[0:08] Madam Clerk, roll call. Council President Williams, here. Council Vice President Jones, here. Council

[0:15] Member Bear, here. Council Member Breyer, here. Council Member Broughton, here. Council

[0:21] Member Moore, here. Council Member Patton, here. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Clerk.

[0:31] All

[0:31] 0, 0, 8, 1, 2, presentation of parking consulted updates.

[0:35] Mr.

[0:41] President, I had on here mayor, members of council.

[0:44] Thank you for allowing us to present to you today.

[0:46] I wanted to provide a real brief history of city parking just to make sure everyone was aware.

[0:52] The downtown improvement board managed city parking within the DIVs 44 block foot print from 2007 to 2020.

[0:59] In October of 2020, Mayor Robinson brought the control and management of parking back to the city

[1:04] with the intention of updating and enhancing and improving the overall parking experience for the entire city.

[1:09] Here today to present phase one of recommendations for the city parking reforms is Philip Olivier with Olivier Consulting.

[1:20] Thank you, Lisa.

[1:28] Good afternoon, Council President.

[1:30] Members of the Council, like Lisa said, Philip Olivier, here with Olive Tree Consulting to present some of the highlights of my phase one consultation report.

[1:45] I'm also happy to go into any details or specifics of the actual report because this is sort

[1:51] of a deluded presentation for presentation purposes, and feel free to stop me obviously

[1:59] at any time for questions.

[2:03] Firstly, the objective of this report is to initiate the first steps to improving the parking

[2:10] experience in Pensacola.

[2:11] So, on this slide, you'll see, or as you know, the UWF Hof Center conducted a survey on

[2:20] parking and received a little over 5,000 responses.

[2:25] The top two statistics are really emphasizing the relevancy of the results in the following

[2:32] stats.

[2:33] As you can see, 79% of respondents travel with personal vehicle or motorcycle to get downtown.

[2:40] 68% park on street for recreation in the city space and just a few of the other highlights there, 73% stated it's somewhat difficult or extremely difficult to find a space downtown.

[2:58] 88% said that the most challenging time is to find parking in the afternoons or evenings.

[3:05] A little more than half said that they would pay between $1 to $4 or more for an hour of

[3:14] the perfect parking experience.

[3:16] And the number one concern among respondents was the limited availability of spaces.

[3:24] Next slide, please.

[3:27] So here is a comparison of leading payment providers that are contracted with other municipalities

[3:34] and Florida, a few of them here, pay by phone, park mobile,

[3:39] Flowbird, who is really who we're contracted with now.

[3:42] A lot of people know it as park Pensacola.

[3:45] However, it's really a rebranded Flowbird app and then Passport.

[3:50] And as you may know from my report, I'm recommending park mobile,

[3:55] not only for the functionality and capability, but

[4:00] the sheer density they have, not only in the state,

[4:03] by in the nation, all

[4:08] right, next slide please.

[4:10] And so here's just a reiteration of some of the stats that were in the results.

[4:15] The conclusion here really is pointing to the primary concern being the availability

[4:20] of spaces rather than cost, so the number one concern limited availability of space, 73%

[4:27] not finding a space difficult, 21% said primary concern was cost, and 31% really wasn't

[4:36] sure how to indicate city parking as opposed to privately managed parking.

[4:43] And then here is just a map of our current parking landscape.

[4:48] The yellow shaded area is two hour free parking, and the blue shaded area is the current paid

[4:55] parking.

[4:56] Next slide.

[4:57] This is a map provided by the Hoss Center that it's essentially a heat map showing density.

[5:07] It's based off of cell phone data and it just highlights the downtown area as being a really dense populated area.

[5:17] And on the next slide here we actually overlay that data onto the maps that we can really compare apples to apples when we're talking about the parking map here.

[5:28] And then on the next slide to here we've got the recommended zone, so you've got the

[5:34] current paid parking, which is really from the other map there, just translated over

[5:40] in blue, and then in the green is the proposed additional paid parking.

[5:48] So here we go into the parking hours, currently all parking zones with the exception of the

[5:59] PM paid parking basis, money through Saturday. Our recommendation is to extend that to midnight

[6:08] for all zones that are currently at 8 a to 7 p. And just a reiteration there of some

[6:14] of the survey results, 88% find the most challenging time to find parking is in the afternoons

[6:20] or evenings. And you know, the availability of space directly correlates to pricing,

[6:28] paid parking and how you price that. Next slide. And so here's more data supplied

[6:36] by the Hoss Center based off of cell phone data. It is an overlay of our

[6:43] recommended hours there at the bottom and the blue dots. And as you can see all

[6:48] the hours we put it there on is every hour that's above one million visits per

[6:54] hour.

[6:59] So then we get into sort of how to establish a base parking price. So what we did was we compared to

[7:07] other relevant cities and we took their median per capita income and then their average parking

[7:16] rate and came up with a parking cost to daily income ratio. And as you can see Pensacole is pretty far

[7:24] behind there compared to that average baseline at 0.47% the average is about 1.59% and so

[7:34] on the next slide here we show what the dollar amount would be if we were aligned with

[7:39] the average to this comp set. And so that's $1.69 however if you read my report I'm sort

[7:47] of recommending really to go more incrementally to a dollar, a 300-something percent increase

[7:55] really not reasonable, so 50 cents to a dollar is certainly within reason, if you look

[8:00] at these other comparable cities.

[8:06] And so like I said, I call that really a base price.

[8:10] The goal here is to fluctuate the pricing to achieve a desired outcome, and so this is

[8:17] It's just kind of an infographic on how you would determine that, so you start your base price as any space or zone sort of increases in demand.

[8:27] You would increase that in price as well.

[8:29] And the goal is to eventually end up with an average of 85% occupancy or so per zone per location.

[8:39] And then a re-iteration there, if you go back one slide, the more than half of the respondents said that they'd be willing to pay a dollar to $4 or more for an hour of the perfect parking experience.

[8:54] Next slide.

[8:56] And so here are just a list of overall benefits that you'd received just from inherently changing this parking strategies as recommended.

[9:05] easier to find parking, easier to pay, better infrastructure, stronger economy and produce

[9:13] vehicular congestion.

[9:15] I'm happy to dig into any of those benefits and how that works.

[9:20] And so this is kind of a complicated looking table, top line here, revenue projection is if

[9:28] all changes are made, the city would go from roughly 600,000 in annual parking revenue

[9:35] to 2.85 million. That's if all changes are made and are any elastic. And then the lower

[9:44] three tiers there are really just a matrix to determine what the revenue would be if

[9:50] you were to choose one or two of those suggestions.

[9:58] So that's a lot of money. So what do we do

[10:01] with it? I think the goal here while this is a list of recommendations of what you can

[10:06] do with that money and how we've seen other cities spend that money, the goal is to

[10:12] reinvest that money into the experience for the actual user that's paying into that

[10:17] experience. So everywhere where you're charging for parking, that's where you should improve

[10:24] the actual infrastructure.

[10:30] And this really goes back to the other paid parking maps so this

[10:36] This is recommended where you would actually implement these benefits.

[10:40] This map would evolve along with the other maps, so as you would expand paid parking to

[10:47] other streets and other zones, you'd want to expand this as well.

[10:50] But based on the recommendations, if you went with that, this is where you would implement

[10:56] those benefits.

[11:01] And that's it.

[11:05] Mayor?

[11:05] Yeah, I apologize.

[11:07] I was late.

[11:07] I appreciate Philip putting this together, obviously a lot of work has gone into

[11:13] bringing this report to you and Lisa and her team and you know I really had

[11:20] our intent at this point is to open this up for questings concerns, conversation

[11:26] and we have the expert here due to great job putting this together. We know no

[11:32] one better than me but this is quite a hot topic, depending really no matter what

[11:36] you do but we really came to the realization many months ago that as parking has evolved so much

[11:43] and changed so much from private, privately operated, D-I-B, then to the city, then adding spaces

[11:52] that, you know, we came to the pretty quick realization that we haven't had a holistic look at how

[11:57] parking operated in the city. So are we band-aiding things as we move along or are we finally

[12:02] kind of, you know, collecting our thoughts, collecting the surveys and the concerns of

[12:07] our citizens and trying to come up with the best solution moving forward.

[12:09] So, that's what this effort is, and we know it's a painful, I know my email inbox can

[12:15] illustrate perfectly that this is a frustrating topic for a lot of people, and I think a big

[12:21] portion of that is not just what's happening in private lots that we can't control, but

[12:25] also making sure that we have our ducks in a row that we're doing what's right for our

[12:29] it in, and if we're able to generate revenue for user fees that we come back and not use

[12:34] taxpayer dollars of folks that may not be using downtown, but how do we make it safer

[12:39] more beautiful?

[12:40] How do we have those infrastructure improvements that we desperately need downtown?

[12:43] This is a way to do that and start to get a little feedback from you guys as well about

[12:47] what those priorities may be moving forward if we were to start to actually be generating some

[12:53] real dollars in terms of parking revenue.

[12:55] Anyway, I've heard you fill up in Lisa and the team putting this all together and just interested to hear your questions.

[13:01] Thank you as well. May I don't know if this is a question for you or for Lisa?

[13:06] How much did we make off the parking? What are we making off the parking now?

[13:11] 600,000.

[13:14] Council President, members of Council, roughly about 600,000.

[13:18] I don't know if Miss Lil' Boy is here. She would have the exact numbers I'm sure, but roughly about 600,000.

[13:22] That's what I recall about that and that's for a significant amount of spaces as you can

[13:29] bet right now it's 30 minutes free.

[13:31] Do we pay a transaction fee on this 30 minute free or do we not?

[13:37] So it's 30 minutes free and then it's 50 cents an hour for, of course, the blue spaces

[13:42] as it's considered.

[13:43] And how many free lives do we have?

[13:46] How many free spaces?

[13:47] I know it's significant portion of our cities.

[13:49] So all of the spaces are free after seven all of the spaces except for Jefferson garage all are free after seven all are free on Sundays all are free on national holidays and about 85% of them are free all the time.

[14:04] So we give away a lot of our parking.

[14:07] So if you had to put the number on it how many spaces I don't have the exact count but I can absolutely get that for you and send it out in the next couple days.

[14:14] Okay. Thank you. Councilman Behr.

[14:18] Thank you, Mr. President. This question is for Philip, I sort of.

[14:23] So first of all, on the slide that showed the survey results, it said, the number one

[14:28] was limited availability of spaces. Is there a way to tell if that's like, is that just

[14:33] any spaces or is that city spaces? Because there's a lot of product, lots too. Is there?

