[4:48] Yeah,

[5:01] Okay.

[5:24] » Thank you for helping other

[5:42] They think it'll

[6:31] I don't think

[8:09] Right

[8:23] on.

[8:37] All

[8:48] right, we will call the first meeting to order. This is a special meeting of the

[8:53] Flagler Beach City Commission. Today is Thursday, September 10th. Time is 5:30

[8:58] p.m. Mayor, if you could lead us in a pledge of allegiance, and we'll follow

[9:01] that by a moment of silence to honor our veterans, members of the armed forces,

[9:04] and first responders. To the flag of the United States of

[9:10] America to the stands, one nation under God, indivisible

[9:18] and justice for all.

[9:32] » Thank you.

[9:36] All right. Well, everybody's getting seated. If you can take a moment to look

[9:39] at your cell phone, make sure it's on silent, vibrated, or turned off, please.

[9:43] And this is just as we talked about earlier, it's a special meeting. This is

[9:47] our budgeting meeting. City manager, I'll turn it over to you. Thank you, Mr.

[9:52] Chairman. Um, what you have before you is the revised budget based upon the

[9:56] input that you provided during the three budget workshops and any secondary

[10:02] comments that were shared with me. Um, thanks again to Miss Rhonda Allen for

[10:07] putting this together. You will find on the first or two of the first three

[10:11] pages um the changes that were incorporated into the budget from what

[10:17] was originally proposed to you uh back in July. So, um I'll go through the

[10:22] presentation again primarily for the benefit of the public um that had not

[10:26] participated in the meetings before. So, I'll move forward with this.

[10:31] These are going to be awfully hard to read. Um this is a proposed budget. It

[10:35] uh yeah I can't even read that. Um basically the budget is based upon the

[10:43] same millage rate that we levied for the past 2 years 5.45 mills um in accordance

[10:49] with Florida state statute. That is actually a tax cut because it is below

[10:54] the proposed uh roll back rate.

[11:00] Fine Benny. Um so this explains the different um levels of millage rate that

[11:06] should you want to revise it and you did um in July set the tenative mill rate at

[11:11] the 5.45 ms um as Mr. Smith explained it's legally possible to go higher than

[11:18] that. It's it involves a lot of legal machinations. So um there is no intent

[11:23] or no recommendation from city staff to go higher than what you previously set

[11:28] as a tenative military. Um but you could go uh substantially higher um depending

[11:34] on how many commissioners supported that.

[11:37] So this is the the chart that shows what your taxes and my taxes the impact of

[11:44] the proposed tax rate is. Um it ranges anywhere from uh low double digits to

[11:50] mid triple digits increase mid 100. Um, but that is the impact. The median tax

[11:59] payment for the city of Flagler Beach taxes, not somebody's entire tax bill is

[12:04] approximately $14 to $1,500 um for their total tax bill for the city

[12:09] of Flagler Beach only. you'd have to add on, you know, you may pay six or $8,000,

[12:15] but that also includes school taxes, county taxes, and then the other

[12:20] agencies such as find and uh East Flagger Mosquito Control. But the median

[12:26] tax bill for the city of Bridle Beach is approximately $1,500.

[12:32] So, a lot there's a lot of interest, and I believe Mr. or the property appraiser

[12:36] addressed some of this that people's assessments are going down or their

[12:40] assessed value is going down, their market value is going down, but their

[12:44] property taxes are still going up. And what he referred to is that's called a

[12:48] recapture. So residents that have a homestead exemption, their assessed

[12:56] value can only go up by 3% or the rate of inflation, which is ever less. So

[13:00] that leads to that gap between the black line and the red line. Well, now as the

[13:07] market values start to go down, you're still the assessed value or taxable

[13:13] value is still increasing and it will continue increasing until those lines

[13:18] intersect, which hopefully they don't intersect, but the black line returns to

[13:24] going back up. So that is a simple explanation of why people's market value

[13:30] is going down but their taxable value is going up.

[13:36] This describes the sheet describes the revised um revenues for the city's

[13:41] general fund. Um again incorporating some some changes to uh state share

[13:48] revenue and other things like that that Miss UN has documented in your packet.

[13:55] Uh these are the expenditures by department again revised as indicated in

[13:59] the packet by Miss Allen. The various departments

[14:05] uh utility rates these are and this is going to be subject to discussion. These

[14:11] rates incorporate the rate study which we are going to give you a copy of the

[14:15] rate study um to see they've already received it.

[14:19] Okay, you have a copy of it. This will be on the September 24th agenda. So

[14:24] these rates are the ones that are incorporated or recommended by the rate

[14:28] study and the difference was we recommended originally in budget that

[14:32] the water and sewer base rates would go up by 20%.

[14:37] The rate study indicates that water base rate and

[14:42] commodity rate the usage rate should go up by 3.5%. But the wastewater usage

[14:48] rate should go up by 25%. So you have a copy of the rate study over the next two

[14:53] weeks. Please review it. If you have any questions, please let me know. And

[14:56] that'll be part of the fee structure for the next city commission meeting.

[15:04] And let me go back to this. What this encompasses

[15:08] the rates for both the water for water usage and sewer uses is based upon a

[15:13] typical 2 to three family household, which is approximately 4,500 gallons. So

[15:19] that's where it says the usage 4.5,000 gallons. So if you use less than that,

[15:26] your rates will be less. If you use more, it will be more. But according to

[15:29] Mr. Old and utility billing, that is what a a typical 2 to three person

[15:34] household pays for water and sewer. Um these are the revised proposed rates.

[15:44] Uh now we get into the special and enterprise funds which is the general

[15:49] fund impact fee uh the CRA uh

[15:54] the uh building department and other special funds uh going forward.

[16:02] Um again the special enterprise funds water wastewater sanitation impact fees

[16:08] utility administration. So, the budget looks like it goes from $87 million down

[16:14] to approximately $45 million. And again, as indicated in a memo previously

[16:19] distributed, that is due to the accounting change, due to recognizing

[16:23] things not as revenue, but they go to the balance sheet as our asset. So,

[16:28] that's primarily due to an accounting change.

[16:33] Um, these are the capital improvements. There are some changes. We did take out

[16:37] the uh facility vehicle. We increased the park improvements and these are all

[16:43] based upon the recommendations that you had during the budget workshop. Um park

[16:48] improvements. Um there's no changes I think on that sheet.

[16:54] Um then some other changes. We took out the building uh code inspection for the

[16:59] facility maintenance. Um that was taken out. Um so there are some minor changes

[17:04] again documented by Miss Allen in the sheet that was provided to you. Um these

[17:08] are the capital projects. Some changes were here. Um we increased the amount

[17:13] for the uh bypass pumps reduce the amount for the generators. Um those are

[17:18] the probably the two key changes to that.

[17:23] Um again additional enterprise fund capital projects. Uh we did take out the

[17:28] yard spotter that's been purchased. Um some of the other items that are zeroed

[17:32] out near the bottom of that page were transferred to professional services in

[17:36] the utility department taken away from capital.

[17:40] Uh this is the um yeah the enterprise

[17:49] fund capital projects um for the utility department water wastewater maintenance

[17:56] closing out the total enterprise fund uh capital improvements.

[18:01] This is the organizational chart. You're going to be asked to the city ordinance.

[18:05] The city has never done this before. Um, but in the city code it says that the

[18:10] organizational chart has to be adopted by ordinance. Um, so you are going to be

[18:15] presented with this at first reading tonight. Again, it's never been done by

[18:18] the city before, but it's in the code. So, you are going to be presented with

[18:22] the uh first reading of the city's organizational chart tonight. Second

[18:26] reading will be scheduled for September 24th.

[18:29] Uh, these are some of the staffing changes. Again, no changes that were

[18:33] presented earlier um to you. And this is the budget calendar. And we

[18:40] are now at the first public hearing, which is the third bullet down,

[18:45] September 10th. And we will have the second public hearing on September 24th

[18:50] with the new fiscal year scheduled to begin on October 1st.

[18:54] So pending, any questions? That concludes the presentation of the

[18:59] proposed budget. All right. Any questions for city manager while Riley's

[19:03] up?

[19:07] » Okay, let's >> Commissioner Cunningham on the five-year

[19:12] plan. And I know I brought it up during the workshop meetings,

[19:16] budget workshop meetings, the almost $10 million you have on

[19:22] Robert's Road and John Anderson for the reuse line

[19:29] that's going to be spent in this year's budget

[19:32] » only if we get the grants that we're applying for. That that's my that's

[19:36] where I was going with that because if you start that you may not even be

[19:41] considered to have a to get a grant. >> Correct. Absolutely.

[19:45] » So you're leaving that in there? >> Correct.

[19:49] But we're not going to spend the money until unless we get the grant. But it's

[19:54] in there to demonstrate to D that we are prepared to go forward with the project

[19:58] if we get the grant. >> Okay.

[20:01] Cuz no water will be in it for four years.

[20:04] » Correct. It will not be there will be no expenditures on it unless we get the

[20:07] grant. >> Okay.

[20:10] » Any other questions for city manager before we do general discussion?

[20:16] » All right. Thank you. No questions for you. Uh discussion.

[20:21] » Do you want to move into your resolutions?

[20:23] » Yeah. Once we get done our >> Okay. You want to do discussion first?

[20:28] » No discussion. Well, you enter it. Well, we'll move on

[20:32] to resolution 2026-68. Drew,

[20:35] » resolution 20226-68, a resolution of the city of Flagler Beach, Florida, levying

[20:40] the abalone property tax middle for municipal purposes on all taxable

[20:43] property within the city for the fiscal year being October 1, 2026 and ending

[20:47] September 30th, 2027 stating the knowledge to be levied as 5.4500

[20:53] in Flatler County and 5.4500 is the rate to be levied for Valuchia

[20:57] County and providing for an effective date. All right. Questions or discussion

[21:01] about the mill rate?

[21:06] » Look for a motion. >> Motion to motion to approve um

[21:11] resolution 2026-68. >> I'll second the motion.

[21:15] » All right. We have a motion, a second. I'll open this up to public comment. Any

[21:18] members of the public wish to speak on this agenda item?

[21:25] Right. See none, I'll close public comment. Um, further discussion on mill

[21:28] rate. Okay. And if you call the roll, please.

[21:33] » Commissioner Santo, >> yes to the motion.

[21:36] » Commissioner Sprdley, >> yes to the motion.

[21:38] » Commissioner Sherman, >> yes.

[21:39] » Commissioner Cunningham, >> yes.

[21:42] » Chair Kulie, >> yes. The motion. Motion passes

[21:44] unanimous. Resolution 2026-69. Drew.

[21:48] » Resolution 2026-69. A resolution by the city commission of

[21:52] the city of Flagler Beach, Florida, adopting budgets for the general fund,

[21:55] utility fund, sanitation fund, storm water fund, CRA fund, peer enterprise

[21:59] fund, and building code inspection fund for the fiscal year 2026 27th, fixing

[22:04] appropriations therein, proposing expenditures there, and determining the

[22:08] amount of money to be raised by taxation, and providing an effective

[22:10] date hereof. >> Discussion on enterprise funds. Mr.

[22:16] Cunningham. Yeah, I noticed they're

[22:22] recommending

[22:25] approve it on first reading. There has to be a second reading anyway, right?

[22:29] » Yes. >> So, we can do the final cuz honestly, I

[22:35] just seen this thing Friday when the in the budget packet, unless y'all have

[22:40] seen it before that, the final budget from after the workshops.

[22:46] And personally I need more time to go through it more and another the next

[22:51] meeting would be enough time. >> Yeah. Okay.

[22:55] » Yes, you can make changes between the first and second

[22:57] » and we have done that. All right. Any other discussion on

[23:03] enterprise funds?

[23:07] » Look for a motion. >> Motion to approve resolution 2026-69.

[23:13] » I'll second the motion. All right. We have a motion, a second. can open this

[23:16] up to public comment. Any members of the public wish to speak on this agenda

[23:19] item?

[23:23] I see none. I'll close public comment. Um any further discussion on

[23:29] participants? Just so I'm clear,

[23:34] if we do say yes to all this, they're recommending

[23:41] it can still be a no at the next meeting. Right.

[23:44] » Correct. as well with it. Okay. >> And and also just to be clear, it's the

[23:49] enterprise party that is for your budget that this resolution is your entire

[23:52] budget, not just your enterprise fund. Your enterprise funds are part of that

[23:54] budget, >> right?

[23:56] » Yeah. So there all those uh questions and of course if if you have any of

[24:01] those um you know obviously it'd be good to try to work that through the city

[24:06] manager a little bit ahead of time so we don't get too far off track in the in

[24:12] the next meeting. But absolutely, we've had uh many meetings where stuff has

[24:16] come up on second reading and you know, we've had to crunch some stuff and and

[24:21] adjust things. So, it's part for the course. It's no big deal.

[24:27] So, if you were to if you were to vote, you know, hypothetically yes this time

[24:33] and then you get answers to your questions you don't like, you very well

[24:37] could vote no on the next one. >> Yeah, I did last year. Right.

[24:46] Any further discussion on this? Any for a roll call, please?

[24:52] » Commissioner Sprdley, >> yes to the motion.

[24:54] » Commissioner Sherman, >> yes.

[24:55] » Commissioner Cunningham, >> yes.

[24:58] » Commissioner Santo, >> yes to the motion.

[25:00] » Chair Kulie, >> yes to the motion. Motion Motion passes

[25:03] unanimous. Um, and what we're going to do, just so everybody knows what we're

[25:08] going, we're concluding this meeting, but then we're going to jump into our

[25:11] general business meeting. So, when we adjourn, we're not actually adjourning

[25:15] adjourning. Just don't want anybody to think that they got left out or

[25:18] anything. So, I'll look for a motion to adjurnn.

[25:19] » Make a motion we adjourn. >> All right, we are adjourned.

[25:23] Does anybody need any time? Jump right in.

[25:26] » Yeah. All right, let's get group switched.

[25:32] Any

[25:43] good?

[25:47] All right, we'll call the regular meeting to order. This is a regular

[25:51] meeting of this the city of Flaggler Beach Commission. Today is Thursday,

[25:55] September 10th. The time is 5:47 and we'll start this with a pledge of

[26:02] allegiance followed by a moment of silence on our veterans, members of the

[26:04] armed forces and first responders. Mayor, if you could lead us

[26:10] to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it

[26:15] stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice

[26:21] for all.

[26:37] Thank you.

[26:43] » All right, mayor. Do we have any proclamations or awards?

[26:49] » I issued a proclamation. Uh, stand by one second. Uh, I'm a little behind

[26:55] here. Uh,

[27:01] think I'd be more organized than this, wouldn't you?

[27:05] The proclamation was given on behalf of the city uh for National E-Waste Day and

[27:12] that was issued um for October 14th. We also issued a proclamation recognizing

[27:19] the historical museum in its 25th year and that is in September of this year.

[27:25] So those have been issued and that's it for tonight.

[27:29] » All right. Thank you. And deletions or changes to the agenda.

[27:34] City manager. >> Uh please uh the city clerk has provided

[27:37] you with the revised agenda. uh removing item 7D which was the resident's concern

[27:42] about drainage by an adjoining contractor that has been amicably

[27:46] resolved. So please remove item 7D from your agenda. All right.

[27:52] Anything Penny and everybody has the amended agenda.

[27:58] All right. All right. We'll open this up to public

[28:02] comment. Citizens are to speak. Comment should be limited three minutes. Please

[28:06] address the chair and uh please do not you know offer your time to anybody

[28:12] else. We need all speakers to keep their time within three minutes and please

[28:16] start with your name and address for the record.

[28:22] » Can you turn the mic on

[28:27] » otherwise known as Mark Gwolf in Flag Beach, Florida?

[28:32] Um, so just so everybody knows, uh, thank you, Penny. I requested, uh, based

[28:38] on LA my comments last time, I requested public records on how much money, um,

[28:44] I'm super cheapkate, especially as a taxpayer. How much money are we spending

[28:48] on legal fees from Mr. Martin? And what not just Mr. Robo, the city? I'm just

[28:54] curious how much legal fees get spent here. So, I haven't had time to go

[28:57] through them, but I appreciate Penny um forwarding that to me. And um I'm also

[29:02] curious about um let me start over here. They agreed there was neither possible

[29:07] nor necessary to educate people who never questioned anything. It's from one

[29:11] of my favorite books, Joe Joseph Heler, Catch 22. Um you all should know that my

[29:17] job as a citizen is to request transparency because I am a cheapkate.

[29:23] uh ensure the money is spent without waste. Uh ensure workers are who they

[29:28] say they are. And I want to question everything. So I apologize if sometimes

[29:33] I come in here as kind of the angry guy, but I don't like public speaking. Uh

[29:37] like most people are not comfortable public speaking, but it is my job to

[29:41] question what you guys do. And um I appreciate you putting up with me. But

[29:46] um you're not familiar with Catch 22. It's a book about a soldier who wants to

[29:51] quit because a thousand people he he doesn't know want to kill him. But he

[29:55] can't quit because a thousand people he doesn't know want to kill him. That's

[29:59] catch 22. And from my observations being here for a couple years already, I

[30:04] noticed that in my opinion, we have quite a bit of catch 22 in Flagler

[30:09] Beach. Uh people seem to get hired because of their expertise and their

[30:14] experience. only to be fired for their expertise and

[30:18] experience by those who don't have their experience or expertise and then we get

[30:24] sued. Um, so I just want to make it public record to everybody, whoever's

[30:29] out there caring and questioning that um, we will be going through this these

[30:34] public public records and we will be requesting resumes and application forms

[30:40] of everybody that's applied to the city and I'm going to make sure that we call

[30:44] the references for those applications and those resumes. Um, I don't want

[30:48] people in here telling us who they are when they aren't who they are. Um

[30:54] I also am a huge fan of sports and body sold individual comfort to a group

[31:00] effort. That's what makes teamwork, the company work, the society work and a

[31:06] community work. He also said, "Show me a big loser and I'll show you a loser."

[31:11] Supposed to laugh, but that's okay. Um I also love the belts. Uh John John Cooper

[31:18] is an amazing coach and we don't seem to have in government managers or

[31:23] leadership style like the winning thing. Um and I'm not I I totally respect what

[31:29] you guys do, Mr. Martin. Um I respect what you do. There's no way I could do

[31:33] it for one hour of one day. But it doesn't seem like we're using the skills

[31:38] of the players we have to make a winning team. You know, we have great players

[31:42] that are honest problem solvers and are worth their paychecks. So, I just wanted

[31:46] to publicly say that and thank you uh for being here and God bless you Flagler

[31:53] Beach. Thank you. >> Thank you. Anyone else for public

[31:57] comment?

[32:01] » Hi, Commission. Melissa Lyn, Flaggler Beach. I just wanted to touch on a few

[32:04] things as Mark pointed out some of the expenses going on recently. Um I started

[32:08] to pay attention to the issues going on with employees most recently.

[32:12] » Can you just pull mic in a little bit? >> Oh, I'm sorry. Thank you.

[32:14] » Is that better? Yes. >> Okay. Um, I've just noticed a lot of the

[32:18] concerns with employees and what's been going on. I attended the 17hour hearing

[32:22] with the uh former fire chief along with reviewing another 7-hour video from

[32:27] another whistleblower case. So, I think the general public should know what's

[32:30] going on here in Flagler Beach. In November of 2025, there was a lawsuit

[32:34] filed um involving the former utility billing department employee for

[32:39] allegations of harassment, bullying, hostile work environment, and other

[32:42] workplace issues. That matter was actually recently settled for $60,000

[32:45] plus obvious attorney costs and what have you. Um, move forward to March of

[32:49] 2026. The whistleblower matter came forward with a former facilities

[32:53] director because procedural issues came up as a problem that were not resolved.

[32:57] What I found interesting is during that sworn testimony and again you all can go

[33:00] back and review this is your city engineer testified to the substance and

[33:05] indicated that the facilities director had been directed not to take certain

[33:10] information or concerns to the commissioners that he nevertheless

[33:13] emailed them and that was the failure to follow a direction which identified as

[33:17] one of the reasons for his termination. Concerns were also raised during that

[33:20] hearing about the city manager and the HR handling of matters which seems to be

[33:24] common lately. This raises a serious question. Why would an employee be

[33:28] directed by another employee not to bring concerns to an elected official? I

[33:33] mean, they shouldn't have anything. They can't come forward, I would think. Um,

[33:36] again, on August 26th, back to the former fire chief Cox, that was a

[33:39] 17-hour personnel board hearing. Again, concerns regarding how the city manager

[33:43] handled it, HR handling of the procedures along with all of the costs

[33:47] we had with this case. So, now moving forward, there's another ad here tonight

[33:51] that's on the agenda. more legal costs for another employee issue because

[33:55] employees try to speak up and they're not heard. So, in my opinion, there's

[33:59] appears to be a quiet elimination of employees. Employees we saw working for

[34:02] the city for years are suddenly no longer here one by one and the public

[34:07] often has no idea what happened or why. Where did these people go? For example,

[34:11] you had a water um mechanic that did installation of water service. One day

[34:18] he's not here anymore after eight years. Where'd he go? He'll leave for another

[34:21] job. You guys might want to reach out to him and see why he's not here anymore.

