a cop. And then the barbecue with the heroes.

[1:10:07] So, that was that's great. So, yeah, nice to see that.

[1:10:11] And then we got a couple events coming up. Uh Police Foundation golf tournament

[1:10:15] is is March 6th. It's a great uh event and it helps to raise money for the

[1:10:20] foundation which helps officers uh that are in financial need. Uh also,

[1:10:24] we have Taste of Oviedo on the 7th out at the mall.

[1:10:28] Uh so, that's always a great event. Brings out a great crowd out there.

[1:10:32] Following week uh we have the Hope Shamrock 5K.

[1:10:35] I don't know, Chief, are you running?

[1:10:40] And then we got uh St. Patrick's Day event uh 4:00

[1:10:44] on that Saturday out here at Center Lake. So, obviously, uh some great

[1:10:48] events coming up here uh this week. And then the the last thing I have is um

[1:10:54] we got a email uh from Bobby Dragon uh talking about the motorcycle challenge

[1:10:59] Uh that he was just saying he was in the Jacksonville Sheriff's Office Bold City

[1:11:03] Challenge. He took three third three first places

[1:11:07] and then one third place at the event. Again,

[1:11:11] a great you know, he's a good motor officer anyways and then you know, to

[1:11:16] represent our city like that is fantastic and then he added on that cuz

[1:11:21] of this I think was because of this he got invited to the to the police

[1:11:25] technology and management to teach officers to be instructors. Was that

[1:11:29] right? Yeah, so I mean this this phenomenal. I

[1:11:33] mean what what an ambassador for our city and I know fire we have the same

[1:11:36] thing. We get a lot of great people there that are ambassadors, you know,

[1:11:39] they go out there and represent the city well and we appreciate everything that

[1:11:43] you guys do. So and public works we like you too. So

[1:11:47] just

[1:11:50] That's all I got. >> Okay.

[1:11:53] Future meeting dates. Monday, March 2nd at 6:30 p.m. we have a

[1:11:57] regular session and Mr. Cobb on the 16th.

[1:12:01] » I do we have a quorum for the 16th? >> I will not be here.

[1:12:04] » I won't be here. >> No, we don't have a quorum.

[1:12:07] You're not here, right? Or are you here? Spring break?

[1:12:10] » I I don't get spring break anymore. >> Oh, that's true. You were a maybe, yes?

[1:12:15] Mayor? >> Oh, I will not be here. Okay, we do not

[1:12:18] have a quorum. >> Okay, no meeting on the 16th then.

[1:12:21] » Okay. Is there anything else for the good of the order?

[1:12:25] It is 7:35 p.m. and this meeting is adjourned.

[1:12:29] » That's a great job.

2.16.2026 - Council Regular Session

Transcript