[14:40] No, there's not really a way to tell because as you could see by the results that not everyone

[14:47] was even clear on how to determine which lots or spaces were city or private, I can tell

[14:55] you that the city spaces are much cheaper in general.

[15:00] It's really free in comparison to private lots, and so it's very likely that that's alluding to the city's business. And I just want to make one addition. When you see the second complaint was caused, the bill of agenda 21%, but when you factor in one way we can't calculate is, is that 21% of people complaining about private lot costs or when 30% don't know, I just tend to believe that 50 cents an hour and 30 minutes free, that I really suppress that in my mind.

[15:29] And if I'm really analyzing that data, I don't truly think it's 21% as number two when

[15:34] we're talking about city spaces.

[15:36] I think it's confusion around $4 and $5 an hour at other spaces that truly are biggest

[15:41] concerns in my mind from the survey.

[15:44] Data is one availability, which is because we aren't charging in some of those places and

[15:48] it's a lack of availability and the app that he mentioned that ease of use.

[15:52] And that was number one and number three on the biggest concerns.

[15:56] But number two was pretty close to number three, and I just don't believe that 50 cents an hour is really truly that

[16:03] The issue and in our city spaces. Um, do you have any idea what percentage of the downtown parking is city versus private?

[16:11] Do we know that?

[16:13] Now that be I could we could probably figure that out. Yeah, I don't have it. I'll stop in my head. Okay. That's fine

[16:21] And then do we know like I know you had that one slide with all those bars on the bar chart makes it a challenge

[16:28] to figure out, but increasing the hours up to midnight, do we know what that, if we kept the rates the way they were, what impact that would have?

[16:37] It has it broken.

[16:38] Yeah, I just...

[16:40] If you're saying if we kept the rates as is and changed the hours, so if hours expanded and no other changes, it's $121,000.

[16:50] Okay, so that's not much.

[16:51] Okay. All right. And then, let's see, I have another question. Okay. So when I look

[16:59] at that one slide that has the proposed paid parking, like increasing the amount of paid

[17:05] parking, it's got the current paid parking, then proposed additional paid parking. Is that

[17:10] pretty much everything that's currently two hour for free right now?

[17:16] Yes. Okay. Yeah. Anything

[17:18] that was two hour free would be converted to paid. So everything would be paid. Okay.

[17:23] And what about I'm in this this not everything. I mean there's a we the vast majority of our spaces are still free

[17:28] Right, you're talking about the two-hour spaces in the heart. Yeah, anything that was previously two-hour time spaces

[17:35] But not paid would now convert to full-time 24 paid parking, okay, okay, and then

[17:43] Gosh my final question that that derail me a little bit. Oh, so the half hour that would go away for which day

[17:50] That's about for free

[17:53] I think that's really up to the city parking.

[17:57] That is something that we're still investigating in working with some of the, talking to some of the other vendors.

[18:04] There's a user transaction fee that would be applied to the city regardless of whether or not a parking session started.

[18:11] So it would actually cost the city money every time we gave away that 30 minutes free.

[18:15] So looking at parking holistically would it be better for us to do specific spaces that are timed for

[18:22] 30 minutes free or does everybody just get the first 30 minutes free? And that would

[18:27] come more of a phase two approach and it's determining who our mobile payment vendor

[18:32] is and whether there's a cost to the city or whether, you know, we just make some of this

[18:37] faces. So with Park Mobile, we'd have to pay a fee for every transaction, correct?

[18:44] Do you have any idea how much that fee is? 25 cents. Yeah. Okay, so the city would have to

[18:49] that cost pretty much all right now we pay 16 cents but what we're saying is not on right now

[18:56] there was the arrangement was that it was not on the free 30 minutes correct but that doesn't that

[19:04] presumes that we we're not even saying that if they did or they didn't that we would still do that

[19:09] and and I agree with Lisa and I've had conversations with downtown business owners

[19:13] Bellafox and Jefferson last year about this topic because one of the most backward parking

[19:18] things we have is that we have two-hour parking on Pellafox Street. No city in America

[19:22] takes their most busy street and makes it free parking for two hours. Then we have congestion.

[19:28] I believe Donald Chooves numbers 30 percent of traffic in a downtown is people circling around

[19:33] for a free spot. And that opens up pedestrian safety issues and all that with additional.

[19:38] So, it's not even to say for sure that whether they would charge or so, they wouldn't that we would not get rid of the 30 minutes free, but we would replace it with, and a lot of the downtown retailers say, well, look, it'd be nice if someone, if you're running in to get donuts, you're running into grabs something that you'd have an area.

[19:57] I like the idea just philosophically at this point, but I like the idea of let's have designated spaces for those 15 minutes.

[20:03] in and out as opposed to every space in the city.

[20:08] So we don't want to hurt the downtown retailers by making someone even though it would be

[20:12] very easy with an app to charge, but we might go more of that direction than every single

[20:18] space 30 minutes free, and there's a lot of confusion about that because people hear 30 minutes

[20:22] free, then they don't register, then they get a ticket, because it's free with putting

[20:27] you still have to open the app and mark that, so there's been some confusion there as well

[20:32] but that's not a perfect solution.

[20:34] Okay, yeah, and I think it almost seems like

[20:38] with the two-hour, it's more difficult to enforce too,

[20:41] because you're having to check those more frequently,

[20:44] especially when there's no app or anything.

[20:46] So yeah, I think that's definitely something

[20:49] that makes sense is to convert those

[20:51] even though I know people love free to our parking,

[20:55] but I appreciate it.

[20:56] Thank you, thanks Mr. Brism.

[20:58] Yes, thank you.

[20:58] Councilwoman Gray.

[20:59] Thank you.

[21:03] It's a very interesting study and there's a lot of ways I appreciate that you did this

[21:08] in so many different ways to look at what each effect will do so that we can navigate

[21:14] it and do things slightly different if we care to.

[21:18] Some things that I have found confusion with constituents is they think this is going to

[21:24] make it more difficult to find parking places but when I was reading some of the stuff I'd

[21:28] I want you to kind of explain how this actually opens up more parking places, if you can.

[21:36] Yeah. Well, it's similar to how a hotel operates their rooms or an airline operates their seats.

[21:43] They adjust the pricing depending on demand.

[21:46] And it really just is all based off of elasticity.

[21:50] And so when you increase the price to find that magic number of 85% occupancy,

[21:57] it leads it to an environment where as you're driving through every block is

[22:02] going to have one or two spaces open obviously depending on the space

[22:07] count of that zone but that is the goal is to drive available occupancy or

[22:13] capacity rather through pricing. So I was kind of thinking and talking it out

[22:20] with some neighbors that if you have no parking paying for parking on

[22:24] Then you may have the barista at the coffee shop who's parking on

[22:27] Palafox for their entire shift.

[22:29] Whereas this will sort people rotating.

[22:32] Absolutely.

[22:32] Is that a legitimate?

[22:34] Yeah.

[22:34] And even in the spaces where you're even charging until 7 p.m.

[22:38] If someone's coming in to work at 6 p.m.

[22:40] They pay for an hour and then they're there until 2 a.m.

[22:45] Well, then how many customers could have come and gone in that time frame?

[22:49] Right?

[22:49] And so that's part of the goal is to make sure that there's, you know, we're trying to promote, turn over and not force it.

[22:58] Okay, and then my final is there are still quite a few people who come downtown who may not have a mobile phone with them, who may not use it efficiently, sometimes me, probably.

[23:10] And they want still a physical ability to pay for their parking, would that still be available?

[23:17] Yes, there's no recommendation to eliminate parking kiosk and in fact I'm pretty sure it's part of the city's plan that as they expand

[23:25] They would expand to more having more kiosk in that area as well. Thank you. I appreciate it.

[23:31] Councilman Jones.

[23:32] No, thank you.

[23:34] Yeah, that's a good question.

[23:35] So first, is it safe to assume that you no longer work for premium parking?

[23:41] Yes, it's fun to make sure.

[23:42] Because I've seen you since last time I talked about that.

[23:46] So I was curious, did we look at any of the private parking, and I know there's been some

[23:53] discussion from you about maybe for some of those.

[23:57] Yeah, I mean I can speak to that, I can, I still maintain, I mentioned my press conference

[24:01] many times, not out of 10 complaints that I get, or that Lisa gets come from, and, you know,

[24:09] So I think when a parent sends me an email and says my 18-year-old, my 20-year-old,

[24:17] was stuck with a boot in the middle of the night, and because one letter was off in

[24:22] a license plate or whatever the case may be, I'm just kind of tired of saying that's

[24:25] not my job.

[24:26] And it's like I'm to be honest with you, so certainly what we're trying to do here is figure

[24:34] out from a city perspective, what I've mentioned earlier.

[24:39] What's a, finally, us coming up with a complete holistic approach of how we handle the spaces

[24:46] of which we are charged with enforcing, with providing.

[24:52] But if there were to be a scenario where private lots good, you know, would see what we

[24:58] are doing and liked it and would be able to be part of that solution, certainly we would

[25:03] be open to that.

[25:04] You know, that's not what our focus is.

[25:06] that's not what we've asked Philip to do is to say let's get our house in order but

[25:13] you know I think that that won't if we were to do this right I think we would we certainly

[25:18] would be the the new benchmark of of performance and how parking works and and I'm just kind

[25:25] of tired to be honest with you sitting around saying sorry that's not our job it's a it's a

[25:31] roading our downtown experience. And when someone goes back to Jackson, Mississippi, or

[25:36] to Atlanta, Georgia, and they get a ticket or they get a boot on their car, they don't

[25:39] say, well, don't worry about it. It wasn't the mayor or the city. What they say is, I

[25:43] had a poor experience in downtown Pasola period. So it is our job. And that's why we're trying

[25:49] to get our house in order. And certainly, if opportunity arose, that there could be more

[25:53] collaboration through private lots and others, we will absolutely entertain them.

[25:56] Thank you.

[25:57] Thank you.

[25:57] A couple more questions.

[26:00] So we talked about the revenue was 600, around 600,000.

[26:04] Do we know what the operating expenses were for parking in that same meter?

[26:12] Council President, members of council.

[26:13] I don't have the numbers for this year because it just closed out, so I don't have those.

[26:18] Last year we had a carryover of I think a little over 400,000 of which we are contributing

[26:25] contributed back into upgrades and aesthetic improvements to Jefferson Street Garage and then some other things

[26:31] I think the mayor is going to mention later on this week. So I think it was roughly around 400 if memory serves.

[26:38] Yeah, correct. Something like that. And I can just say anecdotally understanding how many spaces, do you know what how many spaces

[26:44] is we have now sub your head. The city operated spaces currently paid or just city spaces.

[26:50] city spaces period.