[34:25] Employees should never have to choose between remaining silent and protecting

[34:28] their employment. Taxpayers deserve to know how much the city has spent on

[34:32] outside attorneys dealing with employee matters. These are not isolated

[34:36] situations. They involve different employees, different departments, and

[34:38] repeated concerns about how employee matters are handled. All of this has

[34:42] occurred under the direction of uh Dale Martin. So my question to you,

[34:46] Commissioner, at what point do we start holding the city manager accountable for

[34:49] what's occurring under his administration? For one, I highly

[34:52] recommend that you go back and if you did not attend these hearings uh that

[34:56] went 17 hours and seven hours, go back and see procedurally what was wrong

[35:01] because I strongly suggest that the city manager should be held accountable for

[35:04] what he's done wrong. If you can hold your employees accountable, he should be

[35:08] one of them. Thank you. >> All right. Thank you. Anyone else for

[35:13] public comment?

[35:20] » 255 Ocean Palm Drive. Um, I literally showed up 3 hours ago and I'm so glad to

[35:26] be here. Um, one of the things I didn't I didn't plan on speaking about today,

[35:30] but I I got a question for you. We sold the golf course. I should say we you

[35:35] guys sold the golf course. Um, and we were told publicly that they needed the

[35:42] seal to happen right away because they didn't want to miss growing season. I I

[35:47] showed up to my house today. Again, not planning on talking about this. The

[35:50] place is a disaster. What the hell is going on? I realize it's privately owned

[35:55] now, but you guys should have some input and direction of what's happening. I

[36:00] mean, this is this is astounding. Anyway, so what I wanted to say, what I

[36:04] really came to say, uh, kind of piggyback on what other people were

[36:08] saying, you know, we seem to have a big employee, uh, problem here. And I

[36:14] remember last last uh, winter, someone asked Mr. Martin directly what his

[36:21] employee uh, um, uh, you know, what his policy was for

[36:28] employee complaints. And in his forum he said he had an open door door policy

[36:33] where people could come in and complain. Okay. Or just speak their voice. So my

[36:39] question is you know what are the the five most recent complaints he's got?

[36:44] Not not using names but it's incident. I like to know how those those complaints

[36:48] were resolved because I'm really wondering if things are actually

[36:53] happening the way he is like he said they are or if uh things are are counter

[36:57] to uh what he says. Anyways, I'm glad to be here. Thank you.

[37:02] » Thank you

[37:09] ladies and gentlemen. A lot of you know me from back in early 2000 when I used

[37:15] to operate the boat shop on the field and all of us helped manage the pier. I

[37:21] would like the opportunity to consider doing that again. Uh they cher

[37:29] information booth for a lot of people come to fra

[37:33] and also a person being there that's able to respond to a medical emergency

[37:38] out of here. I used to go under the fire department and then also on top of that

[37:43] one will have issues around the poor. I would look at some of the rules that I

[37:48] heard that was put on the local radio station uh overhead captain. If you had

[37:54] nobody out there, nobody's going to be supervising this. On top of that, you're

[37:59] going to have trash. You're going to have bathrooms.

[38:02] There were times that I had to clean the bathroom three times on Monday.

[38:07] open the pool for free without some kind of security inform

[38:16] you have passed on uh because we have issues on the field and I don't mind

[38:22] stepping forward to help get this city commission the opportunity to get it

[38:27] back where it should be where the city can no money I believe that you have to

[38:32] have a vote shot for the city to have to go to for information and service to

[38:39] people. Plus, down the road, we can consider talking about considering

[38:44] putting food back on it here because there's going to be a lot of expenses.

[38:48] You probably remember you got liability in church, you got the state, right?

[38:54] You got all the maintenance for taking the off every day or in the bathroom.

[38:59] You know what's going to happen there? A lot of times people back then didn't

[39:04] have their telephone. So what would be the first time they do? They come to me

[39:08] security. So I would like to put that opportunity

[39:13] out there. If you all would like to sit down oneonone and talk with me, I'm

[39:17] welcome to do that. I'm going to walk around and give you all your courage. If

[39:21] I have any questions, feel free to call me. Thank you.

[39:25] » Thank you.

[39:30] Right. Anyone else for public comment?

[39:35] » Hello everyone. My name is Sharon Andre. I live at 1744 South Flaggler Avenue.

[39:42] First, I want to say I appreciate all the hard work you do. I appreciate it. I

[39:49] wouldn't be here if I didn't have a concern. We came home from a trip and

[39:53] saw that there were survey markers in our backyard. Uh my husband and I went

[39:58] to the building department, talked to Tim. He was very helpful employee. He

[40:05] gave us Bill Freeman's card. We emailed him. He got back to us right away. Told

[40:11] us that they were considering swailes. Now, we knew they weren't putting

[40:16] swelles in the backyard. So, I asked him about that. He said, "Oh, they're

[40:21] considering finishing 18th Street or the Oak Place into 18th Street." And right

[40:28] now that's Woods. So, um, we did talk to Bill. We had him

[40:34] come by the house and he sees that it's woodlands and it's wetlands. and I abut

[40:43] 18th and I have a neighbors that are but place and we're all very concerned that

[40:51] we don't want the woods removed. I know right now it's just a consideration but

[40:57] before it gets into planning, we want to let you know you're welcome. Come by.

[41:03] It's that right now it's woods. There's wildlife that live in there. There's go

[41:09] for turtles because I know some of you are concerned about turtles.

[41:14] Um, if you'd like to come by, Penny has my information. You want to stop by, let

[41:19] us know, you want to look at it. But it's not something that should be

[41:26] continued. Um, I know it was told to us that there

[41:32] was concern with emergency vehicles and mail. Right now, the garbage trucks come

[41:38] down that road three times a week and Amazon delivers on that road. So, they

[41:45] don't have a problem with it. I don't see why anyone that lives on the road

[41:50] now wouldn't want to keep it the way it is. And they do. And

[41:57] they're supposed to have contacted you. I did email you, Commissioners Bradley,

[42:04] and That's about it. Any questions?

[42:12] » We any uh any comments that we'll be addressing at the end of the public

[42:15] comment period.

[42:19] » Right. Thank you. Anyone else for public comment?

[42:28] That's Batali. 246 Ocean Palm Drive. Uh actually it's a couple comments and this

[42:34] is uh I apologize for not being here last time, the last meeting we had

[42:39] because it uh involved what I'm going to talk about. But at 246 Ocean Palm Drive

[42:44] is actually the location of lift station number one and I know that was part of

[42:49] the agenda last time. Uh it got pulled back in so that I guess Bill Freeman is

[42:54] is going to be working on it. Um I did just so that you know I've been in touch

[42:59] with John. I've talked to Dale. I've been in touch with Bill. Uh so it is a

[43:03] moving target with what's happening now. My biggest concern was the fact that

[43:08] McKim and Creed uh in my view anyway had some errors in some of the uh results

[43:15] that they came out with. They had indicated a house four or five doors

[43:19] down from me uh did not flood. And we have pictures. It's actually the worst

[43:26] house on the on the street uh where they had about 18 inches of water in the

[43:30] house. They also indicated that my location at 246

[43:36] um has potential for flooding. Yet, I wasn't even required to get flood

[43:41] insurance because our elevation is about 7.1 right there, which is higher than

[43:46] the surrounding area. The house has not flooded this lift station. If you go

[43:51] back to uh Nicole back in 22 and even back into Irma in 18 or 17,

[43:57] uh the station did not flood. The lift station did not flood. So there's

[44:01] discussion of lifting the panel a little bit more. Right now, according just

[44:06] looking at the pictures that I had with the flooding uh from Nicole,

[44:11] there's about 18 in from where the water was to the bottom of the panel. lifting

[44:16] that in my mind uh is something that really doesn't need to be done. There's

[44:21] a slab there where you have access into the lift station itself was not

[44:25] underwater. Um so I just have these concerns that I'm putting out there and

[44:30] just letting everybody know. But again, I am meeting with John. I'm going to be

[44:33] meeting with Bill uh and carrying this forward. But my concern there was

[44:37] actually working with a report that may not be accurate. So also I I wanted to

[44:43] at least hope that um the resident themsself gets a little consideration.

[44:50] There are a lot of places um when lift stations are put in, they put a lot of

[44:54] effort into making it fit into the environment so it's not obnoxious. The

[45:01] thing that makes me very nervous is what happened on 25th Street and South

[45:05] Flagger. Um I would hope that we're not looking at anything like that. And I

[45:10] think everybody knows that that doesn't look very appealing. Uh anyway,

[45:15] that's my point. I just wanted to get that across and that's my concern. So,

[45:19] thank you. >> Thank you.

[45:23] » Anyone else for public comment

[45:31] McNab, 1801 South Daytona Avenue. Um, I had a couple of questions on the uh

[45:39] drainage that's being put down on most of the alleyways. Uh, 18th has been

[45:45] skipped. Is that planned to be done?

[45:50] Anybody know? Uh, through the years, um, my daughter's dad and I built the house

[45:56] in 74. Ever since then, the water coming down 18th Street comes to my sliding

[46:02] glass door. Um, and I have changed tile instead of carpet by sliding glass door

[46:10] through the years. I have talked to city through the years and said, "I've got a

[46:19] problem." Well, one time they said, "Okay, we'll just put sandbags down

[46:24] there because I called like for a hurricane." So, they put sandbags all

[46:29] along my 100 ft. Then neighbors came and picked them up.

[46:35] Uh, and then I did have someone come down and look at it. And he says, "I

[46:40] don't see the problem." And I said, "Well, you'd make a bad Indian scout cuz

[46:47] you see the sand that comes off the alleyway all the way through my dolly up

[46:52] on the hill." Another time I paid $50 for a building permit. So I could have

[47:01] the bulldozer down the street making a pool come up and divert

[47:07] property where the water comes off the road to go back on the road swinging

[47:13] around a whole bunch of trees that I have. So I've tried. So I'm just curious

[47:19] to know are they? And then I finally I had to work to put some asphalt back

[47:24] because the the original road was a sand road when I built

[47:29] uh Cina Road. And so then the first engineer that paved in his good

[47:38] insight put a bump all the way across like an apron

[47:43] extended past the alleyway. So when the water comes down 18th,

[47:49] it actually goes down 18th and not on my property or anybody else's property. My

[47:55] neighbor to the south has water when it's really really heavy and hurricane

[48:02] that actually goes through his room. So just curious to know if 18's going to

[48:08] be done too. And if not, can we just have a bump? So, that's all I have to

[48:14] say about that. Um, and then I got a couple of questions, then I'll get down

[48:19] on the pier. And I'm sorry I haven't talked to anyone else. I haven't seen

[48:24] the plan. How are people in a wheelchair going to get up on the pier and out?

[48:29] It's like a ramp. That was what I had. Right. Thank you.

[48:37] Anyone else for public comment?

[48:47] Okay. 351 Palm Circle. Uh Patty, this was your fault. Um so you judge uh your

[48:54] uh proclamation for e-waste day made me think of this. Um with the county uh

[48:58] closing the hazardous waste facility and e-waste drop off on Old Kings and now

[49:05] directing us to WastPro for money. Um it's not free anymore. Um, does the city

[49:11] have any plans for hazardous waste drop off or e-waste drop off? I think that's

[49:15] an important thing that um, people will try to stick it in the trash if they

[49:20] don't have a place to take it for free. So, obviously don't want a huge expense

[49:24] for the city, but also um, worried about what that impact would be. So, um,

[49:28] whether it's a regular thing or a once a year thing or whatever, uh, I was

[49:31] wondering if you all were considering anything to replace the the service we

[49:35] lost from the county. Thanks. >> Right. Thank you. Anyone else for public

[49:41] comment?

[49:47] My name is Richard Rick McFadden, previous building official, City Flagger

[49:52] Beach. Uh I think most of the commission knows me. I got a phone call that there

[50:01] seems to be playing the name game. Uh there was a fire hydrant over here at

[50:06] the hotel put in too low and the I believe the commission was told

[50:12] that I was responsible for the final inspection.

[50:16] The building department put in Florida statute. We take care of Florida

[50:21] building code. Nowhere in that code does it address fire hydrants.

[50:27] That's done by utilities and a city engineer.

[50:31] Thank you.

[50:45] Mike Archer, Flaggler Beach. Um, I could echo a lot of the comments tonight, but

[50:51] um, mainly I wanted to talk about the swale project, which I'm not sure a lot

[50:57] of people know about, and also the Oak Place proposed improvements, which I'm

[51:04] also sure a lot of people don't know about. Um so without repeating what

[51:10] other people have already said uh the soil project is

[51:16] being just handled a little too

[51:22] universally. There's no reason to have all of the

[51:26] swailes put in that could be put in. Uh if you go out and you observe the actual

[51:33] rainfall, the water on the streets, the water going down the side of the street,

[51:38] a lot of the swailes that were put in five, six years ago work great. They

[51:44] would work better if the city maintained the edge where the sod that they that

[51:48] the contractor put in is now built up to be 3 4 in high. So water goes down the

[51:55] road, can't get into the swale, especially on the downhills like 17th,

[51:59] 18th, 19th. Um, there really aren't many swailes on 19th or 18th, even 17th, uh,

[52:08] west of Daytona. Um, so on the downhill slope, you could

[52:13] add some, I guess, but along Flaggler, you're not going to be able to put any

[52:18] soils in because the water table's too high. So catching it before it gets

[52:22] there, that makes sense. But how you do it and then it's got to be maintained.

[52:27] Right now you're proposing I understand to put in soils extensively

[52:34] where there are no curbs and gutters which is basically from I think about

[52:37] south 6 to about north six. In other words, there's the downtown area that

[52:42] has a storm system. The rest of the the island doesn't. Um, so before you go off

[52:50] putting swailes everywhere and disrupting people's property or the

[52:55] rightway, which a lot of people use as their property for parking, access to

[53:00] their property, and such, go out and look and really study it. I know in the

[53:05] three blocks around me in the past 7 and 1/2 years, I've seen enough rain and

[53:11] enough swelles to know what's going on. For instance, had the U Miami curbs been

[53:18] installed on 17th, there are in six places, there was only one place that

[53:23] was really necessary. And then there's one the same place on the same alley on

[53:28] 16th and yes and then one on 15th, but 16th and 15th not being done. Just 17,

[53:36] 18, 19, 20, 21. So, I mean, it it I understand putting out

[53:42] contracts. I understand that, you know, you want to keep it generic, but that's

[53:48] a waste of a lot of money and resources. Thank you. Thank you.

[53:56] Anyone else for public comment?

[54:05] » Good evening, John Anderson. I'm sorry, Melanie Thompson, John Anderson Highway.

[54:09] Um,

[54:13] Dale, I noticed that they worked on the Veranda Bay breaches that I've been

[54:16] trying to get fixed for the last eight, nine years, months. Sorry, I'm I'm

[54:22] nervous. Um, I like their attempt. Put some sod in

[54:26] the rideway. Uh, they're few one, two, three/ longleaf pines stuck in the

[54:33] middle there. That was a nice effort. Again, it's going to take years and

[54:37] years for it to be completely filled up the way it should be to look like the

[54:41] rest of the buffer. I suggest they can go in and dig up some

[54:46] natural vegetation and bring it forward to make it happen a

[54:51] lot faster. Um, I noticed that there's stakes on the west side of John Anderson

[54:58] on the Summertown side. I called the county wondering what that was all

[55:03] about. came back to me and said that that was part of the original site plan

[55:07] to extend the sidewalk. And my question is that I had emailed

[55:13] you and Adam Mangle about that saying that originally the site plan was for

[55:17] two sides of Randa Bay changing to two different developments and why to extend

[55:24] a sidewalk to nowhere when there's nothing going on on the west side of

[55:30] John Anderson Highway. Um, I let's see what else. I didn't get

[55:36] a response from you about that. Um, and then I've also talked to Adam Mangle

[55:41] last week uh to make sure that the designated land that Veranda Bay

[55:47] Summertown was going to um sell for um

[55:55] the land for the ESL and he and I wanted to make sure it was

[56:00] still online because it's been almost a year now that Ken Belly signed off that

[56:04] he would sell that and he said that they had been reaching out to him and haven't

[56:09] got any response. So, I'm hoping that doesn't fall through the cracks and he

[56:12] falls back on the deal. So, if somebody can please keep an eye on that

[56:16] and um yeah, that was the the land that they were going to sell for

[56:21] preservation. So, um that's my only concern at the moment. Thank you.

[56:26] » Thank you. Anyone else for public health?

[56:36] Commissioners, Mayor, uh, Mike Pickers, Blackley County, owner of Hammock, Bait,

[56:41] and Tackle. Uh, read in your minutes from last month that you're proposing at

[56:46] this point not to put a tackle shop out on the pier, not to collect, uh,

[56:51] admissions for the pier. I would like if you're

[56:56] welcoming to it to put together a prop a proposal and submit to y'all um how bait

[57:03] and tackle shop can benefit the pier and the city. Thank you.

[57:09] Thank you. Anyone else for public comment?

[57:19] All right. See, now we'll close public comment.

[57:23] And so we Let's work this from the bottom up. Um,

[57:28] we have some questions. Uh, folks looking for some information.

[57:34] Start with Miss Thompson. This is about uh updates on the the conservation land.

[57:40] That's Do we have any updates on where that stands for the county?

[57:45] » I believe as M. uh Thompson indicated um the county is pursuing it. The

[57:50] discussions that we've had um I believe with Mr. Rodriguez and Mr. Mangle that

[57:55] they are continue to pursue it. I've actually raised some issues with Mr.

[57:59] Smith um about the city if the county falls

[58:05] short, is there a way that the city can step in um and work with Mr. Belchi

[58:11] through some financial arrangement? if the county effort falters, could the

[58:15] city be in a position to step in and acquire that land as well? So, there are

[58:19] I know that there are ongoing discussions uh with the county at this

[58:22] point that it is still on their radar. They still are pursuing it.

[58:26] » So, it hasn't stopped or stalled or anything like that.

[58:29] » Correct. It's it's ongoing. Okay. There was concerns about the work being done

[58:34] in Rits away if it meets what the agreement was.

[58:39] I think uh the swailes were were part of a commission direction, but I know that

[58:44] uh Mr. Freeman has worked and reached out to some of the residents in that

[58:49] area and is working to schedule a public meeting uh with the residents, but we'll

[58:53] re-evaluate and bring back with you. Um again, the direction was do the swailes

[58:58] um in conjunction with the Miami curb, actually the swailes first. Um so now

[59:03] there's some concern saying don't do the swailes. So, we'll work on getting

[59:07] appropriate clarification on how to go forward with that.

[59:10] » Okay. Just for everybody up here as we backtrack through the comments, if you

[59:15] all have any thoughts or anything, by all means, please share. Commissioner

[59:18] Sure. >> Yeah, Mr. Martin, I you know, I'm glad

[59:20] you guys are moving forward with these projects, but I'm very discouraged that

[59:24] there wasn't any communication that went out to the neighbors prior. Um, you

[59:28] know, years ago, actually, I spoke to Mr. Archer earlier this week about this

[59:31] and um you know year couple years ago when those were initially installed

[59:37] there was zero communication and you know that was that wasn't a good it

[59:41] wasn't good for the public and there was there was a lot of you know outcry over

[59:44] that and I you know when we give direction to you my assumption would be

[59:48] you know that we we've all stressed home how important communication is to the

[59:52] community and uh I was a bit you know taken back when I got a call Tuesday

[59:56] morning hearing that there weren't any um you know any door placers or maybe

[1:00:01] even just like a a meeting before you know they they started seeing you know

[1:00:06] tail yeah like a tailgate meeting of some sort for the residents just to have

[1:00:09] that level of uh you know I think somebody mentioned earlier tonight about

[1:00:12] transparency and I think that would have just been key so I was a little let down

[1:00:15] in the fact that we didn't have uh a conversation with the residents in that

[1:00:19] area. >> Mr. Finally,

[1:00:22] » um, one issue that Miss Thompson raised was

[1:00:27] had to do with the sidewalks on the west side of John Anderson. Uh,

[1:00:32] » the ones that go to nowhere. >> Yeah.

[1:00:34] » Right. >> Yeah. So, I was just curious if there's

[1:00:36] any comment about that or if we have any any uh independent knowledge of when

[1:00:42] that's going to conclude and where it's going to go. I believe, and correct me

[1:00:45] if I'm wrong, Miss Thompson, you indicated that she doesn't believe the

[1:00:49] sidewalks are necessary as in other words, the sidewalk. I've raised that

[1:00:52] issue with uh Mr. Belchi. Um there have been a lot of vacations, so I remain in

[1:00:58] contact with Mr. Belchi. Um she raised the issue of uh replacing some of the

[1:01:04] breaches, the access roads. Um uh so Mr. Belchi appears made some

[1:01:10] effort. Um, I will reach out to him again and ask him to improve that effort

[1:01:14] as well. But although the sidewalks I believe have been staked out, I'm not

[1:01:18] aware of any imminent effort for them to install those sidewalks.

