[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.