[26:51] I want to say it's upwards of 6,000 and I think private is upper last time we did account

[26:56] of private and they've expanded a little bit was upwards of 14 to 16,000 so they have

[27:02] considerably more spaces than-

[27:04] Well what I'll tell you anecdotally is the amount of spaces we have to that revenue that you

[27:09] speak of is minuscule compared to what's happening.

[27:13] There's single private lots that are doing what the city is doing in revenue.

[27:17] So, that's when people say, hey, it's getting more expensive or you're thinking about raising the rate.

[27:22] There's a way more free parking than you would ever imagine.

[27:26] I mean, it's still a significant amount and would be moving forward.

[27:30] And, you know, a dollar an hour.

[27:32] We don't know the difference between people coming downtown and not a 50 cents or a dollar an hour.

[27:36] I think it's how they're treated.

[27:37] And I think it's how what that perfect parking experience is.

[27:40] I think that's what we really need to be fixing is what is right look like in terms of someone enjoying themselves coming downtown.

[27:47] and hopefully we can start doing what we can control at this point and doing our best to do so.

[27:55] The last thing I'll say is that the part of mobile app I've used it quite a bit and it works really well.

[28:00] Our current app, it seems to be pretty good. It's just as kind of slow and clunky and doesn't work all the time.

[28:06] So I like the idea of switching.

[28:10] Councilwoman from?

[28:11] Thank you most of everyone else has asked my questions already but I guess I'll add a question I do have though is I noticed a lot of

[28:23] Miss D's like are you from Pensacola?

[28:26] I was born in Georgia but only there for a short amount of time. So yes, I do consider myself from Pensacola.

[28:31] Okay, so if then you remember how

[28:36] Parking was free you go anywhere but also we didn't have much to see, right?

[28:40] right?

[28:41] Yes, right.

[28:42] So, how the Fox looked a lot different when I was growing up here that it does now.

[28:46] And I think maybe the public who don't know the difference between our blue screen size

[28:54] and the red size, and I do see Mr. Switzerland right there, and I said that up on his face.

[28:59] They don't really, you know, know the difference in how I set up, right?

[29:04] and because they've been here this whole time they just see this change and it

[29:10] may not be advertised to them what's going on right I remember there was a

[29:15] situation when everyone got towed behind the post office behind the downtown

[29:19] post office and they said you know we've been probably here forever for free and

[29:24] now we just all got towed there was a singer it was an older crowd so they didn't

[29:29] you know they hadn't been there forever so they hadn't seen the changes and

[29:32] everything you remember that? I do. Right. So, um, do you think that it might be

[29:37] possible for, well, for first thing? Would this be gradual? Would it be a increase

[29:44] over a certain amount of years? Or would it just one day you wake up and now it's

[29:47] just pricey? Are you referring to the paid parking increase? That would be an

[29:56] overnight kind of thing. Obviously, we would market it, but it would be

[30:00] As of this day, your rate would go from 50% per hour to whatever the determined amount is per hour. Okay. Okay. As far as expanding the paid to park area, that will be a gradual, um, because it takes equipment and time and labor and all of that. So that would be a gradual expansion of the paid to park area. Okay. And well, I think it would help if we just tell people like, like in here, it shows us where the money would go, would it be improvements?

[30:27] And sometimes I'm a little more satisfied if I see that my parking money paid to clean

[30:34] this park or to put this equipment here, right?

[30:38] So showing people what we're doing with the money helps them, you know, fuss at us less.

[30:45] So maybe we could put that in some of the signage somewhere on display and something.

[30:50] And I want to say one thing that we've already had a conversation about before changes would

[30:54] go in is to survey kind of in the same way, much shorter, but to say, all right, well,

[30:59] if there was some real substantial parking revenue for these user fees, what would you

[31:05] like to see done, and is it structured parking? Is it infrastructure? Is it all of those?

[31:11] Because I think if you read Donald Schulte's books, that's one of the big missing pieces

[31:16] and we have not done a good enough job of that. They're saying, we also have had the revenue

[31:20] coming in because it's free in 50 cents an hour but when we do you know how are we

[31:27] describing in one big misnomer I would say a lot of times I know it's

[31:31] described with parking to say well if you raise the rate how does that affect

[31:34] people that you know don't have as much income well and actually raising the

[31:40] rate means that you're charging the user who's using downtown and what I keep

[31:43] describing is we still own these spaces we still have to maintain them we still

[31:48] have to fix them when they're broken. So if you really want to help people that, right

[31:52] now, our taxpayer without any revenue, our taxpayer across the city are paying the fixed

[31:57] faces downtown, hypothetically, because wouldn't we rather charge the people who are using

[32:03] it, that when we do need to beautify, when we do need to fix something that we're using

[32:07] funds from the people who are actually using it, not going around to all 55,000 people and

[32:11] say you're responsible whether you're using it or not, that you use it downtown. So there's

[32:16] So sometimes there's a myth that raising the rate somehow negatively impacts people with

[32:21] lower income.

[32:22] I would argue the opposite.

[32:24] It's actually, it's now preserved people with lower income that may not be coming downtown

[32:28] to eat at restaurants or whatever aren't putting the bill to fix those faces for the people

[32:32] who are.

[32:34] Those are on the questions.

[32:35] Thank you.

[32:36] Councilwoman Patten.

[32:39] Thank you, Mr. President.

[32:40] So a lot of good discussion, a lot of the things that I wanted to talk about.

[32:46] But just going back for a minute to this discussion we were having about pricing, there

[32:53] was a section in your report on demand-based pricing, our variable pricing, and since we

[33:00] don't have the advanced technology infrastructure to be able to really monitor those spaces

[33:07] is on a real-time basis, using cameras and all the rest.

[33:11] I've seen some of those demonstrations and it's really neat technology, but it looks

[33:17] like the recommendation is to use just basically statistics from the number of times that

[33:23] space is turned over to determine the value of that space in a variable pricing model.

[33:29] I've heard us talking about moving from potentially $0.50 to $1 or whatever that is, but I guess

[33:36] That's what I'm interested in hearing more about is when are we talking about moving

[33:43] from a dollar to a variable-face pricing model?

[33:47] Or are we, is that part of this discussion?

[33:54] We've talked about it.

[33:55] I mean, you have to ask Philip in terms of technology, Donald Schupe uses the San Francisco example

[34:00] a lot about, you know, putting technology within each space.

[34:03] I would imagine, and Philip can answer this, really, the question becomes, we would be

[34:10] able to get enough data out of Park Mobile in the much more advanced app that we have

[34:15] that we would probably start to see our own flow, right, of, if we were to go to midnight,

[34:19] let's say, then Friday night, you know, it's Saturday day, we know it's down, and there'd

[34:24] be timing elements that could be dynamic, and certainly, I know, in private lots they're

[34:28] doing that already, based on time and demand.

[34:31] So I would imagine any data collection

[34:34] wouldn't be putting infrastructure in physical spaces

[34:36] like they're doing in San Francisco, but perhaps you just

[34:39] see enough of a runway of data that

[34:41] shows you when demand's up and when demand's down.

[34:44] Is that fair to say that the effort?

[34:45] Yeah, and I think also on the flip side,

[34:47] it's not just increasing pricing when demand's getting higher.

[34:51] It's also lowering pricing.

[34:52] And so there may be instances where there's a street that's

[34:56] currently $0.50 an hour, that may end up $0.25 an hour, if the demand drops that much.

[35:04] But yeah, it's certainly just how do you can collect based off of transactions and come

[35:09] to the conclusion that way.

[35:10] And then it's really up to the city's parking department, how often they actually adjust

[35:14] those prices.

[35:16] Okay, so whatever is going to come before us, we'll have more clarity on that aspect of

[35:23] it as well.

[35:23] I believe the first thing that would be coming to you, correct me Lisa, would be some kind,

[35:28] right now it's written very static in the ordinance that it's 50 cents an hour.

[35:33] That's our only option.

[35:35] So I think that would be the conversation coming to you guys next would be, all right well

[35:40] price is going to change instead of saying it's now one dollar.

[35:43] I think that's very rigid as well.

[35:45] I think it would probably be some 25 cents to whatever two dollars or whatever the case

[35:51] maybe that would allow us to have that flexibility without having, you know, to come every three months

[35:56] and say, well, we want to lower it or we want to raise it, that we've come up. And I think that's

[36:00] what we've seen in other cities before, that that's where it's more written that way, and that allows you

[36:04] that range. There it is. That is correct. So, Philip, on the point about the 30-minute spaces,

[36:12] you know, for shoppers who just want to run in and get something, or they're going to pick up their,

[36:17] or whatever they're dress at scout or whatever it is.

[36:23] You know, tell me how you think about that because I really think that it's important

[36:27] to make sure that we are balancing the, you know, the sort of shot, the long term retailers

[36:35] that are on the street and making sure that, you know, as much as we can, we're creating

[36:39] the right environment to allow them to continue to operate in downtown rather than feeling

[36:46] like they've got to go somewhere else because they're more of a destination business than

[36:50] they are somebody who just kind of passes along on a street and stops in.

[36:55] So how do you think about that and what are your recommendations in that area if you have

[36:59] any?

[37:00] Yeah, well, I think that you sort of lose the control when you're saying that it's free,

[37:06] right?

[37:06] The pricing, the point of all the pricing is to promote that turnover and that's, you

[37:13] do it through the pricing.

[37:14] and so I really think that's how you get to that point.

[37:22] But the idea of having spaces that are dedicated for 15-minute parking or 30-minute parking

[37:26] and having a certain number of those?

[37:30] Yeah, I think it increases turn which is a good thing

[37:33] and that should be beneficial for the retailer that it's near.

[37:37] And I think it's just something that's got to be looked at on a case-by-case basis

[37:41] Is that zone actually retail heavy or walk in heavy and is that going to benefit from

[37:48] having it there for not having it there?

[37:51] Okay.

[37:52] So is that part of I guess what you guys will be looking at going forward?

[37:57] Yeah, and I'll tell you the initial conversations we talked about is I'll just use an example

[38:01] would be on Romana between Palafox and Jefferson where there's some side spaces where you could

[38:07] We kind of pull up, walk into a retailer, walk into, you know, get breakfast for coffee

[38:12] or whatever for 15 minutes just as to go and get moving.

[38:15] We have the worst of both worlds, which is I would put Philip on the spot if I asked

[38:19] him the last city that put in two-hour free parking.

[38:21] But he probably doesn't know off-hand or I don't know if anybody's doing that.

[38:26] Because that's the worst of both, as he said.

[38:28] We've got employees parking for free in a two-hour space and then moving them up one and then

[38:33] parking.

[38:34] You know, I mean it's the least efficient of all.