[1:01:22] » Okay. Thank you. Can you when you and Mr. Belchi connect, cuz I

[1:01:28] know you all been back and forth with, you know, time off and vacations and

[1:01:33] stuff. Can you send a um an email to Miss

[1:01:39] Thompson and copy us or something so we all kind of at least understand where

[1:01:43] those things are? >> Sure.

[1:01:44] » Cuz I don't know anything about the sidewalk and and that's something that I

[1:01:49] would like to know about. >> Okay.

[1:01:52] » Um we'll move up to Mr. Archer's comments that you were talking about

[1:01:56] there, Commissioner Sherman. Um, one of the questions that was brought up

[1:02:01] was, um, why not 15th and 16th South? That

[1:02:06] was one of the questions I got out of that. So, is that going to be another

[1:02:10] phase, the swelles, or you know, there's a lot of questions about the rationale

[1:02:15] that drive those projects. I would have to defer to Mr. Freeman what the plans

[1:02:19] are and where the swailes are going. I know again the original direction was do

[1:02:22] the swailes on the numbered streets um in conjunction with the Miami curb.

[1:02:27] So we'll again working with Mr. Freeman, we'll re-evaluate that entire project

[1:02:31] and bring it back to you before any more effort is extended. Mr. Freeman, did you

[1:02:36] have anything you want to add? So we understand about the 15th and 16th.

[1:02:42] » Okay. So it's not on this project. It it'd have to be another phase that comes

[1:02:46] before us and gets budgeted and all that.

[1:02:51] » I got something. >> Yes, sir.

[1:02:55] five months ago at the April 9th meeting. I was going to save this till

[1:02:58] the end, but it came up and I had to go back and watch the YouTube video again.

[1:03:05] City engineer said, "We have a standard detail for swirls." I wrote it down

[1:03:09] because it was closed caption. I could write it.

[1:03:14] We have a we have a standard detail for swelles.

[1:03:19] we can put the scope of work together and bring that forward to the commission

[1:03:23] for consideration at a later date. That was never done.

[1:03:28] Um that's when Dale said that quote the Miami curb will be slowwalked

[1:03:34] until the Miami curb and swells can be done in conjunction

[1:03:38] and figure out how to move that forward

[1:03:46] and

[1:03:49] I met with Mr. Archer also and I see what his concern is.

[1:03:56] That's not a swell on the side of his house unless it's changed since I saw

[1:04:00] it. That's a ditch. It doesn't follow the uh construction

[1:04:06] detail.

[1:04:15] Someone else said the there was our mini excavators what was what what did the

[1:04:20] work and I think we were told in last meeting we rented a grade which I

[1:04:25] questioned because that's a specialized piece of equipment.

[1:04:29] Where is that at and what's it doing now if it was supposed to be for the

[1:04:32] swailes?

[1:04:37] Come on up city engineer please. I did see the great all maintenance shop

[1:04:43] for a while.

[1:04:47] So, the greatall currently had some mechanical issues and we're working with

[1:04:51] the rental company to address those mechanical issues. As far as other

[1:04:56] questions, you also asked about uh swale. So, it's not complete yet.

[1:05:02] There's a lot more work that needs to be done. They only just scratched the

[1:05:04] surface. What about the

[1:05:11] Well, you said you was going to bring the scope back to the commission.

[1:05:14] » So, we're doing we're doing it in house. >> I don't have bids from anybody. We're

[1:05:20] doing it in house. >> There still needs to be a scope,

[1:05:24] » right? So, we have a standard detail ST-11.

[1:05:29] » I'm fully aware of the standard detail, but that sometimes standard detail

[1:05:35] doesn't always work for every single road, just like Mr. Georgia was saying

[1:05:40] » that's correct. There's some case by case basis where you have to look at the

[1:05:43] situation and figure out whether or not that can work in that location. So, it's

[1:05:49] not going to be universal throughout every every location.

[1:05:53] There's a couple areas where it's either too steep or there's a dune or there's

[1:05:59] something impeding where you can put the whale. So, it's not like it just goes

[1:06:02] everywhere. >> There's mechanical issues with the grade

[1:06:06] hall. We're still paying rent on it. >> They said they would credit us for any

[1:06:11] time that it's down.

[1:06:15] But they're taking a look at it.

[1:06:22] So, by doing it in house, in your mind, you didn't need to bring anything back

[1:06:27] to the commission for consideration like you said on April 9th. Is that right?

[1:06:32] it. Like I said, in my mind, it didn't go out to bid, so there was nothing to

[1:06:35] bring back as far as uh any proposals or bids or anything like that.

[1:06:45] That doesn't jive with what you said in the April 9th

[1:06:50] meeting. You said you were going to bring it back to us

[1:06:53] before the Miami curve has even started. and you made the decision, you said in

[1:06:59] the last meeting to go ahead and do the Miami curbs anyway first. Why do you

[1:07:04] think that you can change what the commission's direction is? And Dale, I

[1:07:09] ask you, is that acceptable to you for him to make a decision like that?

[1:07:14] No, we discussed this at the last meeting that Mr. Freeman accepted

[1:07:19] responsibility for not following commission direction.

[1:07:21] » So, what's the He's being held accountable. comments are in his annual

[1:07:26] evaluation for that.

[1:07:36] Very poor. That's all I got. All right. Any other comments on the

[1:07:42] swale project that's going on? Next one was from uh Mr. McFaden about

[1:07:49] the fire hydrants. Um, and correct me if I'm wrong. What we were told is those

[1:07:54] were approved by a third party vendor. Um, so just, and by the way, welcome

[1:07:59] Rick. I didn't recognize you under the hat and the beard and everything until I

[1:08:02] heard your voice. Had no idea it was you, but um I had not heard anything

[1:08:08] about um uh about you proving it. We were told in

[1:08:12] the meeting that it was a third party that that did that.

[1:08:15] » No, Mr. Chairman, I made that comment. Mr. for Freeman and the fire chief went

[1:08:20] out and investigated and that fire hydrant was not changed at all during

[1:08:24] the construction of the hotel. That was a pre-existing hydrant at that location.

[1:08:29] Um, interim chief uh Cordier has gone and inspected and it is accessible. You

[1:08:35] can use it in an emergency, which a fire would be an emergency obviously. Um, you

[1:08:40] can barely get attached the hose to it, but there is no valve which was also

[1:08:45] part of the project. But that hydrant was at the existing location. We have

[1:08:49] photos of before kite hotel construction and post hotel construction. That

[1:08:53] hydrant was not modified or altered in any way due to the construction of the

[1:08:58] hotel. And Miss Buckingham brought this up at

[1:09:04] the conclusion of last meeting. She said, you know, can't we

[1:09:08] just dig out around that hydrant and put like, you know, small little retention

[1:09:13] area like to hold the dirt back, you know, say x amount of feet around it so

[1:09:19] hose can easily get to it for the time being until this that big project's

[1:09:24] done. The it is possible and Mr. Freeman and Mr. Cordier sent me photos. It is

[1:09:29] possible to connect the hose to it. That doesn't solve the issue of if we want to

[1:09:34] raise it Chief Cordier has said that he would

[1:09:39] rather than use that hydrant, he even though it's usable, he would use the

[1:09:43] hydrant on the opposite corner of the hotel

[1:09:47] because it doesn't meet code, right? As it is right now, it does not meet code.

[1:09:51] And they cited the specific code. So, we're going to have to raise that fire

[1:09:55] hydrant. And you and in order to raise the hydrant, you have to turn the water

[1:09:59] off. And there are no valves in that immediate area to turn it off. That's

[1:10:03] what leads to the big project. So that's the hydrant right now is functional. Uh

[1:10:08] you can't attach a hose to it. It according to chief coordinator you can

[1:10:12] barely get a couple of fingers underneath the connection once you make

[1:10:15] the connection. But it can be connected and it can be utilized if necessary.

[1:10:20] That doesn't solve the problem of revising or reconstructing that hydrant

[1:10:25] so it meets current code. So that's we'll have to review that. that was part

[1:10:29] of the original proposal um that you expressed concern like okay is it going

[1:10:33] to have to close down Second Street for an extended period of time that'll be

[1:10:36] reviewed now that we know that the hydrant is functional so is there

[1:10:40] appropriate time and how can we scale that project so it doesn't affect second

[1:10:44] street as much as it as much as it affected third street last year

[1:10:49] » right like try to if there is going to be any closures try to do them overnight

[1:10:54] and then open it up during the day or something

[1:10:55] » correct >> okay Next uh comment was from Mr.

[1:11:00] Mckika. Um a backup for the hazardous waste drop off.

[1:11:05] Mr. Sherman, you have something? >> Yeah, I actually um I'm glad he brought

[1:11:09] that up. There was a I listened to the county meeting maybe a week or two ago

[1:11:13] and I believe um Commissioner Carney had mentioned there might be like different

[1:11:16] locations like we've done years ago. You probably remember when you could drop

[1:11:20] off your stuff at the library. um you could take like hazardous waste like if

[1:11:24] you had like pesticides or something like that and they'd pick it up right

[1:11:27] there for us. Um I thought there was a um at that county meeting I was

[1:11:32] listening to I believe they did say they're going to have different areas

[1:11:34] like set up throughout the county that you'll be able to drop them off and I

[1:11:37] think they did say like the old Kings location would be one of the locations

[1:11:41] and you know I guess there'd be some sort of like public service announcement

[1:11:44] for those throughout the year when they would have those um events and

[1:11:47] » that would also be for municipalities. Yeah, that would I would assume. So,

[1:11:52] yeah, I mean, I didn't get, you know, I was just kind of just listening in. I

[1:11:55] didn't really wasn't fully locked in, but I know Commissioner Carney is having

[1:11:58] a town hall. Maybe that'd be a question somebody could present to her.

[1:12:02] » City Manager, do you have any feedback on that?

[1:12:04] » Um, I've been in communities before that have had a community collection day. Um,

[1:12:09] Mr. Huntington from Waste Management is here this evening to talk about the

[1:12:13] their contract extension proposal. So he might at that time when you bring that

[1:12:18] forward that issue forward, he might be able to offer some comment or some

[1:12:21] insight as to how the city can coordinate that either with other

[1:12:24] communities in the county or the county itself.

[1:12:28] » And would you be able to find out with county where they're at with it? See if

[1:12:33] we're part of those plans. >> And again, as Commissioner Sherman

[1:12:37] indicated, uh, Commissioner Carney is having a town hall in I think two weeks

[1:12:42] a week, a week to two weeks. Um, so we can uh we can coordinate with the county

[1:12:46] on that. >> All right. Next one is Miss McNab about

[1:12:54] this is about 18th being skipped. Um, this is more of the the the whole

[1:13:00] drainage and swale project. That was the first part. Um,

[1:13:06] city engineer, um, can you give us some insight on 18th as as part of that

[1:13:11] project? 18th is part of the project. So it is

[1:13:16] not being skipped. >> Well, it part of so we're in the design

[1:13:20] what what precipitated the whole discussion about Oak Place was a

[1:13:24] resident expressed concern that vehicles could not access adequately access their

[1:13:28] property. So that led to discussion about improving access on Oak Place,

[1:13:34] including the uh presentation and adoption of a design standard that used

[1:13:39] that geoexile stuff. And again, I think that was primarily driven by one

[1:13:44] resident. So, it's great to hear from the other residents that they may not be

[1:13:48] interested in that project. It's only in the preliminary design stages at this

[1:13:51] point. And if there's no desire to move forward with improving Oak Street and

[1:13:57] connect because part of the argument originally posed was postal vehicles,

[1:14:02] which I've come from several residents, understand that postal vehicles do

[1:14:06] access that street as well as other delivery vehicles. That was not

[1:14:10] originally presented. It was originally presented that postal service vehicles

[1:14:15] wouldn't go down that street because there had no place to turn around.

[1:14:18] That's what led to the the discussion about okay, so how do we make it so that

[1:14:23] vehicles have completely through access and that was the 18th Street right

[1:14:28] ofway. So that's only been part of the design and again there's if anything was

[1:14:33] going to go forward with that it would come forward to you but at this point in

[1:14:36] time it was only in design phase and based upon the resident's concerns

[1:14:42] I don't think there's the sufficient level of interest among the other

[1:14:46] residents to continue that project or at least to revisit what is the desired

[1:14:51] intent to improve 18th Street. So, I look forward to uh working with the

[1:14:57] residents, Mr. Freeman and I will work with the residents and share with them,

[1:15:01] okay, what are their concerns and how can we address the concerns that were

[1:15:04] previously stated? >> Mr. Sherman.

[1:15:06] » Yeah, Mr. Martin, I I want to go backwards. I think we got to clear the

[1:15:09] record. The post office does not will not go down that road. I think uh our

[1:15:12] city clerk can speak to that too that the former police chief tried to work

[1:15:16] with the postmaster. That was a whole thing long before your time. So, the

[1:15:19] post office will not go down that road. I know delivery trucks will. And I think

[1:15:23] where the this whole thing comes up, just so for the public's record, they

[1:15:26] understand what happened. We had a resident break their hip. The road needs

[1:15:30] to be resurfaced over there. The um apparently, you know, Mr. Martin, you

[1:15:34] might be able to speak to this too, that the the condition of the road was not

[1:15:37] safe enough, I guess, for the first responders to go down that road to get

[1:15:42] the individual um you know, safely into the vehicle. So, they actually had to

[1:15:46] wheel a stretcher there to get the woman with the broken hip out of her driveway.

[1:15:52] who been who had been laying there. So, I don't know. You know, maybe it then

[1:15:55] snowballed into, okay, are we going to open up the road? I think what we need

[1:15:59] to do, you know, again, I I'm not the engineer here or anything, but I think

[1:16:02] what the goal of it all was to do was to get that road resurfaced. I don't think

[1:16:07] there was any, you know, is it tight since the new construction with some of

[1:16:10] the homes, new homes that were built there. Um, yes, but like, you know, the

[1:16:15] other homes have been there for years and it hasn't ever been an issue. So, I

[1:16:17] think the issue came up was the condition of the surface of the road

[1:16:21] there that uh prevented the first responders from going to that

[1:16:26] individual's house right there. Said they again they had to wheel a stretcher

[1:16:30] down the road due to the condition of the surface of the road.

[1:16:34] » And again, I'll defer to Mr. Freeman, but I believe we put the millings down

[1:16:38] that were originally requested and they've been compacted to improve that

[1:16:42] access. Whether there needs to be more work done, again, I'd have to defer to

[1:16:46] Mr. Freeman on that, but I know that we did make a preliminary effort to improve

[1:16:50] accessibility to that portion of Oak Place.

[1:16:54] » Mr. Freeman, you could um bring us up to speed on

[1:16:58] that, please.

[1:17:02] » Yes. So, several months back when we first heard the uh complaint or the

[1:17:06] concern, we did go and place millings down and uh improve the uh roadway.

[1:17:14] and I haven't heard any complaints about it since then other than from the one

[1:17:18] person who didn't really care for it. >> Do you get any other feedback?

[1:17:24] » Uh same feedback as the city engineer um that the you know that they they felt

[1:17:28] like the millings actually made it a little bit more bumpy than um better

[1:17:32] than what it was. Um and then that's I think when the geo you're the material

[1:17:37] you had proposed to put down on the road there. Um, but that's that's the last I

[1:17:42] had heard and I was unable to corroborate, you know, whether or not

[1:17:45] there was an emergency vehicle that had issues going down there. I could not

[1:17:49] corroborate that story. >> Commissioner Sprley. Yeah, I've heard

[1:17:53] from a few constituents in the area um who line up with um suddenly spoke here

[1:17:58] tonight, including Miss Andre, who asked for a meeting and actually replied back

[1:18:04] to you this morning. Um and so from those three or four folks in the

[1:18:11] neighborhood there on 18th uh their message was that they they are not in

[1:18:15] favor of removing those trees and there I didn't hear any discussion about the

[1:18:19] condition of the road. It was mostly the trees.

[1:18:21] » Okay. Mayor >> I can just say that yes rescue could not

[1:18:26] get downrace. They had to walk in and carry the victim out. I can't attest to

[1:18:30] this. >> Or I mean what?

[1:18:34] » I believe it was the condition of the roadway. They just could not either get

[1:18:38] in or get through it. But that did happen.

[1:18:46] » I had I had an email from a different resident that I believe Commissioner

[1:18:49] Santo spoke to that was intimately or personally involved with that rescue

[1:18:54] effort. And I mean based upon their accounting, they had to assist the

[1:19:00] victim to the rescue vehicle. So again, I think that is um lends some

[1:19:06] credibility to the fact that the rescue vehicle could not get there um with the

[1:19:12] condition of the road. So um we can revisit that project. There's it's it's

[1:19:16] only the design phase. We'll gladly reach out and talk to the residents and

[1:19:20] see what uh what the overall interest is among people. But again, the the few

[1:19:25] that have contacted me through an email or telephone um has been that they do

[1:19:30] not desire significant improvements to Oak Place and not uh and definitely not

[1:19:36] South 18th Street. >> Got it. And I'm going to just jump

[1:19:41] around a little bit because this was also brought up um Andre about Oak Place

[1:19:47] Road being finished. The only thing that's being done is just

[1:19:51] surveys right now. >> Correct. Okay. And that's part of the

[1:19:54] design, but as far as the project goes, none of

[1:19:58] that has been brought forward, approved or anything.

[1:20:00] » Absolutely not. >> Right. Okay. Because that was also a

[1:20:03] public comment. Any comments from up here about that whole 18th and access

[1:20:10] and that's a whole another agenda item really. I would like to see in city

[1:20:16] engineer and city manager host a town hall, meet with the residents that are

[1:20:21] impacted by it and get a more general feeling of what they wish to see, not

[1:20:28] just one resident but right the whole >> Yeah. numerous things at play. You got

[1:20:33] accessibility issues, then you have the ego factor. Sure. I mean there there's a

[1:20:38] lot of pieces of that, but I I would feel pretty confident with

[1:20:42] city manager and engineer meeting with the residents coming up with something.

[1:20:47] Yeah. I mean it just for me. Okay. So you got to re uh you have to remove

[1:20:52] three or no six trees in order to get the typical section that we were talking

[1:20:57] about. One of the other issues that I see is that there's some wetlands at the

[1:21:01] northern edge of that road and we would be affecting the buffer of the wetlands

[1:21:06] uh by doing some of the widening and that's just something that if you ask me

[1:21:10] I think that's u money not well spent.

[1:21:17] Any other thoughts on that? >> Commissioning you would have to pay

[1:21:22] mitigation credits and they're very expensive.

[1:21:24] » I I just don't think it's a very good idea at all. No, I wouldn't pursue it.

[1:21:29] » So, if you wanted to ask my opinion, I'd say

[1:21:33] squish it. Leave it alone. Okay. Well, that comes back up, we can

[1:21:38] make that decision formally. >> Take We'll take a closer look at the

[1:21:43] viability or sustainability of the road with the millings, at least how far can

[1:21:47] that be reasonably extended to provide adequate access. and we can work again

[1:21:53] with the residents of that area and and uh come up with a solution to present

[1:21:57] back to you before we do anything. >> Well, and you also suggested back then

[1:22:01] there was another solution about the construction of that road. It was

[1:22:05] something that had to do with the >> what we were looking at for the road

[1:22:09] improvement where the Barnhill property was. You know,

[1:22:12] » that's the geoexile, right? >> And again, that that could be an option

[1:22:17] a more expensive option than millings. But again, we can present options to you

[1:22:21] after we discuss the options with the rest.

[1:22:23] » Good thing is that's permeable versus the milling.

[1:22:25] » Correct. >> Yeah. Right.

[1:22:27] » All right. Next thing is there anything else on that? Okay.

[1:22:30] » Um actually Miss McNab also had a question about she had a hurried comment

[1:22:34] about access to >> ADA on the pier.

[1:22:36] » Right. And the pier is completely um Miss Overreet sent an email to uh Mr.

[1:22:42] Predomo based upon some uh ADA compliance and the pier is that slope

[1:22:48] meets the necessary ADA compliance for accessibility

[1:22:53] um to the full extent of the pier. >> Okay.

[1:22:56] » 2010 ADA standards for accessible design including

[1:23:01] » your mic on Penny. the 2010 ADA standards for accessible

[1:23:06] design including the specific precisions provisions for fishing peers and

[1:23:11] platforms.

[1:23:14] All right, next com was from Matali. This is on the

[1:23:20] McKim Creed information not being accurate on the lift station and the

[1:23:25] elevations for Palm Drive. Is that something you want to take?