[38:36] We're better off with 15-minute or 30-minute spaces where there's term coming in we can still support businesses

[38:42] So that's be a very initial conversation we've had is say all right

[38:46] Well, let's take four or five spaces along Romana, you know where that you could feeds right in within a block of places that you could run in and out of grab a, you know

[38:54] clothing or

[38:55] You know coffee whatever and be in and out of there

[38:57] And now we're getting more people to be able to interact with downtown and one stat that we just saw and at least it's sent to me

[39:04] recently, Hoss did their own DIB survey that you may have seen.

[39:09] I think they said in 2020 we had 5.6 million interactions with downtown and this last year

[39:14] at 8.3.

[39:16] So when you see that our largest complaint is availability of spaces, we have 2.7 million

[39:21] more people, 50% more according to their data than we just did a few years ago that are interacting

[39:26] with our downtown somehow.

[39:27] So that's very, very much realistic is that we do have more people coming down here and

[39:32] a lot of free parking into our free parking may not be the same solution it was in the 90s when

[39:37] me and my granddad were walking down and we wouldn't see a soul on Saturday when I was growing up.

[39:41] You know lots of free parking around then but you know we've got a city in demand and this is part

[39:46] of the growing up of the city in demand is to you know I agree and I think what I do think having

[39:51] those kind of short real short-term spaces is a good way to balance everyone's interests.

[39:58] So on the, there was also a discussion about employees, you know, and kind of what happens

[40:07] to folks who are working downtown and how, you know, what are our strategies and I think

[40:13] I saw a few suggestions in here, you know, on how to create some more parking.

[40:17] I see all these decks we have where either at night or, you know, even most of the day

[40:24] They're not being used some of which the city has an interest in so I guess you know

[40:29] I just like to hear what you because I think that's a big concern by a lot of businesses

[40:34] Particularly those that employ folks that are making a lot of money. You know, where are they going to park if

[40:39] They can't find parking. We talk about kind of what we're doing now and then we you know, I can address

[40:44] So yes, council president councilwoman patent

[40:46] Right now we currently offer free parking to employees on the roof of Jefferson garage

[40:52] It is highly underutilized

[40:54] I go on the record of saying that again, roof of Jefferson Grudge is highly underutilized

[40:59] and it's free to employees.

[41:00] We also have a common density a lot, which is free during the day.

[41:04] It's free on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday night, we start a charge, Friday night, we

[41:08] charge Saturday night.

[41:09] It is underutilized.

[41:10] The South Palafox lot is underutilized.

[41:13] We offer a lot of free parking again.

[41:15] Almost 85% of the city's parking is free all the time.

[41:19] So if an employee can't find somewhere to park, I would go out on a limit.

[41:24] say it's probably because they're coming in on two wheels five minutes before

[41:27] their shift starts and they want to park right outside of where they work because

[41:31] we offer lots of options. We will also have an option for if you want a

[41:35] permit and you can prove that you're an employee and you have to maintain that

[41:39] proof of employment because a lot of these restaurants, bars, so forth have a

[41:44] high rate of turnover. So it's real hard to make sure like if you're getting a

[41:48] $10 permit to park in the garage because you're an employee that you don't carry

[41:52] that permit for two years and you only work down here for a month. So we're trying to figure

[41:56] that solution out, but we are having conversations of how do we offer proof of employment every

[42:02] month and you get a $10 permit for city owned property or a lot that's close to where you

[42:09] work.

[42:09] Good. I think that's just a great piece of this that I think is really important.

[42:13] And it is difficult being in the business and being downtown. We have 50 employees. You

[42:19] know, it used to be suggestive before or why don't you give employees a pass? Well, because

[42:22] there's turnover in these all these restaurants and bars, I mean every two weeks someone would be out

[42:27] with an employee pass for the next three years, you know, that they only work the perfect plane

[42:32] for two weeks, you know, and so that that would be the difficulty, the only way I could come up with

[42:37] some scenario that would make sense there would be that the that the business itself had some kind

[42:41] of ownership, in other words they had to pay for half and their employee paid for half or something

[42:46] that allowed there to be some control in place that they would have a vested interest in making sure

[42:50] that those are updated. But yeah, it's kind of kind of difficult, you know, and there

[42:55] are passes now as for the general public. So those are accessible. And I think that's

[42:59] another myth. I hear a lot say that'd be nice if there's passes like, well, there is passes

[43:04] in the Jefferson Street garage. So we do have options for employees that are that are

[43:08] reasonable. You know, but yeah, I agree. Whether if they go parking a private lot and pay $75

[43:14] to be there for their entire shift. I mean, that's not something we can control. And I

[43:17] I knew what, that's a complaint that I've heard as well.

[43:21] So how did you, to try, well, let me back up, I thought I heard you say that the area that's now going to be going to be paid is the previously free two-hour parking.

[43:33] Does it include anything that wasn't already two-hour parking?

[43:37] It does.

[43:38] Okay.

[43:38] It does.

[43:39] Yeah. It's the two-hour free parking plus some expansion beyond that.

[43:42] And how did we determine, you know, what areas made sense to turn into paid parking versus leaving us free parking?

[43:50] You know, in person sort of density in volume but also the volume data that we were presented to from UWF.

[44:02] But I think the most important part is that you really can't get solid data until it's paid parking because you need that sort of transactional data to figure that out.

[44:12] And I do have one question on the map because I've been interested in this for a while.

[44:19] Right down at the south end of Halifax, so Plaza de Luna, I see, you know, we have the

[44:26] paid parking in that parking lot that's right on the, I guess if you're facing north on

[44:31] the right side.

[44:34] But there's free parking, no two hour parking, all the way along the water there.

[44:38] Is that included in the recommendations to turn into paid parking?

[44:46] I'm sorry.

[44:49] So there's parking along, I guess it's really between the port and

[44:57] on the court side, and there's a, there's a,

[45:00] A whole bunch of free parking. Along with the fairies. A lot of fair land is right there. Yeah, going towards pot. If you were walking along the water, that's where I think that's where is that right councilwoman? Yeah, that's exactly right. And it just didn't show greed on here. So I was curious whether it was actually included. Okay. So let me make sure I think she was talking about parking benefits area. Tell me a little bit more about that. Yeah, so a lot of other cities, if implemented this that have gone through any sort of

[45:29] parking reform, you know, the goal is to take the parking revenue and to invest it back into

[45:36] the city. So that's simply that just refers to the area in which the revenue will be invested.

[45:40] Right. And it's really ever evolving as whenever you expand paid parking, that area should follow.

[45:48] And then I guess lastly, how big do we think our parking staff needs to become to actually

[45:56] police all these spaces and you know we make sure that we're giving tickets

[46:01] where needed. Council President Councilor Patten for this year we budgeted two

[46:08] additional staff members to kind of fill in the space in between our day shift

[46:12] and our night shift and to overlap some of the weekend shifts because we do

[46:18] parking management for the entire city so we respond to 3-1-1s we go out to the

[46:23] vote ramps and so forth. So our area is not just confined, confined to the paid

[46:27] a park area. We are ambassadors for the parking ambassadors for the entire

[46:32] city. So we budgeted for two additional this year that were approved. Having

[46:37] this in mind, knowing that next year, if all of these changes are implemented, we

[46:44] may have to increase that. But I felt like two additional staff members currently

[46:48] we have four, so we would go to six. I feel like that's enough to take care of the

[46:52] need at this moment. All right, I know I said that was last, but you just made me think

[46:56] of something else. There are other areas where we have paid parking. I think of Belmont

[47:00] Abilia, as I think has some paid parking over there.

[47:04] There is no paid parking in Belmont

[47:06] Abilia. There is a time we have a city lot over there. It's actually CRA lot, but it is free

[47:10] parking. But it is free parking still. Got it. Okay. All right, thank you.

[47:14] All right. Pass me over there. Thank you, Mr. President. A couple of questions. So I guess

[47:18] Well, if you did a great job when you work for premium, because there are so many premium

[47:22] lots around here, but, you know, I had this fear because I've gone to the post office

[47:28] a couple times, and I'm just going and parking somewhere else because I'm afraid I'm going

[47:34] to get booted or something while I'm in there, but I have this fear that one day I'll come

[47:39] to the city and our city will be a premium lot, I hope that never happens, but a couple

[47:44] questions. So, and I can think of a place like either the box office at the

[47:49] sander rather than pay all the fees for a company I won't talk about on a public

[47:52] meeting. I'll let you go to the box office and buy my tickets there and so

[47:56] having some way to be able to do that and run. I mean if it's a long ways, well I

[47:59] guess I can run there in 15 minutes and get there but things like that are what I

[48:03] think of too as far as having some free parking. But then on the demand-based,

[48:09] and you would talk more about this than the mayor had and you know I looked at

[48:13] the report. So how are people going to know when they're circling around what the price

[48:19] for that particular spot is and we go to demand-based or they have to look at the app

[48:22] and violate the law by using their phone while they drive or how is that going to work?

[48:28] Yeah, I mean it's typically obviously if it's dynamic like that it's not going to be fixed on

[48:34] a sign or anything so it would take looking at the app or the pain meter. So they'll have to like

[48:41] pull into the spot and then make that that would be the safe way to do it.

[48:44] Correct.

[48:44] At least it would stop.

[48:46] OK.

[48:47] And you listed several other cities here.

[48:48] I think that's really helpful with the base rate.

[48:50] I know it's mobiles to $1.

[48:52] Do any of those cities that you may have said this in here?

[48:56] I didn't see it.

[48:56] Do they use demand-based at all?

[49:00] Some of them certainly do.

[49:01] I didn't really consolidate that data.

[49:05] OK.

[49:05] So it's not in there.

[49:07] It's not just missing out on it.

[49:08] I want to make sure I didn't just miss it and then is the demand-based pricing is it anywhere in their projected revenue lift like that the bar chart that you have is that demand-based in there?

[49:22] No, it would be so difficult to count.

[49:24] I knew it would. I'm missing that too. I mean, going up to the dollar to me, I understand that.

[49:31] I mean, and I think 50 cents is really, really cheap, you know, I mean, compared with

[49:36] other cities, you know, when you look at cities close to us that are charged in a dollar.

[49:41] But the demand base makes me a little bit nervous, you know, that's all I was going to ask

[49:46] you a question about it originally, then of course councilman Patent asked some other questions

[49:49] like, okay, I need to find out about that too, but the demand base that really has me concerned

[49:53] because I'm not sure, I think of like, like ride share services, there's one that has

[49:58] like that sometimes it goes way up when there's high demand and I just I want to make people make sure

[50:03] people aren't completely shocked and they're going to a spot and it's like way more than they ever thought.