[1:23:29] » We could take Mr. Spatonia. I had a lengthy phone call yesterday. I

[1:23:33] discussed it with uh Mr. Freeman and we're trying to coordinate a meeting

[1:23:36] with Mr. Bali to go over um what the Mckimman study says and what are

[1:23:42] discrepancies between what's real on the ground and what is indicated in the uh

[1:23:48] um McKim and Creed study I think Mr. hospitality's principal concern is does

[1:23:54] the McKim and Creed study yes it improves the resiliency of the component

[1:23:58] the lift station but is it overengineered and I think that's what

[1:24:02] we'll talk about with uh Mr. Spatali and Mr. Freeman

[1:24:07] got it and not to skip over anybody but we had

[1:24:11] a comment from Mr. Bakers also Mr. Madson about, you know, pure bait shop

[1:24:18] um possible city stuff that that can be something that should that come up, city

[1:24:22] manager, you know, you got those uh folks information, you can reach out to

[1:24:26] them. >> Correct. And that's still part of the

[1:24:28] ongoing discussion as we prepare for the peer reopening. So,

[1:24:32] » next one was uh uh Rich from he was talking about golf course and uh HR

[1:24:40] issues. Um any comments on that from up here? the golf course. Um the next

[1:24:45] measuring point in accordance with the purchase agreement is in March. So we

[1:24:50] were continuing to maintain uh observation but the next uh point in as

[1:24:56] specified in the purchase agreement is a review of the conditions um in March and

[1:25:01] if he doesn't meet those conditions he can ask for I believe you may correct me

[1:25:06] Mr. I believe he can ask for a one-year extension.

[1:25:08] » That's correct. And also just for the record so everybody is aware I think you

[1:25:12] are but their final site plan application was before parboard and that

[1:25:16] will be coming to you. I don't know exactly what meeting that's scheduled

[1:25:19] for but that will be coming for you shortly. Also

[1:25:23] » waiting for them to get the um I think it's on yeah October

[1:25:31] I just saw it. I'm sorry I blanked on the date

[1:25:34] » and it but that it was approved but there are several conditions that have

[1:25:38] to be satisfied as part of the site plan approval that was reviewed by the power

[1:25:43] board. So there's still some work to do. >> Right, Commissioner Sean?

[1:25:47] » Yeah, I you know just seeing the condition of the golf course, I saw it

[1:25:50] about a month ago and I you know you and I have had a conversation about it and

[1:25:54] it's atrocious. I mean that that's the that's the way to describe it. Um the

[1:25:58] grass was up to you know I'm a tall guy. it was close to my, you know, knee

[1:26:02] height and the guy was out there cutting it, but it's like how how long did it

[1:26:05] take to get to that point and, you know, I thought, you know, it's all part of

[1:26:09] being good neighbors and things like that. And I just I'm I'm really let

[1:26:13] down. Um, these were some of the concerns with the sale of the golf

[1:26:16] course as to why I, you know, I' I've expressed this to you. I've expressed

[1:26:19] these same things to the city attorney on many occasions. So, um, you know, I

[1:26:24] don't know what we can do as far as a city goes. As far as like, you know, I

[1:26:27] know you can't go code enforcement, correct me if I'm wrong, city attorney,

[1:26:31] they can't go in somebody, they can't go walk on somebody's property to see the

[1:26:34] condition of the golf course. They have to see it from plain view. Is that

[1:26:37] right? Permission. Permission warrant to go on private property. You can see it

[1:26:40] from a neighbor's property though. So, if there's a neighbor complainant, a

[1:26:43] neighbor is always is always able to invite code onto their property if a

[1:26:47] violation that would not otherwise be able to be seen from a rideway. Anywhere

[1:26:51] the everywhere where you already have the right to be, you can have per if you

[1:26:54] can't see it from the right of way, you have to have permission or a warrant to

[1:26:56] go onto private property. But a neighbor can give permission to go onto their

[1:26:59] property to allow observation. And are there per are there things that can be

[1:27:03] held accountable for? Because I' I've been notified by neighbors there's

[1:27:07] alligators roaming around out there and you know there's people's backyards with

[1:27:10] young kids that back up to that. You know, I'm you know, again, when you have

[1:27:14] conditions like that, that's more conducive for wildlife to maybe roam a

[1:27:19] little bit more freely in those areas. And

[1:27:21] » the code is what they're held accountable to. So, to the extent, so

[1:27:25] over overgrown grass, dud debris, pile of dud debris, those kind of things can

[1:27:29] be addressed. Yes. >> Animals to the extent that that you're

[1:27:34] creating, you know, you're creating a nuisance habitat through the other

[1:27:38] things potentially. But I don't think the code speaks directly to alligators,

[1:27:42] for instance. But to the extent that they're they're finding a hiding space

[1:27:45] in in overgrown grass, you can address the overgrown grass.

[1:27:48] » Okay. >> Right. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[1:27:51] » Uh well, this several meetings ago about all the debris on the golf course that

[1:27:55] was left behind that really a fire hazard because it's so dried out. And I

[1:28:00] think you said you were going to get in touch with code enforcement and have

[1:28:02] them go. >> I had to ask code enforcement. I don't

[1:28:05] know if anything's coming with that, but I have asked code enforcement to keep an

[1:28:08] eye on the property. But again, they are limited in where they can go. They can't

[1:28:11] can't walk that property. They can see what they can see from the right of way.

[1:28:13] » Well, if I can see it from the road of my truck, I'm sure they can see it from

[1:28:17] where their vehicle >> or from somebody's backyard

[1:28:22] that I'm sure would gladly let them walk behind there.

[1:28:26] » Commissioner Sprley, I share the concerns about the condition of the golf

[1:28:30] course. I was among those who thought that um once the loan was funded, which

[1:28:35] was several months ago, that there would be uh immediate improvement. Um and it

[1:28:43] just it's just disappointing that here we are in September and there's no

[1:28:47] apparent improvement at all. So, um we just need to keep our eye on it. Uh, I

[1:28:54] know that now that he has a not just us looking over his shoulder, but the bank

[1:28:58] looking over his shoulder because uh it depends on the golf course becoming a

[1:29:03] golf course and creating revenue, but he's going to be able to make his

[1:29:06] commitments to the to the bank. So, I'm sure there are a lot of people looking,

[1:29:09] but we need to continue to keep that at the top of our radar screen. Thanks.

[1:29:14] » That site plan review is on your October 8th agenda for consideration.

[1:29:20] Thank you. >> All right, Commissioner Santo, it's hard

[1:29:24] for me to see you way over there, so I apologize.

[1:29:27] » So, what would be the procedure for a resident? They have a complaint to see,

[1:29:31] you know, trees laying down that have been pulled out but not removed. Like,

[1:29:35] should they call code enforcement? >> Instructions are allowed on their

[1:29:39] instructions on that call. >> Absolutely. Call call enforcement. Say,

[1:29:42] "This is what I'm seeing from my yard. You're welcome to come to my property. I

[1:29:44] can show you from my from my backyard or wherever the viewpoint is." But

[1:29:46] absolutely call code enforcement. >> Okay. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, I believe

[1:29:51] based upon Commissioner Cunningham's comments, Commissioner Sherman's

[1:29:54] comments, and my observation, I will check in with nobody needs to call

[1:29:58] enforce. I will discuss with code enforcement tomorrow and make sure that

[1:30:02] the appropriate action is taken immediately

[1:30:06] cuz yes, as Commissioner Cunningham said, you can see it. You don't need to

[1:30:09] go on anybody's property. Just drive down the road and look out your window.

[1:30:12] You can see it. So, I will reach out to code enforcement and find where it

[1:30:15] stands tomorrow. The whole whole golf course clubhouse

[1:30:21] is an eyesore. I mean, there's weeds growing all up on the side of it. It's

[1:30:26] looks horrible. And I think aesthetics is in code enforcement, isn't it?

[1:30:32] » Yeah. >> Building basic building maintenance.

[1:30:35] » It looks terrible. I mean, let's go take a look.

[1:30:41] » All right. Next thing we got is um Miss Lynn was talking about numerous uh

[1:30:47] employee and HR related matters. Any comments on that?

[1:30:51] » Those are all being addressed by the appropriate boards in compliance with

[1:30:54] the personnel policies

[1:31:00] » and uh Mr. Termhoof was talking about and Penny

[1:31:06] there was a I believe there's a public records request on legal fees or

[1:31:10] something like that. Did you have did you give

[1:31:13] » I provided him that information and then he also requested some resumes and

[1:31:19] applications. I provided some of those and the second part that he requested on

[1:31:24] that requires review for redaction because those applicants their

[1:31:30] information is exempt by Florida statute. So, I have to review and

[1:31:34] redact. So, I did send him an invoice and he said he was going to pay it today

[1:31:38] and once he pays it, I'll be happy to move forward with that.

[1:31:41] » Right. Thank you. Any other comments on public comment

[1:31:47] before we move on to consent agenda. >> All right. Move on to consent agenda.

[1:31:53] Consent agenda is regular and workshop meeting minutes of August 27th, 2026 and

[1:31:59] special meeting minutes of September 2nd, 2026. Does everybody have a copy of

[1:32:04] that? Any discussion needed or questions?

[1:32:11] No, just minutes. I look for a motion. >> Motion to approve consent agenda.

[1:32:16] » I'll second that motion. >> We have a motion and a second. No roll

[1:32:19] call need on this. All in favor, please signify by saying I.

[1:32:22] » I. Any opposed? Motion passes unanimous. General business. Mayor,

[1:32:33] I received a uh emailed uh grievance report um for our charter uh that was

[1:32:41] elevated to me um August 18th. I immediately turned and forwarded that to

[1:32:47] our city attorney at which time I'm going to allow him to proceed. your

[1:32:52] personnel policies procedure provides for if if a grievant is feels that they

[1:32:56] cannot go to a city manager which is step three of the grievance process that

[1:32:59] they may directed to the mayor the mayor will report it to the commission and

[1:33:03] that's what just happened. So you now have it as it says in your uh staff

[1:33:08] report. The purpose tonight is process because with grievances and as you see

[1:33:12] you have the steps there is a relatively comparatively to other process. It's an

[1:33:16] informal process. It's a collaborative process. It's not adversarial. It's not

[1:33:20] meant to have winners and losers. It's not like those of you who have did come

[1:33:23] or have watched the personnel work. It's not the same type of proceeding as

[1:33:26] those. It's about understanding what the grievant is is trying to express what

[1:33:30] issues they are trying to express to whoever's hearing it. In this case, you

[1:33:33] are now the body hearing that grievance. Um,

[1:33:38] understanding those facts, identifying if there are issues that you want to

[1:33:41] address and are operating within the bounds of what your charter does

[1:33:44] provide, and you have that, too. So, there's there's plenty of lane for you

[1:33:49] to deal with this, but you do still have to stay within the guardrails that your

[1:33:53] charter creates on what you can and can't do as to employees of the city. Um

[1:33:57] the fact that you are essentially substituting for the city manager in

[1:34:00] step three of the grievance process does not change what your charter says. With

[1:34:04] that in mind and again back to the process not merits tonight because the

[1:34:08] the written grievance alludes to a broad range of facts but I think even in the

[1:34:13] the grievance on statements he's not presenting the specific facts. He wants

[1:34:17] that opportunity. So the first step that we need to talk about is how do we want

[1:34:21] to give that opportunity? And the suggestion I throw out there but there's

[1:34:24] lots of ways you could go. So it's open to discussion. I do not mean to say you

[1:34:28] have to do this way, but from my eyes, what seems to be probably the most

[1:34:32] effective way at this time is to have a special meeting and invite the employee

[1:34:35] in to present again not an adversarial capacity, in a listening capacity with

[1:34:40] what is it that you want your what facts is it that you want us to see and hear.

[1:34:45] But that's that's the starting spot. happy to answer questions, but really

[1:34:49] the process you want to follow from this point forward again with in that mindset

[1:34:52] of how do we identify issues, hear facts, identify issues and determine

[1:34:56] what what we want to do as a body, >> right? So, just for discussion purposes,

[1:35:02] um, city attorney, this is kind of what I was thinking as well. City attorney is

[1:35:05] suggesting basically scheduling a special meeting. So, there there's not

[1:35:11] any facts in in this to work with. So we need to get the facts and data from this

[1:35:16] person. Um discussion around the proposal of

[1:35:21] scheduling a special meeting to collect that data. I want to discuss some of the

[1:35:27] details that's in our agenda that we got surrounding the whole thing.

[1:35:34] the uh when we got the email from

[1:35:42] today with the report that the

[1:35:51] apparently supposed to be a nonbiased attorney doing an investigation.

[1:36:00] And then I was looking at Rick Bellhammer's email and

[1:36:06] it says that you were trying to dig up. Can't really see.

[1:36:27] Collecting negative feedback. about the employee

[1:36:32] so you could fire him. Why as a city manager would you be doing

[1:36:37] something like that? >> I stand by what was reported by the

[1:36:43] objective investigator that specifically says no disciplinary action is

[1:36:46] recommended. >> That wasn't my question.

[1:36:50] » I never intended anything like that. >> Is that what you told Rick?

[1:36:54] » Nope. >> In a meeting in your office like he's

[1:36:56] saying in his email. >> I think Mr. Val Humor has presented

[1:36:58] things here before that have been discredited.

[1:37:04] » Well, we'll invite him as well. I don't I don't see Rig lying about something

[1:37:08] like this. I

[1:37:11] » mean, why would he?

[1:37:22] My understanding is we're discussing and coming to a process agreement, not

[1:37:27] trying this issue and discussing the issue at hand tonight. Am I correct?

[1:37:32] » Ultimately, you will have to hear the facts involved, but it's up to the board

[1:37:37] where the board wants to take the conversation.

[1:37:39] » Right. >> Well, he was bringing up something that

[1:37:41] was in our packet, which is, you know, it's fair game.

[1:37:43] » Yeah. >> Yeah. I mean, I had a couple other

[1:37:46] things, too. Um, will you have another city employees

[1:37:51] help you get negative information on the employee to help you with your process

[1:37:57] of getting him fired? >> No.

[1:37:59] » Or firing him? >> No. I've taken no discipline action

[1:38:02] against the employee in question. >> None at all.

[1:38:08] » So, it's your word against Rick Bellum's word. What he's saying you're saying?

[1:38:14] » Okay.

[1:38:24] You know, I think somebody brought it up. It seems like it's become a trend

[1:38:28] that if you don't like somebody, they get

[1:38:31] fired. It goes through the

[1:38:35] personnel uh board, but they're obviously going to be

[1:38:40] biased. They're not supposed to be, but they are my opinion.

[1:38:52] It's just showing a very poor lack of leadership

[1:38:56] in my opinion.

[1:39:08] And we just got this today, the report from the attorney. How much did that

[1:39:13] attorney cost? Approximately $11,000.

[1:39:28] Yeah, this is going to have to be dug into really deep.

[1:39:34] » Commissioner Stley. Yeah, I mean as I as I see the agenda item and as uh the city

[1:39:39] attorney has pointed out, we are to consider a procedure for handling these

[1:39:43] things. And I know in looking at the current policy

[1:39:47] um and as Drew indicated there, there's there's three steps here are three

[1:39:51] different ways for a grievance to go forward. uh with two of them ending up

[1:39:58] with the city manager making a determination concerning the grievance

[1:40:04] and that his decision is final, no further appeal. But if that path is not

[1:40:10] taken, then the grievance goes to the mayor to then report it to the board.

[1:40:16] But there's missing from there. There's not a mechanism after that uh to come to

[1:40:22] a conclusion and make a final decision. Just to make sure one point is clear,

[1:40:27] you are you are substituting in for city manager in step three. The grievance

[1:40:30] process does not contemplate you. There is not an appeal that's brought to

[1:40:33] council of city manager. It's if a employee feels that they cannot go to

[1:40:37] city manager, it creates an avenue for them to come this process and you are

[1:40:41] substituting in. So it's not you're not after the city manager, you are

[1:40:45] replacing that step. >> Okay. and is without it saying it is

[1:40:50] what is what should be here to make it consistent that the commission will then

[1:40:56] make a determination after evidence is presented.

[1:40:59] » Correct. >> Okay.

[1:41:01] » With a caveat. So you are still bound by what your charter the the restraints of

[1:41:05] your charter. >> Right. So it's highly constrained of

[1:41:09] where we get into employee matters. >> Right. Right. Um, and I think that needs

[1:41:14] understood by all parties. >> Commissioner Sherman, you had a

[1:41:18] question. >> I just had a question, too, because

[1:41:20] you're commission, you know, I'm trying to wrap my head around this because it's

[1:41:23] like the we've got this uh our prohibitions here in section 2- uh 205,

[1:41:29] right? So, when you're saying it comes back to us, and I, you know, we've kind

[1:41:33] of had some conversations about this leading up to the meeting. Um, I guess

[1:41:37] my confusion is is so what exactly can we do? like you said, we're replacing

[1:41:42] the city manager, but as Commissioner or Chairman Cory had mentioned, we're we're

[1:41:46] we're, you know, held to this charter. So, when it does come to us, I know, you

[1:41:52] know, we can't, you know, we'll have a special meeting, which I'm all for, and

[1:41:56] and having, you know, all the facts presented to us, but I guess my question

[1:42:00] is, what is it that we can do? Is it to give the city manager direction on how

[1:42:05] there's actually handle that? >> Quite a wide lane between the two things

[1:42:08] that you're prohibited from doing. >> Okay. You cannot give direction on who's

[1:42:12] hired, fired, retained. >> Correct.

[1:42:14] » You cannot give individual employees direction. Individual employees that are

[1:42:17] under the direction of city manager, you cannot tell them what they have to do.

[1:42:20] » Okay. Within that lane, are there policies that need to be changed? Are

[1:42:25] there are there is there training that needs to be accomplished? Think of it

[1:42:29] from a policy level. Instead of a we need to tell this employee to do that,

[1:42:33] nope, you cannot do that. We need to tell this employee to go, nope, you

[1:42:35] cannot do that. >> Okay?

[1:42:36] » We need to tell city manager you need to p you cannot do that. But what you can

[1:42:40] do is let's address our policies because these personnel policies ultimately and

[1:42:43] you have the you have a third party who's doing new personnel policies for

[1:42:46] you right now but your personnel policies adopted by you. So if it's well

[1:42:50] maybe we need to have a more robust complaint process maybe we have need to

[1:42:54] have more detail in the process to help administration you know there's a wide

[1:42:57] lane there when you think of it with a policy line. Okay. And then can we all

[1:43:02] will we also bring into evidence the the ca I guess the investigation the

[1:43:06] investigation >> now that now that it's a public record

[1:43:08] if to the extent that there's overlap to the extent that you find it relevant it

[1:43:12] may help you through the process but you still need to go through this process on

[1:43:16] its own. Yeah I mean this might play in if it overlaps facts but this process is

[1:43:21] is still separate from that. >> Okay.

[1:43:23] » Well and I'll just try to simplify a little bit. So step one is we need to

[1:43:27] hear from the employee. >> We got to do that first. And so the the

[1:43:31] first part of our discussion, you know, tonight should be all right, we need to

[1:43:36] hear from the employee. Are you all okay with a special meeting to do that?

[1:43:40] Okay. And then the question is uh we'll need to get on the calendar.

[1:43:44] » Mhm. >> So what you got, Penny?

[1:43:45] » I have that up. Um so I need um

[1:43:52] the first first day we could have what three would be Monday the 14th. I have

[1:43:59] that evening available. I'm assuming you're wanting an evening meeting. Um

[1:44:06] on the 15th I have the evening, 16th is open, 17 oh all next week the

[1:44:14] whole evening is open and then Monday the 21st.

[1:44:21] » Y'all be okay with next Thursday?

[1:44:26] I can do any day next week, but uh Tuesdays aren't good for me, but any

[1:44:30] other day I can do,

[1:44:37] » you know, can you all do Thursdays except Mayor?

[1:44:40] » I would have to miss the Northeast Floor League of Cities meeting in Palatka

[1:44:49] and then Penny's going to want the money back she gave me. Um I the 16th is like

[1:44:53] I said the 16th and the 15th doesn't work for James.

[1:44:57] » No 16th. >> Monday the 14th.

[1:44:59] » Yeah. Wednesday. I have a prior commitment but I could send somebody

[1:45:02] else but I'm I'm a magistrate so I can't send anybody else to that.

[1:45:05] » The 21st which is the following week. A Monday that's available.

[1:45:13] » Yeah. Me too. >> Um unfortunately

[1:45:17] that Monday will not work for me. Every other date you mentioned what?

[1:45:21] » 16th. >> The 22nd.

[1:45:24] » Tuesday. >> I I can't do Tuesday.

[1:45:26] » Okay. The 23rd. >> I can do the 23rd.

[1:45:29] » Same. >> That's a Wednesday.

[1:45:33] » What time? >> Whatever time you like. That whole day

[1:45:36] is open. >> 5:30.

[1:45:39] » I can't. >> It is. You got consensus on that.

[1:45:45] » May 23rd. So

[1:45:49] » do you want that a special meeting where they can make decisions or special

[1:45:53] meeting? It's just for my respect my answer question special meeting is a

[1:45:56] special meeting of a special meeting under the law workshops. They don't take

[1:45:58] votes. Um and this is not when it really this is you would be hearing more but

[1:46:03] you might then discuss and vote on what's our next step. So they may take

[1:46:07] procedural votes at that meeting. So to just help the conversation further

[1:46:14] along, we got a date and this will be for,

[1:46:19] you know, the employee to present their data and their facts and for us to hear

[1:46:23] it and then it's listed as a special meeting. So depending on how that goes,

[1:46:29] we can have discussion. We can decide on, you know, further action. Do we need

[1:46:33] to hear from anybody else? Um, do we need to make a decision? you know, and

[1:46:38] then we can take action or vote on that depending on, you know, where that goes.

[1:46:45] » Does that make sense, Mr. Sprley? >> It was just third Wednesday. I mean,

[1:46:50] » it really makes sense, but to the ultimate point, we make a decision. What

[1:46:54] are we deciding? I mean, are we deciding that there's been uh there's been a

[1:47:00] failure to comply with with our current procedure somehow or we're making a

[1:47:05] decision that the um that our code needs to be amended for resolution?

[1:47:12] » Challenge of where you sit right now because until you hear those ultimate

[1:47:15] facts, you don't really know what you what you might want to do with those

[1:47:18] facts. You really need the ultimate facts to kind of narrow down what the

[1:47:22] appropriate response to those facts is. Does that make sense?

[1:47:26] » It does. >> Within the constraints of the charter.

[1:47:30] » Yeah. >> Yeah.

[1:47:30] » Which is >> can't can't recommend or can't direct

[1:47:34] the city manager concerning his employees.

[1:47:38] » Yeah. >> Right. But we can give direction to city

[1:47:41] manager that on things that doesn't involve

[1:47:46] directing city employees. Think of it as think of it as broad

[1:47:49] broad brushes broadstroke brushes policies.

[1:47:53] » Okay. All right. I'm with you. >> It would not it would it would not be

[1:47:59] anything like personnel review board. >> Okay. Good.

[1:48:03] » Does that answer the questions? Commissioner Santor,

[1:48:06] » I have a a couple questions. So, I mean, when does I assume they're going to be

[1:48:11] submitting documentation on their sides and like do they have to have a they

[1:48:17] have is there a certain date they need to get that information to Penny by?

[1:48:20] » That's a good question. It's up up to you guys. How much time do you want to

[1:48:23] review it, >> right? Cuz

[1:48:24] » well, it needs to follow our standard document process. The same amount of

[1:48:28] time we get from meetings, it needs to be the same.

[1:48:30] » Well, this is a special this is a special Well, this is a special meeting,

[1:48:33] right? And this is a special meeting, too. So, you probably need to decide

[1:48:36] tonight. Yeah. >> How much time you want to review any

[1:48:38] documents that are submitted. >> We have a 3-w week lead on on

[1:48:42] » Well, we we usually get our information the Friday before a meeting.

[1:48:47] » Correct. >> Are you all okay with that?

[1:48:50] » We Yeah, because we have a Don't we have a commission meeting the night next

[1:48:56] commission? >> Yeah. So if we could get it a little bit

[1:48:58] the f like the Wednesday before so then we can prepare for that and then

[1:49:01] » the deadline for um the employee to get that information made to me would be

[1:49:09] you would actually want it on Tuesday the 15th so I could provide it to you on

[1:49:13] Wednesday the 16th >> at the latest you know and if employee

[1:49:19] can get it to us sooner even better but that would be the the deadline.

[1:49:23] You'all okay with that? >> Yeah.

[1:49:25] » Yes. And my other question would be, you know, how long is this meeting set to?

[1:49:29] Do we have to pick a date or um how long it'll be or how much time we'll give the

[1:49:33] employee to present if they are presenting?

[1:49:37] Those are things we should probably hash out before that date.

[1:49:43] Thoughts on that?

[1:49:46] » I was going to ask city attorney what your do you have any recommendation on

[1:49:50] tonight? Again, given the the breadth of the items discussed in writing, I I

[1:49:56] don't know how much time the employee would need. So, if you want to put a cap

[1:50:00] on the meeting, I don't have an issue with you capping the meeting. But if

[1:50:05] let's say you put let's put a 2-hour cap on it and you hit 2 hours and the

[1:50:08] employee is halfway through his presentation, do you grant an extension

[1:50:12] or do you continue the hearing? What do you do? Because again, we're just kind

[1:50:16] of in an amorphous spark. We don't know how much fun the employee is going to

[1:50:19] take. And again, the the purpose is to allow them to present um fairly

[1:50:25] reasonably to the point I know the board is making. But from my perspective,

[1:50:30] first threshold is to make sure they get that full opportunity. So if you think 2

[1:50:33] hours fair, you say two hours, so be it. I do think that giving some idea up

[1:50:38] front is helpful to the employee too because that way they can they can

[1:50:40] program how they want to present, how they want to prioritize. So I do think

[1:50:44] it's helpful for both parties to have that discussion. But rather than

[1:50:47] thinking of it, okay, if we say two hours and two hours and you're

[1:50:50] two-thirds time for the last third, you might just say at that point, let's

[1:50:53] continue on because you're also thinking of everybody's mental energy, employees

[1:50:57] mental energy, and it's a lot to ask an employee to to do, too. So, there's some

[1:51:00] courtesy to employee that comes into that conversation. You don't want to

[1:51:03] force somebody to stand in front of you for hours presenting. Commissioner

[1:51:06] Smileley, it strikes me that um maybe something like uh the employee being

[1:51:13] told that they should try to make their presentation fit within 1 hour. Uh and

[1:51:19] then if during the uh during the meeting, you know, if additional time is

[1:51:24] requested, then you know, a reasonable response would be given. But I think if

[1:51:30] you set it up to frame the uh presentation of the grievance to 1 hour,

[1:51:36] I think that would uh you know subject to extension if necessary. I think that

[1:51:40] would be helpful to the employee and us that that's kind of where I was at. I

[1:51:45] wouldn't want to put a hard cap on the meeting right length duration as a

[1:51:53] presentation of data facts and uh the grievance itself.

[1:51:57] Um, I think 60 minutes is good and then from there

[1:52:03] then we can get into questions for, you know, the employee. Um, but their time

[1:52:10] to present really needs to be for us to hold our questions, write them

[1:52:16] down while they're presenting, then ask at the end, and then we can go from

[1:52:20] there with meeting time. Does that sound okay, Mayor?

[1:52:22] » I agree. should have the documentation to pre-eread so we'll have an idea. So

[1:52:28] not every word needs to be spoken. I think an hour would be fair as long as

[1:52:34] we receive the documentation in time to review it and then we go from there,

[1:52:41] » you know. And also if if we're making good time and it's productive and and

[1:52:46] we're kind of trying to stick to a time if something

[1:52:53] very big comes up you know we can always adjust to a meeting if we need to but I

[1:52:58] wouldn't want to hardcap the actual meeting duration itself because we might

[1:53:03] get into an hour discussion ourselves right Penny did you have something

[1:53:10] » if Um, someone asked me for this information like the media is it public

[1:53:14] record? >> You're talking about the you the

[1:53:16] information to this >> whatever submitted to me to provide to

[1:53:21] » it's public record subject if if any of it in claim redactable information you s

[1:53:27] but yeah this is not this is not a confidential process. This is a public

[1:53:31] process. >> Mr.

[1:53:33] » Yeah, I was also going to ask uh Mr. Martin, would you also be able to

[1:53:36] provide us with the or um the employee current employee handbook? So, as to

[1:53:42] what our city attorney said, uh looking at this with a broad stroke to see, um I

[1:53:46] know we're in the process of having, you know, third party rewrite these. But, um

[1:53:51] you know, this may also help steer some conversation for your third party as

[1:53:56] well, what comes of this. So, if we could have a copy of that

[1:53:59] » printed or or >> if you I don't know for me, you can just

[1:54:02] send me a link if you could. Um I don't know that others may need paper but I I

[1:54:06] can read a link. Um >> yes reference and and just as a follow

[1:54:13] on directly related to your comments about the third party um Miss Matis had

[1:54:18] the initial discussion with the third party today and part of that discussion

[1:54:22] was are there areas that you are already aware of that you want to see reviewed

[1:54:28] or discussed as part of the revision potential revision of the um personnel

[1:54:34] policy. So, as you're reviewing the personnel policy, or if you already know

[1:54:39] of issues or areas that you want reconsidered or at least reviewed by the

[1:54:43] third party, I will send you all an email and submit your concerns or your

[1:54:49] areas of interest to Miss Matthysse so that she can share those with the third

[1:54:53] party, whether it's, you know, benefits or hours of work or anything like that.

[1:54:58] If there are areas that you are already aware of that you want to be part of the

[1:55:03] discussion of the revision, please share those with Miss Matthysse. So I will

[1:55:07] send you an email with that request. Include Miss Matthysse on it so you can

[1:55:11] reply directly to Miss Matthysse as well.

[1:55:17] » It's not going to cost another $10,000, is it?

[1:55:21] » No, you've already approved for the personnel policy review.

[1:55:32] further discussion on this. Commissioner Santo.

[1:55:34] » Yeah, I mean, in some ways, I I know we're all being very thoughtful about

[1:55:38] this, but it still feels we're almost winging it because we don't have a

[1:55:42] procedure for this. So I don't know if there's any appetite here for either

[1:55:46] city attorney to at at our next meeting to come back with some more strict guard

[1:55:51] rail for us and process or you know I just want to make sure this is the first

[1:55:56] time for us. Correct. >> It is but the challenge is it's what is

[1:56:00] to begin with an amorphous pro process. I mean the grievance process generally

[1:56:04] is because of its informal nature and when you're dealing with a broad range

[1:56:08] of facts where you haven't heard the specific facts yet there's many

[1:56:11] directions you would go which is the challenge in saying soup to nuts this is

[1:56:15] the process you should follow because you're going to be reacting to what you

[1:56:18] hear when you start hearing the facts. >> Yeah there he can't template anything

[1:56:22] because we don't have any data yet. >> And then since this is a grievance would

[1:56:27] it only be the grievant presenting and being there that day? That is what

[1:56:31] you're discussing right now is you would just be hearing an agreement to

[1:56:34] understand those initial facts at which point following that the board would

[1:56:37] then discuss what do we need to do as the next step. Okay.

[1:56:40] » But it's going to be reacting to what you hear at that meeting. Thank you.

[1:56:45] » Further discussion

[1:56:49] and this uh so our our action from this was just setting a meeting date. Um

[1:56:57] this doesn't involve public comment does it? We're not taking any action. We're

[1:56:59] just setting a date. Okay. Um, any further discussion before we move on on

[1:57:04] this one? We got our date. Everybody can make it.

[1:57:08] » I'd like public comment. You just insulted me.

[1:57:11] » I'm on that committee.

[1:57:16] » Sir, no. >> Sorry about that, but that's wrong.

[1:57:20] That's wrong. What he said is wrong. >> We're all volunteers. That's wrong.

[1:57:24] » Okay.

[1:57:28] All right. Um All right. So, we're good.

[1:57:35] All right. So, we're going to move on to general business B resolution 2026-71.

[1:57:40] Drew.

[1:57:46] Resolution 2026-71. A resolution by the city commission of

[1:57:50] the city of Flaggler Beach, Florida, approving an extension for solid and

[1:57:53] yard waste disposal between the city of Flaggler Beach, Florida, and Waste

[1:57:56] Management, Inc. of Florida, providing for conflict and an effective date.

[1:58:02] » City Manager. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, Mr. Greg

[1:58:05] Huntington from Waste Management of Florida Incorporated of Florida is here

[1:58:09] this evening. Um, waste management purchased as indicated in the SAP

[1:58:13] report, waste management purchased um, what was formerly known as environmental

[1:58:18] services in Banell. So that is a transfer station. So when our sanitation

[1:58:24] department picks up our trash and our yard waste, they take it to the Banell

[1:58:28] location where then it is transferred to other vehicles that is then taken to the

[1:58:33] landfill. Um after their purchase, waste management

[1:58:38] recognized the ongoing contract that we had with uh environmental services. Um

[1:58:43] they did come back for a modification. Um but this is a so that current

[1:58:48] contract expires at the end of this calendar year. So Mr. Huntington and

[1:58:52] Waste Management has presented uh extension to that contract, a three-year

[1:58:57] extension. There is one minor change after I discuss it with Mr. Huntington.

[1:59:01] It does propose a yard waste collection fee of $35 a ton. I'm trying to

[1:59:08] differentiate because we currently pay by yard right now. We pay $7.50 per yard

[1:59:15] of yard waste. So, and I asked Mr. Huntington, "How do I convert yards to

[1:59:20] ton?" Because a yard of one material might weigh more or less than a yard of

[1:59:24] a different material. And he indicated that they would keep the current rate of

[1:59:29] $7.50 50 cents a yard for our yardway. So, that would be one change um to what

[1:59:35] is in your packet. Instead of going to $35 a ton, it would remain at $7.50 per

[1:59:42] yard. And I'll let Mr. Huntington explain that further if you want. Um the

[1:59:47] only other caveat is in their agree we are capped in our code to a very

[1:59:54] specific CPI measure. In all likelihood, the proposed

[2:00:00] increases, which are 4.5% and 5% for the two successive years after next year,

[2:00:07] will likely exceed the cap or the CPI index that we're

[2:00:12] using. So over the course of this coming year, we may need to revisit that

[2:00:19] ordinance which is dates from 2008 that list a very specific CPI measure

[2:00:25] which I included in your packet. We may need to revisit how we peg increases to

[2:00:31] our sanitation fees. All I'm saying is that's that may be a subject for

[2:00:35] discussion going forward. And if I could just get y'all pause just

[2:00:41] for a second. I wanted to do some housekeeping and I forgot to mention

[2:00:44] this. Um there is a public comment period at the end of the meeting. So I

[2:00:48] just wanted to let you know that um before we got too deep into that. So

[2:00:51] that's my fault for not bringing that up. I just wanted to remind you that. Um

[2:00:54] okay. Sorry about that. And that that's all I had. If you want to hear from Mr.

[2:00:58] Huntington for the record, Greg Huntington, senior

[2:01:02] account executive for Waste Management Incorporated of Florida. until Dale's

[2:01:06] point, um, we were looking to change what you'd already we had already

[2:01:10] established with the city as a as a per yard rate, per yard debris. You don't

[2:01:15] really bring us that much yard debris. So, when I talked with Dale, we didn't

[2:01:19] want to confuse the matter. We just said, "Look, we'll just keep it the 7

[2:01:22] the $7.50 per yard that we've been building the city since you entered into

[2:01:28] the agreement with um Environmental Land Services. We acquired them in June 1st

[2:01:32] of 2024. So, we'd be willing to just keep that as is simply because you're

[2:01:38] not bringing the majority of the waste that you're bringing us is municipal

[2:01:41] solid waste or trash or garbage. And

[2:01:47] it was mentioned earlier about hazardous waste. So, let me just address that if

[2:01:51] you want. In municipalities where we provide

[2:01:55] collection services like collection of residential services or commercial

[2:01:59] services, a lot of times we'll work with the municipalities on a day that

[2:02:03] residents can bring hazardous waste to how it's disposed of. You know, I'd have

[2:02:09] to look into that because all we are in Flaggler County is a disposal facility.

[2:02:14] We do not have any collection contracts, but we do have disposal agreements with

[2:02:17] your city, Flagger Beach, city of Benell, Flagger County, and City of Palm

[2:02:22] Coast. So my commitment to you as a good partner because I appreciate the

[2:02:25] relationship we share in in sharing in these critical environmental services

[2:02:29] that we're providing for your city. I will reach out to those municipalities

[2:02:32] that I have good relationships with and see if in fact they're going to be

[2:02:36] providing days that your residents can participate in in in disposing hazardous

[2:02:41] waste because it is important because lithium batteries I mean they get into

[2:02:46] trucks and they burn our trucks down and our trucks are you know 320,000

[2:02:51] so we don't want the hazardous material like lithium batteries in our waste.

[2:02:57] » I've worked with Mr. Huntington. And when I was in Bernardina Beach,

[2:03:00] Bernardina Beach had an annual household hazardous waste and e-waste collection

[2:03:05] day. And they actually contracted I can't remember what other agency they

[2:03:10] piggybacked off of, but it was approximately a $35,000

[2:03:14] one time a year. It's typically around Earth Day, so midappril that residents

[2:03:21] could come and dispose. And it was a third party contractor. It wasn't waste

[2:03:25] management that they would collect your paints. They would collect your

[2:03:28] electronics. They would collect, you had to put a limit on tires because you'd

[2:03:32] have people bring in a truckload of tires. Then they'd go home and pick up

[2:03:35] another truckload of tires. But that was a third party contract. And I again, if

[2:03:41] there's some I can work with Mr. Huntington and maybe other communities

[2:03:44] in the county and say, "Yeah, are we interested, you know, collaborate and

[2:03:49] get a third party vendor in here to do that collection?" because it it wasn't

[2:03:53] waste management or waste bro or it was a specialized company that collected the

[2:03:58] paints, collected the tarpentines and collected all that at the city's public

[2:04:02] works yard and for a while we would check IDs so that you you know we

[2:04:08] weren't getting people from all over South Georgia coming and depositing

[2:04:12] their stuff. So if you want I can gladly start the conversation with uh Mr.

[2:04:17] Huntington and Waste Management figure out, hey, do we want to try and execute

[2:04:21] something like that in light of the absence or the dis uh discontinuation of

[2:04:26] a county household hazardous waste site? >> Okay. Discussion or questions for city

[2:04:33] manager or representative? >> I do.

[2:04:37] So, our solid waste is going to go up 41%, right? That's what I'm reading

[2:04:42] here. >> Correct. From $46 a ton to $65 a ton.

[2:04:46] Are we accounting for this in the budget for sanitation?

[2:04:50] » We raised the sanitation rates to the maximum allowable that is permitted by

[2:04:55] our municipal code which was 2 I think 2.46%.

[2:05:01] » I thought we just gave you all a raise not long ago.

[2:05:03] » You did towards the end of last year which I came here and thanked y'all for.

[2:05:07] It was like 8%. Um, and I I made the point, you know, Environmental Land

[2:05:11] Services, not to take anything away from them, but they more were more or less

[2:05:15] like a mom and pop organization. >> I know, Mike. Very well. Yeah.

[2:05:18] » Yeah. And I mean, WM, we're the largest sustainability company in North America.

[2:05:21] So, we put an emphasis on the safety of our employees, maintenance standards,

[2:05:25] infrastructure standards, all those things that we've improved, which makes

[2:05:28] it safer for when your employees come to dispose of the waste. So, yes, it's a

[2:05:32] significant increase. Um but in one respect we're really the only disposal

[2:05:37] game in town in Flagler County. Um you know city of Palm Coast and um

[2:05:44] uh Flagler County, I believe they take their waste all the way down to Tamoka

[2:05:47] landfill in Valuchia County, which is about a 64 mile round trip from here

[2:05:52] today where it's a 32 mile round trip to our facility.

[2:05:56] » And Mr. Rodriguez, the sanitation director, did reach out and get the

[2:06:00] numbers from Valuchia County and in his estimation that although the landfill

[2:06:05] cost may be somewhat lower by the time you factor in time and wear on the

[2:06:10] vehicles, um it would ultimately be more expensive to go to the Valuchia County

[2:06:15] landfill instead of continuing to use the waste management transfer station

[2:06:19] here in Bennell. But we did look into that as an option.

[2:06:26] » Mr. Yeah. Um I just had a qu question for

[2:06:29] the city manager. Um you know, maybe moving over the course of this next

[2:06:33] incoming fiscal year. Um I'd like to request just to see if we can get some

[2:06:37] data every quarter to see, you know, what our, you know, our solid waste is,

[2:06:43] what's, you know, what our fuel costs are. Just to start looking at things

[2:06:46] strategically here a little bit to see what the costs are and what how that's

[2:06:50] going up and different things. I mean um just to look at things a little bit more

[2:06:53] holistically for the you know to for some planning in the future with our you

[2:06:57] know our projected growth as a city and things like that

[2:06:59] » and one of the things that I had contemplated in the course of the year

[2:07:02] and if you know again if we're going to look at establishing some goals um was

[2:07:07] to actually put together uh requests for proposals um in for which the city we

[2:07:12] would prepare a proposal um because again there is a cost of

[2:07:18] the local service um would you get things less expensive in all likelihood

[2:07:23] through one of the major players whether it's Waste Management or whether it's

[2:07:27] Waste Pro or whether it's FCC which services Palm Coast but again put out a

[2:07:31] request for proposals um there are some unique challenge to our community

[2:07:35] whether it's the commercial collections the the narrow streets the things like

[2:07:39] that because a lot of the professional garbage haulers um they're transitioning

[2:07:44] to what they call ASL automated side loaders so there's only one person in

[2:07:48] the truck that uses joystick fixes stuff up and go, which I mean there there are

[2:07:53] some challenges in our community with overhead wires with trees and things

[2:07:58] like that. But um have a meeting with interested providers such as Waste

[2:08:02] Management, Waste Pro or FCC and our people and basically say, "Okay, put

[2:08:06] together a proposal for residential and commercial waste collection and look at

[2:08:12] the numbers and bring those numbers back to you and say, "Yep, we you know, at a

[2:08:16] certain point it's if it's going to be $50 a year or $50 a month for

[2:08:20] sanitation, but another company can provide it for $25 a month." At least,

[2:08:25] as you said, you have the data. you can make an informed decision on what do you

[2:08:30] think best suits our residents.