[50:08] I hope there's a top-end range there. I'll speak Philip's off the way to that. I think these are city

[50:14] spaces and then they need to be, you know, there needs to be a affordability factor. So they're,

[50:19] this is not for us to get into the private lot game of, you know, five and six dollars an hour or more

[50:25] or depending on the event, that's not the intent here.

[50:30] The dynamic pricing, when you look, it's in the data,

[50:33] when 41% of people say that time is hardest

[50:37] to find a space is on weekends at night,

[50:39] and we're not charging anything.

[50:41] That's why it's hard to find parking on weekends at night

[50:44] is because there is no delineation between demand

[50:47] or employees of a restaurant, taking all 20 spaces

[50:51] in front of a restaurant, there's no control on that.

[50:54] And like Philip said, there's no turnover.

[50:56] So I still think it's the city's duty to keep it affordable for citizens and for visitors.

[51:01] And that is part of the experience.

[51:03] We can't determine what private lots do.

[51:06] But I think the dynamic pricing, yes, would not be.

[51:09] There should be no fear of that.

[51:11] We would be getting into the same situation that private lots are getting into where it starts to go exponentially more expensive.

[51:17] It would be something that would still stay within a very affordable and we have the data to back up.

[51:22] It's only the ordinance we could put the language that the match rate would be correct. Okay. That's all the questions

[51:27] I thank you. Councilman Moore. All right, maybe I'm back clean up. I don't know most of the questions been asked. I

[51:37] Just really had one question. I was I guess

[51:41] Thrilled to see you know this kind of comprehensive approach

[51:44] Come forward. How long ago was it the Donald shoot came depends call. I don't know I was scrolling through my LinkedIn

[51:50] in 2018. 2018. All right. Well, I was scrolling through to see if I could find a post where

[51:56] he came through. And I came upon a Donald shoe post on LinkedIn that says, this is the

[52:01] best consulting report I have ever seen. Congratulations to Philip Olivier and Pensacola. Is that

[52:08] you and is that us?

[52:12] I would think he's seen a lot of a lot of consulting reports, huh? That's

[52:18] pretty good. I thought that was pretty cool to see.

[52:20] Sort of validates, you know, that we're heading the right direction.

[52:23] Yeah, yeah, yeah. So, it felt really good about that for the community moving forward.

[52:29] I hope that we've got some way to reach out to Jeff Speck, who hung the moniker

[52:32] about the Pensacola parking paradigm or whatever.

[52:37] Hidious moniker it was, he coined for us. So we can show him we learned,

[52:42] learned our lesson and have pointed ourselves in a new direction.

[52:45] But anyway, no questions really left to ask as the thorough groups are well done team and congratulations as Dom Schoops has. Thank you.

[52:54] Thank you.

[52:54] Councilwoman Braw.

[52:55] I just had a quick question.

[52:57] You mentioned about the pricing cases for another mayor mentioned that.

[53:03] Don't we right increase the price in the parking garage?

[53:08] Special events.

[53:09] For big events, for special events.

[53:13] Yes, we do. On special events, we put a sign out, a frame sign out, and we increase the rates during special events to help cover the cost of maintenance and the upkeep of JEPs for Roger.

[53:24] Right. So in this, in this proposal, will we do that? Will we continue doing that or we wouldn't have to do that?

[53:29] We would still continue to do that.

[53:32] It's a separate issue from the regular cost and so forth.

[53:36] We would just maybe expand not to the same rate that we charge at Jefferson Grodge,

[53:41] but we would maybe expand that same concept on street parking.

[53:44] I would just use a gallery unit as an example.

[53:47] We know there's a high demand for parking and at 50 cent and knowing that it's free after 7.

[53:53] We may increase those rates on street to one of those high demand times.

[53:59] Well, I just want to let you know that the public doesn't appreciate that.

[54:04] Just that's all.

[54:05] Yeah, it's public.

[54:07] And it will bother them for forgotten night.

[54:09] And we know that.

[54:09] We know they don't like it.

[54:12] All I will say is downtown is hustling and bustling, especially on a gallery night.

[54:21] And the city would be remiss to think that it's okay to give our parking away when

[54:28] And there are other lots that are charging in excess of $50 to $100 an hour to park and people are parking there.

[54:35] So if we can reinvest that money back into our city, why would we not take that opportunity?

[54:43] Why would we thank you for that?

[54:45] And now to add to, I think I've just got the numbers today.

[54:49] I think we spent $112,000, somewhere in the $110,000 range in the last maybe six months on Jefferson Garage,

[54:55] new lights, new pressure wash, painted, you know, if you haven't noticed, if you were

[55:01] to, when we should probably get a good before and after, you could see the distinct difference

[55:05] that it looks like within that experience. And that's what we're supposed to be doing. That's

[55:09] what we mentioned before is it's a little more palatable to pay, is it $10 for the night.

[55:14] You know, so if you're there for five hours, you're paying two bucks an hour, the park and the garage,

[55:19] it's a little more palatable when you know that it goes to making that experience better. And I think,

[55:22] As I said, I think that's my responsibility personally and the administration's responsibility

[55:26] to say we're not just taking money from you and then we don't tell you how it's benefiting

[55:32] the same way with a half-cent sales tax, things that we do there is to say here's where

[55:36] your money's going.

[55:38] I think that is our obligation and that's certainly what we want to ask the community about

[55:41] and what they want to see and that's what we do moving forward if we have the substantial

[55:46] revenue of which to do so, so that would be our blaming for it.

[55:51] Councilwoman Pat.

[55:54] So Councilwoman Broughton asked my question because that's exactly what came to my mind

[55:59] is all these special events where we're charging.

[56:02] So thank you for that.

[56:03] But I did just leave my light on because I want to say that this was something that I wanted

[56:08] to see happen.

[56:09] This kind of detailed, you know, in-depth analysis of the parking downtown is obviously

[56:13] of great concern to people living downtown and people visiting downtown.

[56:17] town. So, I really appreciate it. Thank you Mayor for doing it. Thank you Lisa and Phillip for this great report. I didn't know was that as great as it really is, but you know, the report, the Donald Schoep has now labeled one of the best.

[56:31] So, I'm grateful and I appreciate it and I just wanted to tell everybody that.

[56:36] All right. You're out of the hot seat.

[56:40] Thank you.

[56:41] All right, we're moving down to the review of the consent agenda items.

[56:47] Item number 2 is 2, 3-00784, amendment 2 in a local agreement with the Scambia County

[56:54] Housing Finance Authority.

[56:58] Item number 3 is 2, 3-00793, approval of utility work by highway contract agreement number

[57:07] 426935-2-56-02, with the State of Florida Department of Transportation, FDOT, for construction

[57:15] of stone water piping across scenic highway at the intersection of Langley Avenue.

[57:24] Item number 4 is 2-3-00759, proposed revision, court, tariff, number 5A.

[57:33] Council President.

[57:34] Council President.

[57:34] Yeah, you have a revised item at your place and the only revision was in order to keep some consistency in the recommendation, I ask support staff to change two words that doesn't change the substantive nature of it and they were very gracious and allowing to change those two words.

[57:57] Okay. All right. Thank you.

[57:59] Item number five is two three dash zero zero five seven two community development

[58:06] block agreement for service with Council on Agings of West Florida Inc.

[58:14] Item

[58:15] number six is two three dash zero zero seven seven seven discretionary funding

[58:20] allocation city council president Delaney Wiggins district seven item number

[58:25] Item number 7 is 2-3-00781, discretionary funding allocation city council member Jerry at

[58:31] more district 4.

[58:35] Item number 8 is 2-3-00796, discretionary funding allocation city council member tenia de

[58:42] Broughton district 5.

[58:46] Item number 9 is 2-3-00797, discretionary funding allocation city council member Jennifer

[58:53] for Breyer District 1.

[58:56] And we're moving down to the review

[58:58] of the regular agenda items.

[59:00] Item number 10 is 2, 3-00719.

[59:05] Request for license to use.

[59:07] Right away, 801 East Gregory Street,

[59:14] Councilwoman Breyer.

[59:15] It's just curious,

[59:20] actually, I can't slide

[59:23] whether I want to save questions for Thursday or not,

[59:26] but I was curious, are they here to see me or any of them?

[59:29] I'll save it.

[59:31] Council member.

[59:33] Thank you, Mr. President.

[59:35] I don't have some questions Thursday too, but I do have one question.

[59:39] I read over the narrative here and talks about how the property immediately west of East

[59:46] Gregory, or Middle East West of them on Gregory is utilizing city of Pensacola right away.

[59:52] I guess that's broken egg I'm thinking.

[59:54] It's across, it's across 13th avenue from another broken egg.

[59:57] Okay. Yeah, 13. Yeah. Okay.

[1:00:00] What's that what's referring to that particular property? Is that that if you were to go there now, there's asphalt. It's really unmarked asphalt on the east side of 13. That's on the same side of the 13th Avenue is where the hotel that's being proposed. It's not designated for another broken egg. They have no permission to use. There's nothing around that's designated for a business. That's correct. Is this something we've done before as far as giving like that type of parking to a business?

[1:00:29] Well, there's a lot of different versions of that.

[1:00:31] We've collected, I think, the 28 LTEUs.

[1:00:35] We've done that in right away.

[1:00:39] We've done two in the last 13 years, excuse me, two in the last 10 years that we have

[1:00:46] going right now.

[1:00:48] And there's also other agreements.

[1:00:49] There's some shared use agreements like behind the holiday in right now that is in a parking

[1:00:53] lot, not in the right away.

[1:00:54] But as part of their parking requirement you previous administration council

[1:00:59] You know that might have been part of the lease or something like that. So

[1:01:03] There's a lot of different arrangements that have involved parking or city owned parking or right away in some way

[1:01:09] So yes, there's there's general precedent for it

[1:01:11] But I don't think you'll ever find apples to apples to apples, you know, L.T.U. requests based on numbers faces on streets

[1:01:17] Right anything like that. They're all going to be different

[1:01:19] You know in some way. I just don't remember seeing one that those spots were dedicated just for

[1:01:24] of that entity?

[1:01:25] Do we, we have those?

[1:01:27] Yeah, we do.

[1:01:28] We definitely have L to use, that agreements that have been placed in,

[1:01:32] have been in place for years, that a lot, city-owned parking spaces,

[1:01:37] to a business, to a, yeah, we have several of those.

[1:01:40] I can't speak to every issue, how many spaces at each one,

[1:01:43] but, I mean, we have a list of those, yes.

[1:01:46] Can I get that before Thursday, just so I can see?

[1:01:48] I'd like to see what the precedent is for this.

[1:01:51] Yeah.

[1:01:52] We've got a list.

[1:01:53] All right.