[2:08:37] » I would like to see that before we go through next year's budget cycle that

[2:08:42] information and RFP the whole nine yards because at some point it does become

[2:08:48] dollars and cents. Thank you. And that would be for solid waste and uh

[2:08:55] yard debris also. Right. >> Correct. And um in all likelihood in my

[2:09:00] discussions with Mr. Huntington, not just residential but commercial and then

[2:09:05] we also offer a bulk pickup as well. So the full gamut of sanitation services

[2:09:10] that we now provide as a city, we can put it out for request for proposal, a

[2:09:15] line by line comparison. Okay. What are you going to charge our commercial

[2:09:18] residents? One of those challenges, a lot of our commercial accounts are

[2:09:24] rollout dumpsters, whereas a lot of the more professional components, they use

[2:09:30] the overhead dumpsters. Well, that in some ways creates other problems, but

[2:09:34] that's invite all the players to a meeting, share the concerns with them,

[2:09:38] and there might be some that say, "Nope, we're we're not interested. Your your

[2:09:42] circumstances are too unique." You know, how do we handle the beach collection?

[2:09:45] you can't use automated side loaders on our beach cans. So, we have to figure

[2:09:51] out how do we craft the RFP and that's bring in them have a

[2:09:55] preliminary meeting and say here's the challenges help us create the RFP so

[2:10:00] that everybody's on a level playing field and we compare apples to apples to

[2:10:03] apples.

[2:10:08] » Mr. Santo, uh can you confirm is this a one or a

[2:10:12] three-year uh contract here? It's a It's a three-year extension.

[2:10:16] » A three-year extension >> with fixed price increases in years two

[2:10:19] and three, which the city manager referenced. And

[2:10:22] » sometimes municipalities want to use a CPI index. And we typically will appeal

[2:10:28] for water, sewer, trash or garbage, and trash collection because it better

[2:10:32] represents the cost associated with the industry. Some people go with CPIU,

[2:10:35] which isn't really, but it's always you you never know. you're not you're not

[2:10:40] going to know with certainty what the CPI increase is going to be. So, a lot

[2:10:44] of times municipalities like the idea of a fixed increase year-over-year because

[2:10:48] you can budget for it. That makes sense.

[2:10:52] » Okay. Thank you. >> How does these rates compare to the

[2:10:59] other local municipalities? >> Are you putting us on track in line with

[2:11:04] the other ones? So I have I have smaller disposal agreements with the city of

[2:11:08] Palm Coast and with Flagger County and I have MSW listed there for $75 a ton.

[2:11:15] Yours is is it 65 >> because your your volumes are going to

[2:11:20] be greater than theirs and so obviously with volumes that you know the cost can

[2:11:24] come down.

[2:11:31] city manager. Um, am I correct in saying that Palm Coast is shipping theirs down

[2:11:38] to Valuchia? Is is that what >> I believe they use FCC?

[2:11:42] » That's correct. The the company that has their collection contract is FCC, which

[2:11:47] is actually a Spanish-based company. Um, the county is Waste Pro, and they do

[2:11:53] take the waste that they collect curbside or commercial and take it to

[2:11:57] the the Valuchia Valuchia County landfill. the disposal agreements I have

[2:12:02] with them. I have different items listed in there if in fact for whatever reason

[2:12:06] hurricanes or storms and they had to you know deposit material there. So

[2:12:12] okay further discussion

[2:12:18] look for a motion make a motion we approve resolution

[2:12:24] 2026-71. >> A second we have a motion a second. I'd

[2:12:28] like to open this up to public comment. Any members of the public wish to speak

[2:12:31] on this agenda item?

[2:12:40] » Mark 261 Ocean Time. Um, just listening to things, why why would the same amount

[2:12:47] of solid waste go up that much uh in a year? Um, I just want was kind of

[2:12:54] wondering why just I don't know why would that it's the same amount. Why

[2:12:59] does it have to go up? Is that go gas costes or costs or employees or what

[2:13:05] what costs? Why does the cost have to go up so much over that period of time? So,

[2:13:10] I'm just curious about that.

[2:13:18] Kicker 351 Palm Circle. Um the representative from Waste Management uh

[2:13:24] used two key phrases. uh they're an environmental services company and

[2:13:28] they're the largest sustainability company. Is there a way we can get them

[2:13:32] to uh put their money where their mouth is and uh show us uh their skills in

[2:13:37] that regard? Um you know, we're talking $65 a ton. How do we reduce our tonnage

[2:13:42] of waste? Is there opportunities? We have a fairly limited recycling program

[2:13:47] here right now. I've heard that's because it's expensive to recycle. Are

[2:13:50] there opportunities for us to expand our recycling program that could be less

[2:13:54] than $65 a ton for recyclables? Um, they're the experts or the biggest in

[2:13:59] the world or biggest United States or whatever. Is there a way we can hold

[2:14:02] them or encourage them to give us other alternatives to reduce our uh a tonnage

[2:14:08] of uh waste, hopefully reduce cost? Thanks.

[2:14:13] » Thank you. Anyone else for public comment on this agenda item?

[2:14:19] And seeing none, we'll close public comment. Um,

[2:14:24] you can go ahead and step back up because both questions are directed u

[2:14:28] towards y'all and you might be able to provide some insight. So, first question

[2:14:32] was why so much? So, so I made the point that when we took over from

[2:14:37] environmental land services, um, you know, we our standards for, you know,

[2:14:42] maintenance standards to our buildings, safety standards for our employees,

[2:14:45] infrastructure, pavement of roads, scale houses, and yes, we do um, you know,

[2:14:50] probably pay our employees more than most, and there's benefits. So, and then

[2:14:55] there's obviously transportation cost. The agreement with the Environmental

[2:14:58] Land Services was a three-year agreement going back to 2024 with no price

[2:15:03] increases other than the one you afforded us towards the end of last

[2:15:06] year, which we were very appreciative for. These costs better represent the

[2:15:11] costs associated with our industry at this time. I mean, and I don't say this

[2:15:14] to be contentious, but we're obviously not in the business to break even or

[2:15:17] lose money. I mean, there's certain acceptable profit margins that we run

[2:15:23] on. >> All right. M bill on that. Yeah. The

[2:15:30] previous agreement with environmental land services was directly negotiated by

[2:15:34] the former sanitation director and it was an incredible deal on behalf of the

[2:15:40] city. The $45 a ton. That's that's a factor in the increase is that yes, for

[2:15:49] 3 years that cost was locked in at $45 a ton with no inflationary increases

[2:15:55] whatsoever. So the city had a very good agreement with Environmental Land

[2:16:00] Services when Mr. Smith left. So that's that's a contributing factor. The

[2:16:07] previous deal um did not keep pace with the economics at the time either.

[2:16:13] And the other one was about recycling and reducing tonnage.

[2:16:17] » Yeah. Well, I mean, we'll definitely take a look at um you know, he made the

[2:16:21] point which is true. There's a lot of cost associated with recycling and that

[2:16:25] you know, I could come and do a whole presentation on as to why that is

[2:16:28] because the demand worldwide demand for it has gone down significantly. So what

[2:16:32] where it used to be we were getting paid a rebate for the material and shared

[2:16:35] that with municipalities. Now it's, you know, depending on your geographic

[2:16:38] region, it's $155, $165 a ton for processing, recycling. So it has to make

[2:16:44] sense. Yes, he he makes a good point. We are the largest sustainability company

[2:16:49] in North America because it in different geographic locations where it makes

[2:16:53] sense for us to be able to do that, then we have those material recovery

[2:16:57] facilities all over the state of Florida. Unfortunately, here in

[2:16:59] Northeast Florida, it's Republic Waste Services, which are located up in Duval

[2:17:03] County. Um, but in the past we have received recyclable material. And I'll

[2:17:08] have those conversations with our operations to see if in fact there could

[2:17:13] be certain commodities that make sense. That may be what they're really doing is

[2:17:17] they're probably receiving things like cardboard or paper or metals where the

[2:17:20] value is still there unlike glass or plastics.

[2:17:25] Yeah. So, as a as a as a municipal partner of yours, I will look into the

[2:17:29] hazardous waste disposal with with Mr. Martin as well as look at other

[2:17:34] opportunities to reduce the MSW portion of your, you know, trash if it

[2:17:41] can be diverted into to recyclable material.

[2:17:45] » Right. Any other questions or discussion?

[2:17:48] Mr. Centtory. >> I mean, just from personal experience,

[2:17:51] you know, we had at our business ELS and I really enjoyed having them and they're

[2:17:55] a great company to work with. But now, see, you know, I've seen the waste

[2:17:59] management trucks and the drivers, you know, the equipment pull up and you

[2:18:03] could see one of the reasons why it's it's much more expensive and I do miss

[2:18:07] the old pricing, that's for sure. Um, but the trucks are generally newly

[2:18:12] freshly painted, new decals, you know, nothing's dripping out of them. Um, the

[2:18:18] drivers seem very happy working for them. They're all wearing their safety

[2:18:23] vest. You know, little things on the compliance end I noticed that maybe not

[2:18:26] everyone else will see, but you know, so just wanted to to save that for the

[2:18:31] public and for us too. But, you know, be nice to get a little more competition in

[2:18:34] the area for sure and maybe in a future date we'll have that. So, thank you.

[2:18:40] » Right. Further discussion. All right. We have already had public

[2:18:45] comment. We have motion. Penny, if you call the RO, please.

[2:18:51] » Commissioner Sherman, >> yes.

[2:18:53] » Commissioner Cuttingham, >> yes.

[2:18:54] » Commissioner Santo, >> yes to motion.

[2:18:56] » Commissioner Sprdley, >> yes to the motion.

[2:18:58] » Chair Kulie, >> yes. The motion. Motion passes

[2:19:01] unanimous. Thank you. Appreciate your time tonight. I'll move on. Resolution

[2:19:06] 2026-72.

[2:19:09] » Resolution 2026-72. A resolution by the city commission of

[2:19:13] the city of Flagler Beach, Florida, ranking the parking management vendors

[2:19:17] and directing the city manager to begin discussions related to parking

[2:19:20] management with the highest ranked vendor providing for conflict and an

[2:19:22] effective date. >> All right, city manager, you want me to

[2:19:28] take this or you want to get >> I can introduce it again. Um, I believe

[2:19:32] we see at least three companies here. I'm not sure if the fourth is somebody

[2:19:37] here from Passport. I don't see anybody from Passport. So,

[2:19:42] the other three um are here. That's one parking, Peninsula Park, partners

[2:19:46] parking, and last parking. Um they did give a presentation to you um earlier in

[2:19:52] August. Um unfortunately, I know the mayor and commissioners were not able to

[2:19:56] attend, but I understand that you you reviewed the video with the

[2:19:59] presentations. So the intent tonight is solely to rank for four consultants and

[2:20:08] then if you're still in if you're still interested in pursuing conversations

[2:20:13] about parking management or paid parking rank the four I will then begin

[2:20:18] discussions with the number one ranked and the intent is that we will develop a

[2:20:24] conceptual framework relatively quickly to bring to you to

[2:20:30] say, "Okay, you like that?" Like, "What days do you want parking? What, you

[2:20:34] know, area do you want paid parking? You know, how many residential exemptions?"

[2:20:39] So, we'll we'll put together something first, just like the pier. We'll bring

[2:20:43] it to you and you say, "We like that, we like that, we don't like that. Change

[2:20:46] that." So, that's what the intent come out of. You rank them. I'll start

[2:20:51] working with the first one. And if for some reason the wheels wobble or come

[2:20:55] off the cart and are not successful in working or you're not satisfied with

[2:21:00] where we're going with the number one ranked, we say thank you very much and

[2:21:03] we go to the number two ranked and we'll go on until you come up with the program

[2:21:07] or you decide we want to take the offramp. We don't want to pursue this

[2:21:11] anymore. So that's the intent tonight. I did inform all of them that um there

[2:21:16] were no presentations to be expected tonight, but I said they may want to be

[2:21:22] available if you have any questions for them. So, I appreciate the other three

[2:21:25] companies um coming here and their continued interest in the city of

[2:21:30] Flagler Beach. >> All right. Before we get into

[2:21:33] discussion, just some housekeeping items. Number one, does everybody have

[2:21:37] the score sheet that was uh put on the dis? It's our standard regular

[2:21:43] commission score sheet. You would want to have the score sheet

[2:21:49] where number one is the highest score and then we all pass down. Give it the

[2:21:54] penny all that. But I want to kind of just even segue this.

[2:22:02] So picking

[2:22:06] a parking company to talk to is not going to mean that the city is moving

[2:22:14] forward with paid parking. We all agree on that.

[2:22:18] » Yes. >> Okay.

[2:22:20] In order to move forward with paid parking, you have to cover hundreds upon

[2:22:26] hundreds upon hundreds of things and whatifs and the nuts and the bolts and

[2:22:32] all that. We could start talking to a parking company about some of those nuts

[2:22:38] and bolts and we might find that they're not the right parking company for our

[2:22:41] nuts and bolts and then we might have to go back and then talk to a different

[2:22:46] parking company. And this is a very very long runway. And

[2:22:52] this is, you know, and just to be fair to the process, this is also a runroy

[2:22:58] that could potentially lead nowhere or it could lead to this isn't the right

[2:23:02] fit for us. There's there's a thousand things. This is

[2:23:07] we rank the companies based off what we heard

[2:23:11] and any questions that that get brought up tonight. And then the city manager is

[2:23:16] going to start discussing things with them and go, "Here's what our city is.

[2:23:22] Here's kind of what we're thinking and here's and then there's there's going to

[2:23:26] be meetings and meetings and all the the the minutia um that has to get worked

[2:23:33] out. Uh I saw, you know, it's interesting. I saw a a press article

[2:23:37] today talking about this meeting was going to be decided for moving forward

[2:23:41] with paid parking. We can't move forward with paid parking. We don't even know

[2:23:44] what it consists of right now. This is moving forward with discussions.

[2:23:49] I just want to put all the hysteria at bay a little bit. Um, am I is there

[2:23:55] anybody that does that make sense? Am I speaking right?

[2:23:59] » Okay, mayor. >> Yes. And I can appreciate you setting

[2:24:03] the tone of this conversation and what we are looking to achieve tonight. We

[2:24:09] are not making a decision definitively one way or the other. It's continuing

[2:24:13] conversations. So, thank you for stating that.

[2:24:17] » We can't decide if paid parking is the right thing for the city if we don't

[2:24:22] know anything about it. >> And this has been I have a DVD that Jane

[2:24:29] Mee let me borrow where the city was talking about paid parking in the late

[2:24:34] 90s. So this is 30 years and this is you know you got to do your due dil due

[2:24:42] diligence to figure out if it's the right thing or not. Um I don't think any

[2:24:47] one of us knows if it's the right thing or not at the moment. Um technology

[2:24:50] changes fast. We have some new stuff to discuss but you can't make any

[2:24:57] determinations if you don't know anything about it. Uh Commissioner

[2:25:01] Sherman, you had something. No, I think the mayor kind of um hit the point on

[2:25:05] the head to reiterate what you were saying. I don't there's no decision

[2:25:08] being made tonight. I think we just have to make that clearly stated for the

[2:25:12] record because I think there's a lot of misinformation out there and a lot of

[2:25:16] conclusions being made and it's almost like a a game of telephone. And so I

[2:25:21] think that uh you know we just really you know I think the public needs to

[2:25:26] know that this this is just the early on preliminary stages. There's nothing, you

[2:25:31] know, there's a lot, like I think you just said, there's a lot of nuts and

[2:25:34] bolts. There's a lot of um, you know, fine details we would have to go through

[2:25:38] before we even push this to the finish line.

[2:25:44] Yeah, I there's a I made quote I got an interview and made a quote and I've been

[2:25:51] saying the same quote since I've lived here. Um, and I I genuinely believe that

[2:25:56] for this city, uh, paid parking is inevitable. at some point and I don't

[2:26:01] know when that point is but at some point I I believe that the population

[2:26:06] over there is going to be so great that we cannot intelligently hold that

[2:26:12] capacity here and the one of the only ways to manage it is with paid parking.

[2:26:16] I've been saying that for 12 years, but they, you know, there's uh a lot of

[2:26:21] social media out there said, "Oh, Commissioner Kulie's all decided on that

[2:26:25] and and I if you say for my long-term vision of the city, it might decide on

[2:26:30] it." Yes, I absolutely believe that is inevitable. It it will happen at some

[2:26:34] point. Um but we need to decide if that point is now or if that point is later

[2:26:39] or if that point is after all these things get worked out. But we can't you

[2:26:45] can't do it unless you at least have conversations.

[2:26:49] But I thought I just wanted to put a little bit of bandwidth into that

[2:26:52] because there's so much hysteria out there and everybody is absolutely

[2:26:57] convinced that this commission is going to start paid parking tomorrow

[2:27:02] and I just think it needed said.

[2:27:07] All right. So let's have >> I have one thing.

[2:27:10] » Yes, sir. I've spoke to everybody I can find and

[2:27:16] probably 75% don't want paid parking. Maybe 25% does.

[2:27:25] What would be wrong with having a referendum and let citizens vote on it

[2:27:29] if they want it or don't want it? Is that even an option? Could it be an

[2:27:35] option? Cuz

[2:27:40] case in point, Fernandina Beach, city of Fernandina Beach started in February and

[2:27:45] lasted 6 months and it's closed up, shut down because the citizens didn't want it

[2:27:51] and they voted to have it taken away. And that was my only point.

[2:27:59] And I mean, the city already owns parking lots that the city owns.

[2:28:06] Why couldn't we do paid parking there? Manage it in house even

[2:28:10] in some way. Figuring out what that would be.

[2:28:16] We could do that anytime we want cuz a city owns property and make it

[2:28:23] happen. People would pay to park in the city parking lots.

[2:28:30] And you bring up uh two good points in one of the vendors is passport which

[2:28:35] would be if the city was doing something that was inhouse that would be a

[2:28:39] provider of software you know to do it or we could always build our own too

[2:28:44] which probably would not be a good idea for us to try to tackle with everything

[2:28:48] else we have going on. Um but P passport would be

[2:28:53] a package that the city would you know purchase in in as a possibility of doing

[2:28:59] it in house. Um so discussion on so you bring up a good point. So discussion on

[2:29:06] referendum versus you know what we're doing now as far as

[2:29:10] like having discussions with a parking provider. Commissioner Sherman.

[2:29:13] » Yeah I I it's a great point you bring up about the you know voting referendum. I

[2:29:18] think it would be worth an option now to get it to that point. I guess there's a

[2:29:21] couple questions. I guess city clerk, how like if we were to put that on the

[2:29:25] ballot for March, how soon would that need to be uh ironed out by?

[2:29:29] » Deadline for November is already passed. Um your March deadline is going to be uh

[2:29:36] somewhere in early December. >> Okay. So, city manager, realistically,

[2:29:40] if we came up with a vendor tonight and we ironed out, you know, these are the

[2:29:45] things that we would want. So, like when the voters would go to vote for that,

[2:29:49] let's say, you know, in March, that it was very detailed, very informative. You

[2:29:54] know, we've already kind of set some of the groundwork of if we do go forward

[2:29:57] with paid parking, our residents will not be paying. Like, that's I think I'm

[2:30:01] pretty sure I can speak for everybody up there. And I think also, you know, my

[2:30:04] other concerns, our businesses, right? How's that impact our businesses? So,

[2:30:08] you know, I know there's probably going to be need to be several conversations

[2:30:11] to be had, but I do want to continue pushing. I I think that we can't

[2:30:15] continue kicking the can down the road, but I do really appreciate Commissioner

[2:30:19] Cunningham's point to the fact that having it uh of having it come to a

[2:30:24] voting referendum. Um it would be, you know, maybe a great idea, but I think

[2:30:28] also having all the um details ironed out of kind of what the board would like

[2:30:33] to see. Um and having some sort of public input from, you know, hearing

[2:30:37] from the general public over this um matter would be imperative. But I do

[2:30:42] still want to push forward this evening with selecting a vendor and also, you

[2:30:47] know, maybe opening up the dialect of having it go to a voting referendum.

[2:30:52] » I missed the that would be early January. I'm sorry.

[2:30:56] » Yeah, I think so. There's a couple pieces to that and that I'm thinking is

[2:31:01] we could never get it packaged quick enough to hit January. just my

[2:31:08] opinion because if you're going to vote on paid parking, the vote is what does

[2:31:14] that paid parking even look like and then that would have to kind of get put

[2:31:18] together. Um, yes. Should that be a consideration as part of the discussion?

[2:31:24] And I would absolutely think that should be part of the discussion as far as what

[2:31:29] we're looking at now in doing the research, finding out what

[2:31:33] our options are, seeing if it can even be profitable, does it make sense for

[2:31:37] the city, you know, all that stuff, um I think is probably more where we are at

[2:31:43] in the discussion now because to put it to referendum, you have to know what

[2:31:48] you're putting to referendum. You can't really I mean you could essentially put

[2:31:54] a concept of paid parking on referendum but that's not really the right way to

[2:31:59] do it. >> And keep in mind and I don't know how

[2:32:01] the cost would compare but we're not talking about a charter amendment you so

[2:32:04] you could also have your own special election so you do not have to use

[2:32:08] supervisor elections to do this either. >> Commissioner did you have something?

[2:32:12] Yeah, just that um if we were to go the referendum route and this really just

[2:32:19] amplifies amplifies what you said, uh we need to be able to present to the

[2:32:24] residents what it is that we think paid parking would consist of. And in order

[2:32:29] to do that, then we need to rank and then have uh whoever is the high uh or

[2:32:34] actually the low score is what it amounts to uh make their presentation

[2:32:38] because we need to understand what it is we're thinking about doing before

[2:32:41] telling the residents that they're going to vote yay or nay on the ballot. Um, so

[2:32:46] my view is we continue what we set out to do tonight on the agenda, rank these

[2:32:53] companies and then begin talking immediately with who the low score is so

[2:32:59] that we have something to present to the residents of what they'd be voting on,

[2:33:03] » right? And then once you figure out is the possibility of paid parking,

[2:33:12] you know, would it have a possibility of being the right thing for Flaggler

[2:33:16] Beach? Then the discussion of putting it on referendum I think would then kick in

[2:33:21] is all right. Well, if we think it's the right thing, then it would need to we

[2:33:25] would need to figure out how to get it on ballot. Does that am I Does that kind

[2:33:29] of make sense? I mean it could be voted no

[2:33:33] » right >> be done.

[2:33:39] » You mean like just the the concept of paper parking? I don't know if we'd be

[2:33:42] able to put some like what it would look like

[2:33:46] together that quick. >> Well, I know that but

[2:33:50] » get a feel for what people want. Citizens want yes or no. Well,

[2:33:55] » I think you would be more talking straw pole at that point. I think

[2:34:01] I I think in in essence I'm sorry I think um

[2:34:06] we would need we would need to do our job and select from the professionals

[2:34:13] who' be presenting to us and excuse me just a second.

[2:34:23] I think that we should have a plan based on the presentations that we have and if

[2:34:28] we as a board feel that we support paid parking, we support this plan, then

[2:34:33] that's what needs to be presented to the residents is what they're voting on. Um,

[2:34:38] so we have to get there. right now I don't think paid parking yes paid

[2:34:43] parking no makes sense to me because of all the dynamics and all the pieces to

[2:34:48] it which is exactly why we want to talk to a parking company and see what would

[2:34:52] fit for this city and our view and then that's what we present to the public if

[2:34:57] uh if we're still of the view after hearing the information that uh taking

[2:35:02] it to the public is the way to go fine at least we have something to carry to

[2:35:05] them so you know that's my You >> Commissioner Santori,

[2:35:11] » I feel like we're asking the vendor to do quite a bit of work at that point for

[2:35:14] then for it to then to go to a referendum. So what I might suggest is

[2:35:19] for the referendum to say to give us the option to vote yes and it still gives us

[2:35:23] the power even if citizens vote they want us to do paid parking, we can still

[2:35:28] say no because what if there it's financially unfeasible in 3 years? What

[2:35:33] if you know the beach washes away and there's no parking? You know, I think we

[2:35:38] need to I'd be very careful locking us into yes to paid parking.

[2:35:44] I think we could do both tracks at the same time possibly.

[2:35:50] » Further discussion, Mayor, >> I agree with uh Commissioners Bradley. I

[2:35:54] think we need to have more details and a more more uh planned out approach. Um

[2:36:02] you know, you ask 20 opinions, you get 20 different opinions. And I don't think

[2:36:07] that's the position we want to be in versus um streamline it, have options,

[2:36:13] have data, facts to provide. I not opposed to doing the referendum, but I

[2:36:21] think we continue down the path we're going on now because we need the data.

[2:36:27] Well, the path we're going down now also is not

[2:36:32] we're not taking action other than just deciding to have a discussion with with

[2:36:35] a company, right? Um which I would view that as no risk at

[2:36:42] this point. Am I wrong in saying that? >> No, that's correct.

[2:36:46] » Okay. Um what any other

[2:36:52] discussion on like how we move forward with this? Um, want to jump into some

[2:36:58] questions? Is there any questions for the parking vendors? Have you all been

[2:37:01] able to review it? Are y'all want to Are y'all Do you all

[2:37:06] feel comfortable with ranking them on the score sheet?

[2:37:12] Okay. Oh, that was easy. Um, all right. So, we'll get that we'll get

[2:37:20] that going. Um, in the meantime, while that's getting tallied up, um, I do want

[2:37:26] to open this item up to public comment. Any members of the public wish to speak

[2:37:29] on this agenda item?

[2:37:36] Kim, Flagger Beach. Um, you guys, uh, I hate to say it, but you

[2:37:43] kind of, um, reiterate what the other person has already just said and you

[2:37:48] could streamline your conversations a lot more by just saying, "Okay, I agree

[2:37:53] with this guy instead of reconstituting the whole conversation what Kohley said

[2:37:58] and then Spratley says the same thing." Um, the guys are here and they already

[2:38:03] know the uh the the companies are here. They know they know the deadlines and

[2:38:08] what they can do and uh I guess you've had that information that they're here

[2:38:13] to tell you yes or no whether they could do it. Um personally I like the idea of

[2:38:18] voting on it. Um I just think it's fair for for residents to get a say into

[2:38:24] what's going on in the in the city. And um you know I I was against parking

[2:38:30] until um the last year or two. It's crazy here. You go anywhere to any beach

[2:38:36] and it's packed down by the tower where we live, packed all the time. Um, so as

[2:38:43] much as I thought it went against the kind of the feel of Flagger Beach that,

[2:38:48] you know, is pretty much gone, that vision is doesn't exist anymore in my

[2:38:53] opinion. um all these costs that are coming to us. Um the only way I see

[2:39:00] really to make to help that out is to charge people that are coming in here

[2:39:04] and using the services. And you know, I know it's going to impact the

[2:39:07] businesses, but I travel a lot and a lot of places that do have parking like

[2:39:11] that. As much as I it kind of pisses me off to go there and have to pay, a lot

[2:39:15] of businesses encourage you to go there by uh they'll stamp your thing or take

[2:39:21] it off your bill or whatever like that. So they work with the the customers, the

[2:39:25] parkers, park parking people to um alleviate the pain of having to pay the

[2:39:30] parking from a business point. If people are going to come to the beach, they're

[2:39:34] going to come and pay anyways. I don't I don't know why we don't make money on

[2:39:38] them. That's just my personal thing, but I would like to vote on it. Thank you

[2:39:41] very much.

[2:39:50] Palmer kick at 351 Palm Circle. Um the the idea of a referendum is

[2:39:56] interesting. Um I I hesitate supporting that a little bit just

[2:40:03] because I mean the process for anything we do in the city is we voted you you

[2:40:08] all in the office to represent us, right? Um if we put everything on

[2:40:12] referendum then what's the point of you guys being here? Um, now is this a big

[2:40:17] enough change for the city that maybe it warrants it perhaps? But if we're going

[2:40:22] to do it, I completely agree with uh Commissioner Kulie and Bradley that we

[2:40:27] need to have details. We need to have information cuz as Commissioner Kulie

[2:40:32] pointed out, there's hysteria right now. People think it's the end of the world.

[2:40:35] The sky is falling. And if a a parking company came to us and said, "It's going

[2:40:40] to be $20 an hour uh to park anywhere in Flagley Beach Reach. I think the sky is

[2:40:45] falling." And it would get a no. But if they came to us and said, you know,

[2:40:48] you're a small town, you got a little charm. How about a quarter an hour,

[2:40:52] maybe people are cool with that, you know? So, it's like the details do

[2:40:55] matter rather than just yes or no on paid parking. So, I if we're going to do

[2:40:59] a referendum, please please please do the leg work to get the facts and the

[2:41:03] details straightened out before it goes to the city to vote. So, thanks a lot.

[2:41:10] Anyone else for commenting on this agenda item?

[2:41:17] Hey everyone, Chris Marlo. My family and I own the Golden Lion Cafe and Next Door

[2:41:21] Beach Beastro. Thank you for taking the time to hear our comments. I came

[2:41:25] tonight to express my concern on why I oppose paid parking. Uh first, I don't

[2:41:30] agree that the timing is right. I think the business community hasn't had to

[2:41:34] endure so much over the last 10 years. We've had major hurricanes. We've had

[2:41:38] COVID, we've had hotels being built, A1A being repaved, the beach reourishment,

[2:41:45] the pier almost done, and there's a little bit of light at the end of the

[2:41:48] tunnel. And now we're talking about rolling out paid parking. Come on,

[2:41:51] please. Here's what nobody's going to say. Nobody's going to say, "Hey, I

[2:41:56] heard Flaggler Beach is rolling out paid parking. Let's go check it out. Hey,

[2:42:00] Flagger Beach has paid parking. You want to go there this weekend?" No one is

[2:42:04] going to say that. And maybe the counterargument that I hear all the

[2:42:07] time, which is, hey, you're going to be busy anyways. Maybe those people are

[2:42:11] right. Maybe we'll break even. It'll be exactly the same. Or maybe less people

[2:42:15] will come here. I would like to see a study on that. I am certain that more

[2:42:19] people will go to Barn Park, more people will go to Orman by the Sea, more people

[2:42:23] will go to Matanzis, more people will go to Crescent Beach where there's food and

[2:42:26] beverage options and other businesses there and where it's free to park

[2:42:30] because that's what people do. We are all on the same team here. We all

[2:42:35] love Flaggler Beach. We all share this love for our town and we all just want

[2:42:40] our town to be better. We're just trying to figure out how to get there.

[2:42:44] But it's in all of our interest for people to come over this bridge. And I

[2:42:49] know that there's a little bit of friction right now about that. I get it.

[2:42:52] But the people that come over the bridge,

[2:42:55] the day they stop coming over the bridge, we're going to have a much

[2:42:58] bigger problem than the problem we're experiencing right now.

[2:43:03] We have less funding than ever. These people leave trash behind. We have all

[2:43:08] costs because of it. They're kind of inconvenient.

[2:43:11] Customers are inconvenient. But guess what? They pay our bills and

[2:43:16] we need them and we rely on them. And the 160 people that I employ rely on me

[2:43:21] to stick up for them. And that's what I'm doing here. One of the many

[2:43:25] counterarguments that I've heard is you're going to be just as busy anyways.

[2:43:28] The issue with that is that you're asking me and every other business owner

[2:43:32] to take the risk. Nobody knows. That's speculative. Another counterargument is

[2:43:38] there's thousands of houses being built over there across the bridge. This

[2:43:41] town's blowing up. They're all coming over here.

[2:43:45] Please do not adopt that mentality. That's how fools think. Don't ever

[2:43:50] assume that people are just going to come to our town. Don't ever assume that

[2:43:53] people are just going to come to your business. You have to give them reasons

[2:43:57] to come. You have to make them want to come. And right now, even though we're

[2:44:02] just talking about it, we're creating a gigantic reason not to come.

[2:44:07] FB3 sent out a survey. 16 local businesses responded here in

[2:44:13] downtown. One of the questions was, "On a scale of 1 to 10, 10 being the most

[2:44:18] negative impact, how would you rate paid parking?" Half, eight out of 16 voted

[2:44:24] nine or 10. So, here's my suggestion. Why are we not looking at a more of a

[2:44:29] collective parking solution? In all of the parking discussions I've

[2:44:33] had in this town, many identified the pier as the most problematic area. We

[2:44:38] have a brand new pier. it's going to be prime parking. Maybe we just start

[2:44:42] there. If the surfers and the fishermen and the beachgoers, if that's where they

[2:44:46] go and that's the problem, well then maybe let's charge them at the pier. And

[2:44:51] then maybe we can use those funds to come up with an overall parking

[2:44:55] solution. We could put some bike racks in town to promote bicycle traffic. We

[2:45:00] can have an electric eco-friendly trolley to reduce congestion. We can

[2:45:04] work on buying more city parking lots to increase the parking capacity so there's

[2:45:09] more parking in this town. I have a feeling if we approached it as a more

[2:45:15] holistic solution like that, more people would get behind it. Thank you for what

[2:45:20] you do for Flaggler Beach. We appreciate you. Thank you. Anyone else for public

[2:45:24] comment on this agenda?

[2:45:30] » Melanie Thompson, John Anderson Highway. Um, what is the revenue for the from the

[2:45:37] paid parking going to be for? Is it for certain things at the beach or is it

[2:45:42] going towards reourishment? Because again, I'm trying to advocate that

[2:45:48] we need to have a tax increase to pay for the beach reourishment. If you're

[2:45:51] raising money for Bagger Beach things from the parking, that's one thing. But

[2:45:56] if you're trying to regenerate or generate money just to reourish the

[2:46:00] beach, parking isn't going to bring that. You're going to you're going to uh

[2:46:05] give the residents, city limit residents, free parking. You're going to

[2:46:08] give um employees that come here to work, you're going to give them free

[2:46:12] parking. You're going to give the people that rent hotels and stay in the

[2:46:18] residents, the Airbnbs or whatever, they're going to get free parking. um

[2:46:23] the restaurants are going to stamp their customers. So, how many people are

[2:46:28] really going to come to support parking, paid parking all over? Again, I

[2:46:33] agree with that. If you want to do prime parking, which is the pier, that's one

[2:46:38] thing. But if I'm coming up to get a to go order, I'm not going to pay to park

[2:46:44] my car for 5 minutes. If I'm going to come up and eat, that's another story.

[2:46:49] If they have a parking lot, I might decide to go there and eat. But if they

[2:46:52] don't have a parking lot and I've got to travel three blocks down to find

[2:46:55] somewhere, then I don't have to pay. I'm going have to think twice about that.

[2:46:59] So, the parking should wait here. Needs to be done. Things need to settle the

[2:47:04] dust and then maybe bring it on to the people because right now I think

[2:47:08] everybody's up to this of all the changes and this is just going to throw

[2:47:12] everybody over. Thank you. >> Thank you. Anyone else for public

[2:47:17] comment on this agenda item?

[2:47:22] Right. See all close public comment. Any discussion from public comment?

[2:47:29] » Commissioner Santo. >> Yeah, I mean I know we're all going to

[2:47:32] be very thoughtful about this process and and my biggest concern are the

[2:47:36] businesses. They're a big part of what makes Flagler Beach special and why

[2:47:39] people want to come here. So, you know, I know during this process, if we keep

[2:47:44] if we move forward, we're going to be looking we could be looking at carveouts

[2:47:47] and different things, but I also respect the fact that with 160 employees with a

[2:47:52] high turnover, how much work does that entail for an employer like you? So,

[2:47:56] these are all things we'll have to think about as we move forward. And um and I

[2:48:00] don't know if I have a request if whoever um ranks the highest if you want

[2:48:05] to give them an opportunity to speak if they're here for a couple minutes.

[2:48:10] Thank you, >> Mr. Sprrowley.

[2:48:12] » I I too uh appreciate the public comment where has been said and in addition to

[2:48:18] those who I talk to on a daily basis, um there are many sides to this issue and I

[2:48:25] think that's why we want to invite a company to come tell us what they can do

[2:48:30] for us and with our input of what we would like for them to do for us to see

[2:48:34] if it even makes sense. and uh it would be a ballot item if we you know to go

[2:48:40] forward from there. Um but you know I and I hear um so many different angles

[2:48:48] to it. You know the fact that Flagler Beach residents should get a pass.

[2:48:53] Something should be done to some degree with the business. I mean, I know with

[2:48:57] Chris 160 employees, I I have no idea, you know, what would be a way to

[2:49:03] accommodate that until we hear from these professionals and see. And I

[2:49:07] thought I have a problem. I got three employees. All right. And I'm thinking

[2:49:09] about how am I going to do that? And I'm two blocks from here. So, it's it's

[2:49:14] something that I think Eric said at the beginning, we have not uh implemented a

[2:49:18] plan to have paid parking. We are inviting a study to come in and hear

[2:49:25] from a group and then digest it, synthesize it, come up with something

[2:49:29] and then the residents will then have their input from there.

[2:49:33] » Thank you. >> Right. Further discussion, Commissioner

[2:49:35] Sherman. >> Yeah. Just I think one of the things

[2:49:38] that comes up, you know, and I I I really appreciate everybody coming up

[2:49:41] and speaking tonight about this, but I think, you know, the other thing is is

[2:49:44] we just got done doing a budget, right? And what and who's paying for those

[2:49:48] parking lots? >> It's hard. All right.

[2:49:50] » It's our >> our residents and that's

[2:49:52] » $300,000 each. >> And so that's, you know, we're not a uh

[2:49:57] charter county like our neighbors to our south where, you know, everybody pays

[2:50:00] into the parking lots, right? It's it's the it's the few residents in our

[2:50:05] community. And and I'm, you know, it's it's it's it's finding that right

[2:50:08] balance if this is really something that we go forward with. And and you know,

[2:50:11] I've I've always said, you know, my other concern is our residents and our

[2:50:14] our businesses and how that impacts things. But I also think that, you know,

[2:50:19] there is massive growth growth on the other side of the bridge. And I think

[2:50:23] there's a lot of educating that has to be going on here that they don't, you

[2:50:26] know, I think there's assumptions. Well, I come here and I spend all this money

[2:50:30] in your town. So all my tax money goes to Flagler Beach. That's not correct.

[2:50:35] You know, that that that funnels through, you know, and it goes then

[2:50:38] down, you know, correct me if I'm wrong here, city manager, but it goes to

[2:50:41] Tallahassee. Tallahassee takes their their share. Then the county then

[2:50:44] distributes it out by the population size throughout the county. So that $10

[2:50:49] cheeseburger you got at one of our local establishments, you know, you paid six

[2:50:53] and a half percent, well that's 6 and a half%. Fly Beach might see pennies on

[2:50:56] the dollar to that cheeseburger you just purchased. And you know, I want you to

[2:51:00] support those businesses, but you also have to understand how sales tax works

[2:51:04] and how things flow es and flows here. So, you know, it's this is very very

[2:51:09] difficult decision to have to make and you know, but also, you know, our number

[2:51:13] one thing is our residents and and our businesses, but also, you know, the

[2:51:16] people on the other side of the bridge who do not pay taxes here in Flagler

[2:51:19] Beach have to understand these parking lots that you see these improvements

[2:51:22] have all been on the backs of the taxpayers here in Flaggler Beach.

[2:51:27] Further discussion,

[2:51:32] right, I have the totals here. Um the lowest score is Laz Parking

[2:51:40] is uh is who was selected as the lowest.

[2:51:48] It be the well be the the lowest score which is the the highest the number one.

[2:51:54] It's selected. >> It's like golf low score.

[2:52:00] Um, did y'all want to hear from last?

[2:52:05] You good, mayor? Okay. All right. So, that is selected. Everybody's okay with

[2:52:12] that. Okay. This is Penny. Further discussion on this item before we close

[2:52:17] it.

[2:52:21] Oh, yeah. We We haven't even done the uh the motion yet. All right. This is the

[2:52:26] resolution. So, we are going to need a motion. I'll make a motion that we

[2:52:28] approve resolution 2026-72. >> I'll second.

[2:52:33] » City attorney, does that have the information that you need?

[2:52:36] » You need to include in it the one, two, three, four linking. That penny, I think

[2:52:39] you just have the penny. So, you could you can attach that, but go through it

[2:52:42] and >> say

[2:52:45] what it is. >> All right. I'll I'll uh amend that

[2:52:47] motion. I'll amend uh resolution 2026-72 ranking uh ranking. So, I need to rank

[2:52:55] each one. Correct. Okay. Okay. 1 2 3. Read it in that order. 1 2

[2:52:59] 3 4. So it would be uh last parking and then it would be um

[2:53:06] sorry here. Uh it would then be correct me if I'm wrong here. Pen peninsula

[2:53:10] parking passport parking and then one parking.

[2:53:18] » Is that hard for you? >> Is it do a second?

[2:53:20] » Second. I'll second that. >> All right. We have a motion and a

[2:53:25] second. And Penny, if you call the roll, please.

[2:53:27] » Commissioner Cunningham. >> Yes.

[2:53:30] » Commissioner Santo, >> yes to motion.

[2:53:33] » Commissioner Sprdley, >> yes. The motion.

[2:53:35] » Commissioner Sherman, >> yes.