[1:01:53] Okay. Okay. That's all I have. Thank you. Councilman Pratt.

[1:01:57] I actually think that would be helpful as well to see a list. But I have one other question.

[1:02:04] Have you, I know you're taking a look at a lot of these licenses to use.

[1:02:10] Have you worked out the details at all of this particular license to use?

[1:02:15] Yeah. Let me give you an update on where we are administratively as well as how it pertains to this project.

[1:02:19] if this is obviously a project that started before COVID,

[1:02:24] that initial conversation with them.

[1:02:27] And not to get into, you know,

[1:02:29] we could talk about on Thursday,

[1:02:31] merits and things like that,

[1:02:32] but just so you know,

[1:02:33] and you saw in your packet that the arrangement before,

[1:02:38] and as you go back through time,

[1:02:39] you'll see it's $200 annually, $250 annually,

[1:02:43] for some LTU's.

[1:02:46] This has been a tipping point for us

[1:02:48] of making sure that we have a clear mayor administrative policy on how we set the value

[1:02:54] for the taxpayers' right away and it will be in the format what I'll tell you we don't

[1:03:00] have all of the numbers worked out we're working through a draft now but the general idea

[1:03:04] is going to be that we set what a market rate would be really in two tiers in my mind.

[1:03:09] Tier A would be really take Phillips parking benefits district where are we charging for

[1:03:14] parking. That's going to be a certain value to the taxpayer. If we were to take that away,

[1:03:18] versus a location like this would be in a different tier, and that there would be a set value

[1:03:24] on that. This is what this right away is worth to us. So what is the agreement? In the case

[1:03:29] of this, they're spending $250,000 on improving those 21 spaces. That would be part of that conversation

[1:03:35] is that we'd say here's what we believe the market rate value of that right away to the taxpayer

[1:03:39] So then let's look at the apples and oranges of this arrangement and see what we think is a fair market value given all of the circumstances that are always different for these requests and then how we set that.

[1:03:51] So as this, even though this would be moving forward as a thousand dollar a year, what we've always done that I don't necessarily agree with, this operator is fully aware that.

[1:04:03] And we have revocability within this.

[1:04:06] This is not signing this away for 20 years.

[1:04:08] This is not.

[1:04:09] So we have the capability and the leverage to do so.

[1:04:12] They are fully aware, I talked to them again on Saturday

[1:04:15] to reiterate this point that we will be coming back to them

[1:04:18] of what the expectation is moving forward.

[1:04:21] But we're trying to not lose sight of the ball here,

[1:04:23] which is a property that's been empty for 30 years

[1:04:26] that has set in relative blight and is just impervious

[1:04:30] this asphalt and that the ability to get that taxable would completely dwarf any dollar

[1:04:35] amount that we talk about for L.T. use, any dollar amount any other way would be getting

[1:04:39] this as usable taxable property as well as the amenity that it would provide for folks

[1:04:46] and neighborhoods like you still and all that that would now have greater access to rooms

[1:04:52] and we know there's demand.

[1:04:53] So we're trying to factor all of those things in that is this worth slowing down this process

[1:04:58] us over getting, taking additional weeks of time to get administrative policy done when

[1:05:03] they already agree that they will adhere to whatever that administrative policy would

[1:05:07] be.

[1:05:07] And I assume that would also be, you'd be considering the term of the L.T.U. and that

[1:05:15] would.

[1:05:15] And that's a conversation that we have to have because if my argument, if I were on the

[1:05:19] other side, my argument would be, well, if I'm going to start paying something closer to

[1:05:22] market rate and not $1,000 a year, then if I'm spending in this case $250,000 on

[1:05:28] spaces, then I may not want the city to be able to take those back in a year, you know.

[1:05:34] I mean, so I think like any lease, like any negotiation, what are you paying and what kind

[1:05:39] of obligation would you expect for that?

[1:05:41] So I would expect that the closer we get to market rate, which I believe is much needed.

[1:05:46] There might be conversations where, hey, it's a two-year agreement, a three-year agreement,

[1:05:50] And not just, I believe right now what is in front of us, I remember correct, is a one-year obligation.

[1:05:57] And then we could, they could spend $250,000 in these faces, we could, we could say thank you very much.

[1:06:02] And then in the year, we're able to take that back, not that that would be our intent.

[1:06:06] But I think that's how it's structured currently, is that we do have the ability to opt out of these, these LTEs, these parking LTEs.

[1:06:14] Okay, thank you.

[1:06:16] All right, Councilwoman Bray.

[1:06:17] I changed my mind, thanks.

[1:06:20] Were they asked to hold off on coming before us so that we had an opportunity to iron out our LTE process

[1:06:30] while we were investigating here, trying to get the house together?

[1:06:33] Yeah, we proposed that.

[1:06:36] And of course, that would be ideal.

[1:06:38] But I think it's also to be fair to the developer.

[1:06:42] However, I think we administratively have caused some confusion, I think the planning board

[1:06:47] as an example was a 2-2 vote, there were only 4 people there, and that 2-2 vote I don't

[1:06:54] believe in my opinion that that was opposition to this, it was confusion on our side between

[1:07:00] parking and planning and others.

[1:07:03] So at the end of the day what I assess is I understand their hesitation, which they shared

[1:07:10] with me is hey you can say it takes three weeks to get an administrative policy but what

[1:07:15] if it takes four months what if it takes five months and given their previous experience

[1:07:20] that this and this has been going on quite a while that I understand that and they've decided

[1:07:26] that they want to. Is it true that they had not contacted the city from

[1:07:31] June 2020 to June 2023. I haven't confirmed that. That's what I was planning her for planning.

[1:07:40] So to me that's the only thing is it's not like they were those all that time they were working with

[1:07:45] us and so is there is there not ability to to move this to a date certain so that there's time for

[1:07:53] the ironing out of the LTE promise and so we say that we promised to bring this back on November

[1:08:00] Remember what have you in, I mean, that's what seems reasonable when we're in the midst

[1:08:05] of all this investigation and, and, and if they really weren't around for three years

[1:08:11] and they come hurrying back and say hurry now and unwilling this wait two weeks or a month.

[1:08:17] I get the idea I've not wanted to wait too long but if we postpone to a date certain wouldn't

[1:08:22] that allow our staff to get it together and make sure we understand exactly the precedent

[1:08:29] we're setting or moving forward. I also appreciate the blinded piece of property. I don't disregard

[1:08:34] anything you're saying in that and I think that there is, I just think there's a balancing act

[1:08:39] here that we don't rush forward with something that then we potentially, even if by law we've

[1:08:46] covered our rears, we look pretty questionable if we grant them an LTEU that their franchise agreement

[1:08:54] as mandated on and then pull the L2U and now they're franchised as part and they can't be

[1:08:59] built anymore. Something of that nature. That's what concerns me.

[1:09:03] Well a couple things I haven't confirmed who they talked on the phone to or emails or whatever

[1:09:09] over three years. I could tell you you know I was operating a business during COVID and there was

[1:09:14] a lot of calls that I didn't take for the next year and a half you know after we you know I shut

[1:09:19] my building down so I mean I don't know that I would ding them over somehow a lack of

[1:09:24] interest when, you know, June, starting in June of 2020, but I wasn't there.

[1:09:28] I can't speak to where we were.

[1:09:32] Here's what I feel they put in writing that they understand in my mind.

[1:09:36] I'm weighing out the benefit, the significant financial benefit of development.

[1:09:42] If the question was, we didn't like the development.

[1:09:44] We didn't like the character of it.

[1:09:46] We didn't like those things that we want to make sure we all want to make sure we

[1:09:50] protect and preserve, you know, something that's good and positive for the city.

[1:09:55] That doesn't seem to be up for discussion.

[1:09:57] We're getting into the weeds on 21 spaces of which they will have to invest a quarter

[1:10:02] million dollars, and I'd make the argument a thousand dollars a year might be a good deal

[1:10:07] at that point.

[1:10:08] I mean, if they were going to put up, if they're willing to put up a quarter million dollars

[1:10:11] and they only have a one-year obligation from us of which we could hypothetically walk away,

[1:10:16] I think that shows their investment, number one, and shows their faith in us that we're

[1:10:21] going to bring them something reasonable.

[1:10:23] I don't think that puts the city in negative leverage.

[1:10:25] I think that shows that they're committed to this project and that they would do...

[1:10:29] I don't know that I'd be willing to do that this time.

[1:10:31] One more question.

[1:10:32] If they sell the property, can they transfer these properties to the new owner?

[1:10:37] These car sponsors?

[1:10:38] I would have to look.

[1:10:40] That's something that we're talking about in our administrative policy that you would

[1:10:43] not be able to convey that without approval.

[1:10:46] So I can tell you the conversation we're having about.

[1:10:49] I can't tell you what we've done before,

[1:10:51] but I don't know if Chair or someone

[1:10:53] would or Leslie want to speak to

[1:10:55] if any of our existing parking LTO policies allow that,

[1:10:58] but I can tell you moving forward,

[1:11:00] I certainly want to check with me with the city any time

[1:11:03] you were due to convey any kind of license to use.

[1:11:06] I don't care if that was for the sidewalk or for anything else

[1:11:09] is that if it's a new ownership that we would need to vet that.

[1:11:12] Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Council President, Councilwoman Breyer.

[1:11:16] Currently the LTEU process that's in the land development code is very generic, and

[1:11:21] it doesn't speak to the terms of the agreement itself.

[1:11:25] What we currently have is that there's a draft of an LTEU document that is executed that

[1:11:31] was drafted by the City's legal department and is updated frequently over the years to

[1:11:37] modernize when needed. It does allow for if there's a new owner that comes in, we have

[1:11:45] assigned them to the new owner, but the city is not obligated to do so. LTUs are, as

[1:11:52] the mayor said, they are renewed on an annual basis, and the city can without cause actually

[1:11:58] revoke them with 90 days notice to the holder.

[1:12:02] Okay, one more thing. And I appreciate you not wanting to ding during COVID, but I do

[1:12:06] think there's an absence of three years, do you can you verify?

[1:12:10] I can only verify that as far as email, I think that there was that gap, but I cannot verify

[1:12:16] whether or not anybody spoke to them on the phone if they reached out to other departments.

[1:12:21] It might not be something that we have a written record of, but I can't verify with 100% certainty

[1:12:27] whether or not there was communication ever that span.

[1:12:32] You said something that trickered my other thought now, being an old this week.

[1:12:40] I don't know.

[1:12:42] I can't think of it right now.

[1:12:43] Thank you.

[1:12:44] If you remember, let me know.

[1:12:47] Councilman Jones.

[1:12:48] Yeah.

[1:12:49] Just real quick, Mr. Mayor, you mentioned the aesthetics.

[1:12:52] And I'm curious, did this go to the ARB already?

[1:12:55] I haven't seen any like actual renderings of the building.

[1:12:58] It wouldn't be in the planning board, it's the planning board, it's the gateway redevelopment

[1:13:04] district which goes to the planning board for a static review.

[1:13:07] It did go for conceptual approval and I think they're going to be bringing it back next

[1:13:12] month for review.

[1:13:17] Council Member.

[1:13:19] Thank you, Mr. President.

[1:13:20] I guess I'm a little shocked they're not here because I had questions I'd love to ask

[1:13:23] before Thursday.

[1:13:26] I would also like to know when they realize that they bought a piece of property was too small

[1:13:30] for their hotel. And does this give, I mean, if we had other businesses who, I know we

[1:13:37] have other LTEUs. Have we had other businesses that come in at the very beginning when they're

[1:13:41] before they build and try and get LTEUs before they build because of a situation like this?

[1:13:46] Are you aware of any? Is this more?

[1:13:48] Councillor, President, Councillor Mimbaire. We have had, not maybe not parking. Parking is

[1:13:54] not a frequent current, but we do have examples of commercial businesses in the city that

[1:14:02] have come in and gotten approval for parking because it was their business model was dependent

[1:14:09] on having the additional parking in the right of way, as the mayor indicated, it's only

[1:14:14] happened a couple of times in the last decade. But we do have businesses that come in and they

[1:14:20] want to have, you know, they need to have a balcony or, you know, or administratively that is approved by staff and outdoor seating area.

[1:14:27] That's what I'm doing.

[1:14:28] Yeah, we do get businesses that they're their business model.

[1:14:34] They're, you know, their plans to, you know, to open a business are reliant on their use of the right of way in some form or fashion.

[1:14:41] To add to that, Councilman, I mean, let's use a more exaggerated example.

[1:14:45] I mean if someone was going to come build, move a 500 employee business here and they had

[1:14:49] to have a laboratory of a certain size and they said, well you know we need 21 spaces

[1:14:53] or we need 10 spaces or 50 spaces, I mean I think it's certainly within the responsibility

[1:14:58] of the city to entertain that idea.

[1:15:00] We have given the economic development. That's a larger example, but I guess what I'm saying is whatever agreement, a thousand a year, 10,000 a year, 30,000 a year, that they would pay for these spaces, dwarfs in comparison, just the annual revenue we would get as a city from the property tax of a 30 year old blinded vacant lot to now be, you know. So I don't want us to lose sight of the relative value of property tax generation against what?

[1:15:29] $1,000, $5,000, $10,000 that we would charge for an LTU.

[1:15:34] And so if that's something in our toolkit,

[1:15:36] whether it's economic development or Eric is office,

[1:15:38] whether it's working on Baptist Hospital,

[1:15:40] whether I think part of our economic development toolkit

[1:15:43] is we should entertain a lot of options,

[1:15:45] in some of which we say no to.

[1:15:47] I mean, if it's, you want too much space in the right away

[1:15:49] or you want to put something there

[1:15:51] that doesn't add to the character of the city,

[1:15:53] then it's our job administratively to say

[1:15:54] that that doesn't make sense for us.

[1:15:56] So it is always a yes.

[1:15:58] I think it's coming up with a clear policy, so when it doesn't meet it, we say well then

[1:16:03] that's not something that we're interested in conveying taxpayer right away too.

[1:16:07] So I mean, I think using that as an economic development tool is prudent and certainly

[1:16:12] something we should entertain if it's proposed to us, doesn't mean we have to do it.

[1:16:15] And given the fact that, you know, we've got this one right now, okay, don't you think

[1:16:22] that this could set a precedent for future businesses wanting to do the same?

[1:16:25] And we have a very limited amount of property in the city.

[1:16:29] I think that's really developable at this point, unlike the county.

[1:16:33] And so if we want to do economic development, or we're not like saying ourselves up by giving

[1:16:37] them these spots for future, you know, just kind of counting on, hey, they got it.

[1:16:42] We can get it out to you for that.

[1:16:43] I would think most developers have been, that would be working on a project of that scale,

[1:16:48] have been enough developments to know that everything is different.

[1:16:51] I don't think anybody would lack the common sense that would say, well, if you gave 21 spaces

[1:16:57] at 13th in Gregory, then I would like 21 spaces on Palafax Street.

[1:17:01] I don't think anyone's going to say that.

[1:17:02] I think you would have a subjective evaluation where you'd say, what are these spaces worth?

[1:17:07] And that's what are, I feel like the administrative job is right now, administrations, is let's get

[1:17:13] a market rate value of what these spaces are worth to the taxpayer.

[1:17:16] And again, in different divisions and different phases.

[1:17:19] is, and then we can make this evaluation.

[1:17:21] It's no different than a tax abatement.

[1:17:23] We would give a tax abatement on X number

[1:17:26] of affordable housing units.

[1:17:27] And we calculate the value of that abatement.

[1:17:29] And we calculate the value of those number of units.

[1:17:32] So that's another economic development tool.

[1:17:34] So I don't think any developer would come in and say,

[1:17:37] well, if those 21 spaces are what you gave,

[1:17:39] then I would give 21 spaces exactly here

[1:17:42] that anyone would look at it that way.

[1:17:44] Every one of these examples and oranges,

[1:17:46] and it depends on what you're doing.

[1:17:47] If someone wants to build a $200 million building and they need two spaces on LTU, I will strongly consider that if they need 200 spaces of our city

[1:17:56] I will not do that. You know, and so that's I think there's no other way to treat this but subjectively

[1:18:03] Because every proposal subjective. It's on a different piece of property. It's located in a different part of the city

[1:18:08] So I would I would not suspect that developers would would look at it so rigidly as you gave 21 here

[1:18:14] So you must get 21 in our space.

[1:18:16] I think they'll see that we'll entertain it.

[1:18:18] And then we make the evaluation of what's good for the city.

[1:18:21] You know, move forward.

[1:18:22] And Mr. Mayor, do you think that by not having this on the agenda, on the Thursday night that this would hurt the chances of this being, you know,

[1:18:32] of this happening on this piece of property?

[1:18:34] Because I kind of feel like Councilwoman Breyer, that it just seems like we're getting our process worked out for in the forward.

[1:18:40] Here's what I would say it would take if the debate is what should be charged for these

[1:18:48] LTEUs.

[1:18:50] I don't know how many decades it would take for that revenue to match what we would get

[1:18:53] in property tax.

[1:18:55] And that has been my evaluation is we're looking at a risk-reward situation.

[1:18:59] If our concern is how are we going to calculate spaces moving forward and if your vote is

[1:19:05] no on that because you'd rather them wait for that administrative policy first even

[1:19:09] and though in writing they've acknowledged that they'll have to adhere to it.

[1:19:12] I certainly understand that, but what I'm saying is, are you willing to risk, I could

[1:19:19] never answer that, and only the developer could answer that, and certainly I'm sure you

[1:19:22] could ask them on Thursday, am I willing to risk a multi-billion dollar development that

[1:19:27] would dwarf any LTU in perpetuity, type of revenue that we would get and take the gamble

[1:19:33] that two more months of a hotel flag that needs to know if you're going to do it or not.

[1:19:40] I just don't know if the risk is worth the reward, I guess, is to answer your question.

[1:19:44] It's not that your argument is invalid, but why would we be delaying it and why would

[1:19:49] we even be flirting with the risk that a 30-year vacant piece of property doesn't get built

[1:19:55] on because of something that they've already agreed that they'd be willing to do?

[1:19:59] So that's my job is to evaluate the risk and the reward, and I just don't see enough risk on the side of not letting this move forward to potentially jeopardize the reward of a development on a blind piece of property.

[1:20:13] I mean, that's just my thing, and so I'd rather this see move forward, and if people are concerned, if you're concerned about that, under that logic, I understand where you're coming from.

[1:20:24] Okay, thank you.

[1:20:25] Thank you.

[1:20:25] Mr. President.

[1:20:25] All right.

[1:20:27] Council Member Breyer.

[1:20:28] One more question for you.

[1:20:30] We haven't done this on new builds traditionally, correct?

[1:20:33] No.

[1:20:34] There is one of the two more recent ones was on 12th Avenue, and it's in conjunction with a restaurant

[1:20:40] that is going to be a new business in there.

[1:20:44] But a new business, but old building?

[1:20:46] Correct, correct, yes.

[1:20:47] That's what I believe.

[1:20:48] That's why you said it's a rough perspective.

[1:20:49] I think retrofitting to old buildings in areas that there wasn't more.

[1:20:54] The two most recent ones, yes, were retrofitting existing sites that were already constructed

[1:21:00] with new businesses.

[1:21:04] And most of that, I guess, would mean that, as far as the tax break or abatements, I think

[1:21:11] we've only had one to keep things affordable housing from when I talked to Chris Jones.

[1:21:16] there's only one in it. It lasted for less than two years. And then the price is skyrocketed.

[1:21:23] So we've not been very successful on that one at all. And I get the idea of not wanting to

[1:21:31] suppress development. I'm just a bit taken by a company looking to build this big. I think that most

[1:21:40] all the others, if not all the others, have built to their size property and made it work.

[1:21:49] That's where this one troubles me a bit with the rush a little bit after the delay delay delay.

[1:21:56] Now let's hurry up, we can't wait two weeks when they were asked to.

[1:21:59] From an agenda conference standpoint, I would say certainly I don't want to get too far out in front of speaking for them.

[1:22:05] I mean, this delay in three years, I mean, I would ask them that.

[1:22:08] I don't want to, yeah, well, and, I mean, it's on the agenda at this point.

[1:22:13] I think you'll have the opportunity to ask them that, fair enough.

[1:22:18] All I'm saying is, again, let's look at this as, let's bracket out the revenue stream.

[1:22:23] If what we're saying is on, I mean, eight of these spaces don't exist, they're under, right?

[1:22:28] So all, there's 13 that are on broken asphalt that we aren't maintaining as it sits today.

[1:22:33] They'll spend a quarter million dollars putting those in.

[1:22:37] Is it a bigger revenue stream for the city, for them to be a little bit larger?

[1:22:41] And being an area that is not power fox, that's not Jefferson.

[1:22:45] And for that to have another floor or another X number of rooms and have another million

[1:22:49] dollars in taxable value on that property, is that more valuable?

[1:22:54] Or have them have a million or two million dollars less taxable property, but fit those

[1:23:01] those spaces on their property.

[1:23:03] I mean, and that's the financial evaluation that you'd be making is you'd say, well, we're

[1:23:08] going to take a million plus less taxable dollars to ensure that they have 21 spaces of

[1:23:13] non-used current property.

[1:23:16] But we don't want them to have that.

[1:23:18] So let's make sure that they build it smaller.

[1:23:20] So that's less taxable.

[1:23:22] Not saying which way is right or wrong.

[1:23:23] I just mean that would be the evaluation I'd be making.

[1:23:25] I guess you can't take out the public's still using this property.

[1:23:31] I know not as often and not as, but it is parked on every week, even the crap parking.

[1:23:38] So I mean there is that a little bit, I mean even on the broken road and the gravel it

[1:23:43] is a little bit, it is used and it's used weekly and some, we're just trying to bounce

[1:23:48] it all out and that's all.

[1:23:50] And under that logic, if a local restaurant that uses it every Saturday and Sunday, if

[1:23:54] If your concern is new development, they have their own parking, have they approached

[1:24:00] us about using those, or getting, I'm not sure what the, I believe they've asked, you

[1:24:06] know, what the process entailed, but they've not submitted anything or requested to have

[1:24:12] exclusive use of that.

[1:24:14] So I mean right now it's free city on spaces of which hasn't been requested.

[1:24:19] So, to now say, well, because people use it, you know, that's an obligation that we

[1:24:25] already have. I don't think it is an obligation we already have, you know, at this point.

[1:24:30] So, I wasn't really meaning to the business. I'm not talking about the business. I'm talking

[1:24:34] about to the people.

[1:24:35] Right.

[1:24:36] And I know what that I'm really MDBating those two, that to the public has been using, but that's

[1:24:43] all.

[1:24:44] I'm good.

[1:24:46] I've locked that road for 39 years, almost many, many, many, many, many times, and I rarely

[1:24:54] see other than Saturday or Sunday, anybody down there.

[1:24:57] So I understand that, I understand this is a value of, this is an asset of the city

[1:25:02] of which we are considering giving away, but we can't, in my mind, be blind to what else

[1:25:07] has happened.

[1:25:08] And there's reputation in order here, too.

[1:25:10] I mean, are we a city that you can develop in or that you can invest in or not?

[1:25:15] And these are the types of granular things that if there, we should always defend ourselves

[1:25:21] for character.

[1:25:22] We should defend ourselves and it's a value to the taxpayer always, and I always feel

[1:25:26] that way.

[1:25:26] But it's also our job to see the force through the trees here and say that this is a significant

[1:25:31] development on a blind piece of property, and they've agreed that they're going to adhere

[1:25:37] to whatever we come up with.

[1:25:39] If they had not said that, if they said we refuse to, we only want to pay $1,000 a year

[1:25:43] or we're not interested, then we would tell them we're not interested.

[1:25:46] They have committed whatever the new policy is going to be that they're going to do.

[1:25:51] So I just don't see why we would jeopardize this type of multi-million dollar development at this point.

[1:25:57] Unless it was a character issue, unless it was something that we thought was not a good use for our city or something like that.

[1:26:04] That's just where I'm at.

[1:26:05] So again, certainly understand the questions and I know they might understand and they'll

[1:26:09] have someone here Thursday to be able to discuss it.

[1:26:12] Jim?

[1:26:13] I had a question, I guess there's some of the discussion here, maybe my planning board

[1:26:20] chops have gotten rusty, so I've since we got this more here.

[1:26:23] Could you talk about the difference between a vacation or right away and a license to use

[1:26:29] what are the differences between those two things?

[1:26:31] Yes, certainly Council President, Council Member.

[1:26:35] When you are requesting a license to use, it is more of a, for lack of a better word

[1:26:41] temporary.

[1:26:42] It's not, you're not being a sure permanent control of the right of way.

[1:26:47] It remains city right of way.

[1:26:49] It remains dedicated public right of way.

[1:26:51] Even if you do have an exclusive right to control how it is used per the terms of the agreement

[1:26:57] that's executed with city.

[1:26:58] When you vacate right away, the city can't sell right away, like you can't real property.

[1:27:05] So it goes to the planning board and it comes before this body in a public hearing.

[1:27:10] And if city council opts to vacate right away, it is automatically returned to the adjacent

[1:27:16] property owner, the portion that they requested to have vacated adjacent to their property.

[1:27:22] And it becomes real property and it's returned to the tax rules.

[1:27:25] Okay.

[1:27:26] All right. We're not given away. This, this is a LTOU license to use. So we're, they're asking

[1:27:33] what would they come back and renew then on a regular basis that use?

[1:27:38] We generally, we just send out a renewal and enable waste annually for them to pay their fee and renew

[1:27:44] with any type of license to use agreement. And as long as there's not an issue with it that causes

[1:27:51] the city to take action to revoke it, then that's just something that occurs on an annual basis.

[1:27:56] on the anniversary of the approval.

[1:27:57] All right, that helps clarify it for me.

[1:28:00] Thank you so much.

[1:28:01] All right.

[1:28:02] Thank you.

[1:28:03] Move it on.

[1:28:04] Thank you.

[1:28:05] Moving on to item number 11, is 23-00804.

[1:28:12] Fourth, addendum to the partial assignment

[1:28:14] of the Valencia Development Corporation of the option

[1:28:17] agreement between the City of Pensacola

[1:28:19] and the Student Properties LLP.

[1:28:21] Item

[1:28:25] number 12 is 23-00806, 4th Addendum to the Partial Assignment to Inspire Communities

[1:28:33] of Florida LLC of the Option Agreement between the City of Pensacola and Stood Apropies

[1:28:38] LLP.

[1:28:42] Item number 13 is 23-00743, FEMA FY 2023 Port Security Grant Program, Acceptance of Grant

[1:28:53] at number EMW2023PU00455 Mobile Command Center.

[1:29:03] Item number 14 is 2023-079 Supplemental

[1:29:08] Budget Resolution Number 2023-079, FEMA FY 2023 Port Security Grant Program. Grant

[1:29:17] at number EMW2023-PU-00455 Mobile Command Center.

[1:29:27] Item number 15 is 2023-081 Supplemental Budget Resolution Number 2023-081 to recognize

[1:29:37] I see all the municipal golf course FY 2023 revenue add

[1:29:46] -ons done.

[1:29:46] No, sir, no add-ons.

[1:29:50] All right.

[1:29:52] No discussion.

[1:29:54] Madam Clerk.

[1:29:55] Council president items two through nine will be on the consent agenda.

[1:30:00] agenda and items 10-15 beyond the regular agenda. Thank you. See the administrative communication.

[1:30:06] Yes, sir. Council President, I just wanted to thank you and Chief Cranger and Habitat and Red Cross for successful smoke alarm Saturday. I think to date, we've given out just over 100 smoke alarms, so making some great progress with the program. So, absolutely. And thank you, guys.

[1:30:27] And we gave out three bedshakers, so that was great.

[1:30:32] A bedshaker, Chief Kranner, I don't want to mess this up

[1:30:36] and try and explain what a bedshaker is.

[1:30:38] So can you come up and let us know about these three

[1:30:43] bedshakers that we gave out?

[1:30:47] You know, I'll put a quarter in it.

[1:30:49] That's not what you think.

[1:30:52] Council President, I understand the concern

[1:30:54] for the industry term, bedshaker.

[1:30:56] It is actually for those that had a hearing impairment and it actually will shake the bed

[1:31:02] It does partner and pair with a smoke alarm. So when the smoke alarm activates in the house

[1:31:07] It's kind of like a bedside alarm that shakes the bed

[1:31:11] And we installed one and it's the first one I've ever seen so we've never had them. We're excited about it

[1:31:17] And in general, and I've received he's a disabled better

[1:31:20] So he's really excited about it. So thank you. Thank you

[1:31:24] Appreciate it.

[1:31:26] City Attorney's Communication.

[1:31:28] No, you're right.

[1:31:29] All right.

[1:31:30] Well, you say you are.

[1:31:31] I'm sorry.

[1:31:34] I'm sorry.

[1:31:36] I'm sorry.

[1:31:36] There's no reaction.

[1:31:38] City Council Communication.

[1:31:41] No?

[1:31:42] I did it.

[1:31:43] Yeah, I'm sorry.

[1:31:44] Oh, okay.

[1:31:45] Council Member Breyer.

[1:31:46] I'd like to say that we had...

[1:31:48] City Kites Neighborhood Association

[1:31:49] had their annual trunker treat.

[1:31:51] this past Saturday with over 850 truck trucker treaters, not including their

[1:31:58] parents. Fire was out, thank you so much Chief Cranger, they had a great time,

[1:32:03] honestly they loved, they loved the fire truck out there, there were few trucks

[1:32:08] and the new equipment I just want to say this was their first

[1:32:12] trunker treat with the new equipment in Belvedere, so they loved that. I mean

[1:32:16] I mean, honestly, it was an incredible 850, you've got two parents or so with some of

[1:32:22] these single kids, and I mean, this was a massive crowd, so it went excellently, and

[1:32:29] they're already talking about next year's plans.

[1:32:31] Awesome.

[1:32:33] And one other quick thing, I want to congratulate the mayor for being accepted on the Escarosa

[1:32:39] board, by the HRS Florida, that was very excited for that.

[1:32:44] And we talked about, there's so many projects that we have in the city,

[1:32:48] ones that we're directly involved in, think about SD engineering and others,

[1:32:52] where half the battle is having that kind of business here,

[1:32:55] and the other half is making sure that there's the workforce there for us to realize that benefit.

[1:33:00] And so yeah, very excited, honored to do that.

[1:33:03] And I've already been in conversation with Dr. McBride,

[1:33:06] and I know we'll be reaching out to a lot of the folks in our community

[1:33:09] that are in the workforce business to see make sure that we're at the state of

[1:33:14] Florida that we're advocating for the greatest policies and opportunities for us

[1:33:19] to build a workforce here. So yeah, thank you for that.

[1:33:22] Congratulations, and we got your present before you hit.

[1:33:24] I'm sorry. Just as you remind your all council members were currently in open

[1:33:29] enrollment for your benefits package, even if you're not getting insurance, you need

[1:33:35] We need to go on to Neil Gug because you have life insurance, you have to name a beneficiary

[1:33:41] for that.

[1:33:42] So if you have any issues with it, contact me or Angela Chanel with a city and she can help walk you through it.

[1:33:50] All right.

[1:33:50] And it's due about October 31st.

[1:33:53] October 31st.

[1:33:54] October 31st is a deadline.

[1:33:56] Okay.

[1:33:56] All right.

[1:33:57] Thank you.

[1:33:58] We adjourned.

[1:33:58] Thanks.

[1:34:00] We don't find any of them.

Agenda Conference on 2023-10-23 3:30 PM

Agenda

Transcript