[2:53:36] » Chair Kulie, >> yes. The motion. Motion passes

[2:53:39] unanimous. Move on to AAA. Ordinance 2026-9.

[2:53:44] here. >> Ordinance 2026-9, an ordinance by the

[2:53:47] city commission of the city of Flagler Beach, Florida, adopting the city

[2:53:49] organizational chart for fiscal year 202627, providing for conflict and

[2:53:53] effective date.

[2:53:57] » All right, city manager, uh you have before you in the packet, which was also

[2:54:01] included in the budget, the proposed organizational chart. Um, in essence,

[2:54:06] there are no changes from the organizational chart from the previous

[2:54:09] year. So you see the various departments listed uh listed uh city commission at

[2:54:15] the top followed by the city manager all the departments that report to the city

[2:54:20] manager and then the subordinate uh departments that report to public works.

[2:54:25] So it is presented to you for consideration.

[2:54:29] All right. Comments or questions for the city manager about the organizational

[2:54:33] chart or the information?

[2:54:38] » I do. >> Yes, sir.

[2:54:43] I assume city engineer is going to be in the

[2:54:46] public works box on the chart. Is that right?

[2:54:51] So everything else, wastewater, utility, I mean all these

[2:54:57] other boxes will fall under one person. >> Correct.

[2:55:02] » Those are traditional public works duties. There's a lot of specialized

[2:55:06] licenses that go along with wastewater and and water and

[2:55:12] everything else that's in here.

[2:55:18] That's a lot to be under one person.

[2:55:26] » Mhm. I mean from typically organized charts

[2:55:30] I've ever seen in cities there's they separate it a little bit

[2:55:36] putting some of it under engineering and some of it under public works.

[2:55:49] » Is that not something that we could consider?

[2:55:55] I think this is the most effective organizational chart. Uh the city

[2:55:59] engineer would have five direct reports to him where I as a city manager have

[2:56:03] 13. So I think five is a reasonable responsibility

[2:56:09] um for the city engineer or the director of public works.

[2:56:25] Can the city engineer handle all this? He's been handling it for the last 3

[2:56:29] years.

[2:56:35] With some hiccups along the way. Absolutely.

[2:56:44] That's it. Any other questions or comments on organizational chart?

[2:56:53] » Look for a motion. >> Motion to approve ordinance 2026-9.

[2:56:58] » Second. All right. We have a motion, a second.

[2:57:01] We'll open this up public comment. Any members of the public wish to speak on

[2:57:04] this agenda?

[2:57:09] I see no one close public comment. Further discussion? Uh, just to clarify,

[2:57:13] this is first reading, so it'll be back before you again on September 24th.

[2:57:19] All right, if you call the roll, please. >> Commissioner Santo,

[2:57:22] » yes, the motion. >> Commissioner Sprdley,

[2:57:24] » yes to the motion. >> Commissioner Sherman,

[2:57:26] » yes. >> Commissioner Cunningham,

[2:57:28] » no. >> Chair Kulie,

[2:57:31] » yes, the motion. Motion passes 41. >> All right, step four, city attorney. One

[2:57:36] little followup from I think the chair your comments at the or your concern you

[2:57:41] expressed at the last meeting regarding Valuchia County Dakota Beach area and

[2:57:46] them cracking down a little bit on beach events and taking forward. So I did a

[2:57:50] little bit of digging and they do not appear to have adopted their own

[2:57:53] legislation. What they did this past summer county and Daytona Beach I think

[2:57:57] were most were both more active in invoking state law that allows them to

[2:58:02] escalate penalties. Um I looked up the term three times now. that keeps on

[2:58:05] flying out of my head. Special event zones and it's a statutory process that

[2:58:09] allows it only covers streets, not beaches. But they've been kind of tying

[2:58:14] that together with youth curfews and and other and other things to try to to

[2:58:23] limit discourage I would say activities. But

[2:58:27] what the special event zones under state law does as to the street, you can

[2:58:31] increase parking, you can go straight to towing, you can do things like that. But

[2:58:34] again, it really doesn't touch the beach, but they've added these layers to

[2:58:37] try to make it a dual effort where I think you were thinking and I

[2:58:42] did see chatter on social media regarding what Panama City and one of

[2:58:46] the Miami cities have done, which is adopting an ordinance which kind of

[2:58:50] applies sending the state has done for roads out to the beach. While I've seen

[2:58:54] the social media comments, I haven't seen anything in their formal record

[2:58:57] show they're formally discussing it yet. But there are certainly again Panama

[2:59:01] City, certainly Panama City Beach has done it. So there are those

[2:59:04] jurisdictions are considering it. So I don't doubt the conversation has come up

[2:59:06] down there, but as of right now, they haven't agenda anything. There haven't

[2:59:09] been any formal discussions about going that direction. They've been leveraging

[2:59:12] what exists under existing law to kind of to do that crackdown this past

[2:59:16] summer. >> So you're not seeing anything out there

[2:59:20] as far as u other than

[2:59:25] » nothing. >> Chatter on social media, but nothing

[2:59:27] actually formally coming to them. But again, chattering on social media get

[2:59:30] somebody formal action and it might be simmering. It just hasn't come forward

[2:59:34] yet. >> Right. Okay. That's good info.

[2:59:38] » Right. City manager. Uh just a reminder, tomorrow is the 25th anniversary of

[2:59:42] September 11th. We have a ceremony out at Veterans Park. Actually, it's

[2:59:46] sponsored by the Knights of Columbus. So, thank you to them um for their

[2:59:50] sponsorship. That's at 8:00 tomorrow morning. Um, other meetings scheduled,

[2:59:54] we have the CRA advisory board meeting scheduled for Monday, September 14th.

[2:59:59] Uh, you've scheduled a special meeting on September 23rd and then the next

[3:00:03] regular city commission meeting, including the second public hearing and

[3:00:06] formal adoption of the budget is scheduled for September 24th. Um, with

[3:00:10] regard to projects, um, based upon conversations with the Department of

[3:00:15] Environmental Protection, our Beachwalk project is officially dead. Um there's

[3:00:20] been an administrative ruling that says you cannot build anything

[3:00:25] seawword of the dune line. So um what Mr. Fernandez and Mr. Pommo from Mafet

[3:00:33] Nickel have talked about is we can maintain the existing footprint and I

[3:00:38] think we kind of hinted or had some discussions about that when the the need

[3:00:43] to redevelop the dune first came up. So um we're going to look at what is our

[3:00:50] existing footprint. How can we incorporate again the lifeguard

[3:00:55] headquarters, the radio station and the bathroom. So that'll be coming back. Um

[3:01:00] this probably in the in the estimation of Mr. Fernandez may actually strengthen

[3:01:05] our pursuit of the excess or the additional $2.5 million because this

[3:01:11] will be directly tied to the pier related to the pier construction. So, um

[3:01:17] that's an ongoing thing, but there was some talk and I I'll gladly share with

[3:01:21] you some some diagrams. He said you could skinny up the prominade if you

[3:01:26] wanted to go south. That would impact parking. And I said, I don't think this

[3:01:31] commission has the appetite to reduce basically the parking immediately south

[3:01:37] of the pier would become parallel parking instead of angle parking.

[3:01:42] I'll gladly show you those, but my initial direction to the engineer was

[3:01:46] that I don't think you have the appetite for that. The same thing about going

[3:01:50] northward where the handicap ramp is and there's

[3:01:55] three covered pavilions. Um, so I think basically uh if we if we're going to go

[3:02:00] forward this, which I think we need to anyway to modernize the facilities under

[3:02:04] the A-frame, we will come back with you with a with a

[3:02:09] conceptual plan and figure out where do we go from there. But the state u their

[3:02:14] regulatory ruling um has has basically said no, we can't build the prominade

[3:02:20] the way we intended or desired to build the prominade. And I know that there's

[3:02:24] been discussions again I haven't been here. you know, when you talk about

[3:02:27] public space or uh you know, we've had public events on the pier. So maybe that

[3:02:32] becomes an option that you know, whether you have things like cheer for the pier

[3:02:37] or other events, you know, do you make it possible to have public events,

[3:02:43] closed public events or private events on the pier itself, but that's that's a

[3:02:47] discussion as part of the pier operations. But I just wanted to inform

[3:02:50] you and I'll share with you the letter um that Mr. POMO provided uh that

[3:02:54] basically said, "Yep, DP just made a a new regulatory ruling that across the

[3:03:00] state you can no longer expand to the seawward side of the doom." So, um that

[3:03:07] I had a great meeting with FDOT today talking about the the ongoing design of

[3:03:12] the Suntrail. Um, we received I've received a few concerns from residents

[3:03:17] who I'm scheduled to meet with tomorrow um concerning the the preliminary path

[3:03:23] has the Sun Trail uh which varies between 10 and 12 ft wide coming up the

[3:03:29] west side of A1A from the extreme south city limits at 9inth Street coming in

[3:03:36] and then looping around the tennis courts and going up South Lagler to

[3:03:41] North Lagler and And the the what a lot of the what the complaints that I've

[3:03:46] received and FDOT received was when you get to North 10th Street, North 10th

[3:03:51] Street is very constrained and it to put a new 10 foot or even 8ft path you are

[3:03:59] impacting even though it's in the right of way you are impacting their

[3:04:03] driveways. They wouldn't have room to park because their garages are so far

[3:04:07] forward. So that section of North 10th Street from North Flagler to A1A is

[3:04:13] going to be marked with sheros. There will be no improvements. There'll be no

[3:04:17] additional path. Basically, everyone will use the road itself. When they get

[3:04:23] to A1A,

[3:04:26] which was a little surprising to me. I didn't realize we were looking at it.

[3:04:29] Not only are they going to go north to the city limits again on the west side

[3:04:33] of A1A, but they're actually going to go south all the way down to I believe

[3:04:39] south or north 4th Street to tie in with one of their

[3:04:45] um crosswalks, one of the new crosswalks. So I thought the original

[3:04:49] concept in my mind was we're going to take 10th Street to A1A and then only go

[3:04:53] north. No, they're going to rebuild the trail going south as far south, I

[3:04:58] believe, as South Fourth Street. They're also going to extend the trail down at

[3:05:03] South Ninth Street. They're going to extend it all the way up to 8th Street,

[3:05:07] South 8th Street, where there is the installed crosswalk signal. So, that

[3:05:12] ties into our existing boardwalk down at that area. Um, so again, the concerns

[3:05:19] that were voiced to me by a couple residents, I think they've also shared

[3:05:21] them with Commissioner Bradley. I'm scheduled to meet with them tomorrow.

[3:05:25] Um, so I'll share with them that their concerns about impacting their property

[3:05:29] should be alleviated because there's going to be no out of the right of way,

[3:05:34] out of the roadway improvements that will affect their property. It will not

[3:05:39] affect the church property either because it's going to be confined to the

[3:05:43] road itself except on the right on North Flagler

[3:05:48] at whatever I think it's North 8 Street is on the south side of the big park

[3:05:52] church parking lot area. It transitions from the west side of North Flagler to

[3:05:57] the east side where the church property is and stays within the rightway.

[3:06:01] Everything's in the right of way to go north to the intersection of North 10th

[3:06:05] Street and then it transitions into the roadway itself. A couple of the F dot

[3:06:10] issues, they are in the design d design stage for redoing the drainage and

[3:06:17] repaving South Lagler and we we talked about uh they're in the

[3:06:25] funding process to fund the paving of South Central.

[3:06:30] Um, and I told them that there are a lot of local concerns about pole pollution.

[3:06:36] That's their term with all the signs and crosswalks. I said, "My impression is

[3:06:42] that people prefer the I call them the blinky blinks, not these big overhead

[3:06:46] things." And they're like, "It's interesting because four or five years

[3:06:49] ago, people hated the blinky blinks." And that's what led to the they call

[3:06:54] them the pedestrian hybrid, the two red lights and things like that. They said,

[3:06:58] "So, we're we're coming full circle." They said, "It's not out of the question

[3:07:02] that perhaps they could consider eliminating those overhead signals and

[3:07:08] going back to what I colloially call the blinky blinks, which they definitely

[3:07:13] seem more effective from my perspective as a both a pedestrian and a driver."

[3:07:18] Um, so a great meeting with with uh FD uh Veterans Park. We have and I will

[3:07:23] email you the landscape architect. um that was uh funded by Mr. Belchi and

[3:07:30] recommended by uh Mr. Bula from Compass Hotel has presented a initial concept

[3:07:36] of revising Veterans Park. Um just like paid parking, this is the first

[3:07:41] spaghetti at the wall. So I will email you that and accept your comments. We've

[3:07:46] presented it to the parks committee last week. I'll share it with the CRA

[3:07:51] advisory board on Monday. I'll share it with you via email tomorrow. Please look

[3:07:55] it over, offer your comments. It's simply a starting point for discussion.

[3:07:59] So, u please consider that. Look it over. If you have any questions, let me

[3:08:02] know. Um at the finance committee meeting earlier this week, um we had a

[3:08:08] presentation from first tryon um and this is a group that was introduced to

[3:08:14] us, at least me, by Mr. Fernandez down at Florida League of Cities. They

[3:08:19] basically create a spreadsheet on steroids. That's my words. um that

[3:08:25] provide long-term financial planning for our capital projects. Um and the uh

[3:08:32] finance committee endorsed it unofficially. They didn't actually take

[3:08:36] a vote, but there and Mayor King and Commissioner Sprattley were there.

[3:08:40] Commissioner Cunningham was was at the meeting as a spectator. Um so the the

[3:08:44] recommendation from them was to move forward with that. They did offer a

[3:08:47] proposal to me. Um, so the spreadsheet, the program, um, is $30,000 to start

[3:08:54] with, but that will then once we do that, if we want to walk away, we have,

[3:08:58] we incur no further costs. Um, but that will provide some credibility and

[3:09:03] dashboards. Commissioner Santos talked about creating dashboards to make some

[3:09:07] of our financial aspects more user friendly. So, this is a program that can

[3:09:13] create charts and bar graphs. Um, so in all likelihood, we'll move forward with

[3:09:17] that. Um, we have funding remaining in this current year's fiscal budget, so it

[3:09:22] doesn't affect next year's budget. Um, so look forward to working on that. I

[3:09:26] don't know if comm Mayor King or Commissioner Bradley are copying on

[3:09:29] that. Um, and lastly, um, at the last meeting, I did provide you a copy of the

[3:09:35] goals that were contemplated from the visioning session. Those will be

[3:09:40] presented on the September 24th agenda. So, if you have any revisions or

[3:09:45] comments on those goals um for consideration, otherwise they're going

[3:09:50] to be presented as I've given them to you on the page that's all yellow

[3:09:53] highlights. Um they'll you can revise them at the meeting if you're so

[3:09:57] inclined, but those will be included on the September 24th agenda as well. So,

[3:10:02] any questions for city manager, Mr. Cam? >> Yeah. Now, when you said the the bicycle

[3:10:09] lanes or Florida trail, whatever it's called,

[3:10:14] it's going to go north Flaggler. They're just going to widen the road a little

[3:10:17] bit and make a bike lane, I guess, right?

[3:10:21] It's actually going to be a segregated path. It's going to be basically a new

[3:10:25] sidewalk. North Flagger presents, according to the

[3:10:29] FDOT concepts, North Wagger creates some drainage issues. So, they're actually

[3:10:33] going to tie it into a Miami curb or a rollover curb and have the path slightly

[3:10:39] inclined so that the water or any moisture on the trail will drain toward

[3:10:46] the road and away from people's property.

[3:10:49] » It's only going to go east on 10th Street, A1A, and then go south all the

[3:10:55] way down to >> South Four Street. Southrect.

[3:10:59] » Is that going to affect any of the parallel parking

[3:11:01] » that No. Well, >> on the side of the road there,

[3:11:04] » it's all in the rightway and I'll have they're supposed to send me the concept.

[3:11:08] I'll share the concept with you when when FDOT emails it to me um as well,

[3:11:16] but it's an 8 to 10 foot path. Um non-motorized.

[3:11:21] I asked FDOT the questions like, okay, the are the FOT police going to be out

[3:11:25] there to stop golf carts from riding on these? and they said there is no F do

[3:11:29] police. So that will be up to us to police that. And it might be that when

[3:11:35] people reregister their golf carts every year, we put a disclaimer on there that

[3:11:39] says under penalty of whatever you're not

[3:11:43] allowed to operate your golf cart because people are going to do it

[3:11:47] because then the argument becomes well non-motorized. Well, what about an

[3:11:50] ebike? and ebike has a motor and but that says they can't put ballards up to

[3:11:56] to stop golf carts from using it because the ballards are considered dangerous to

[3:11:59] bikers. Um so that'll be an interesting enforcement issue that we'll have to

[3:12:06] address. It's still in the final design phases. So, it's still probably two or

[3:12:10] three years out from any construction, but a lot of the surveyors you've seen

[3:12:13] out um have been related to to FDOT and the Sunrail.

[3:12:20] » 8 to 10 ft. That's going to affect the parking from 10th down to 4th,

[3:12:29] but we'll see what the plan looks like. >> And there's still several meetings and

[3:12:34] public meetings that'll be scheduled. So it's we're kind of sort of at the 60%

[3:12:39] design phase right now. Construction is not imminent.

[3:12:42] Several public meetings officially run by FDOT as well.

[3:12:48] Questions for city manager. The only comment I had is if we're

[3:12:52] looking if FDOT is looking at going full circle on a couple things that they're

[3:12:57] doing. I might just be speaking for myself, but

[3:13:01] is there any way they can come full circle and not have the no right turn on

[3:13:06] green at 100 and A1A, which creates mass confusion?

[3:13:10] » Yep. That's already being looked at by FDA. Y

[3:13:12] » has got to be the worst thing ever. >> Nobody knows what to do with it,

[3:13:17] » right? >> But that's been raised with FDOT by uh

[3:13:22] the A1A groups as well as city staff has raised that issue as well.

[3:13:27] » Yeah. You know in traffic, tell them to go and stop at the same time,

[3:13:32] » right? >> All right. Um, Penny,

[3:13:55] » contract with University of Central Florida on

[3:14:01] the rest of it. The rest of it approved and that was come back

[3:14:09] after October one and he reached out to Spectrum to about

[3:14:20] directly um a dedicated line to improve speeding

[3:14:26] and

[3:14:30] So probably not reached out to Metro.

[3:14:53] I would say because that's so important if this becomes a money thing should

[3:14:59] probably come to us for consideration about you know we could we could pull it

[3:15:04] or reserve if we need to. >> I think yeah I think they'll be

[3:15:07] sufficient based upon the work that Miss Overreet and Mr. Mson are doing. I don't

[3:15:11] think the money is going to be an issue. It's just let's let's move it forward

[3:15:14] and that's what Mr.son and Miss Overreet are working on. And

[3:15:16] » let's give that credit to Daniel because he's doing the footwork on this. So, Mr.

[3:15:22] All right, mayor.

[3:15:27] I don't want

[3:15:30] Commissioner Sandor. The timing of this lightning is kind of

[3:15:34] funny. Uh, but I met with uh Mr. Shame recently who asked to meet with me and

[3:15:40] um he's going to be bringing forth plans to annex in the rest of Veranda Bay

[3:15:48] where their homes are already approved and

[3:15:52] built for the most part but that'll bring in uh more money obviously to the

[3:15:57] city. So I'm trying to schedule a meeting between him, Mr. Belshi, myself,

[3:16:04] uh, Commissioner Carney at the county, and, um, I would even like to get, uh,

[3:16:09] Mr. Hathaway, uh, Caleb Haway and on the meeting, too, so we can have a nice

[3:16:14] discussion and and see what the plan is. So, but regardless of what I feel about

[3:16:20] it, he's bringing the plans forward, I think Monday, uh, possibly. So, I

[3:16:25] imagine that will be in front of us soon. So, that's all I have for now. I'm

[3:16:30] suffering from the flu. So, thank you, >> Commissioner Sprley.

[3:16:35] » Thank you. Um, first of all, I want to thank I'd like for Dale to convey this.

[3:16:40] Uh, thank city staff for all the work concerning the budget this year. There

[3:16:45] was a lot, you know, we had, uh, three workshops. We had our first budget

[3:16:49] meeting tonight. We have another one coming up. There's a lot of material

[3:16:52] there, a lot of hands in this from city staff. So, I appreciate all the work

[3:16:56] that they did. and this is the fourth time I've been on the board when we've

[3:17:00] had a budget and I think it was the uh it was the most comprehensive but yet

[3:17:05] understandable budget uh that I've seen. So I appreciate that. Um, as far as the

[3:17:10] trail and your meetings with DOT, I'm very happy to hear how the treatment of

[3:17:17] North 10th Street will be because it's the residents there that were having the

[3:17:21] most difficult time with it who contacted me. And uh, so it sounds like

[3:17:25] having signage in the road is what it sounds like is uh, a good uh, resolution

[3:17:32] of that. I think that that will be a lot less intrusive on those neighbors. I

[3:17:36] also like the fact that um there will be uh it'll run up to the two crosswalks

[3:17:44] north and south to allow those who want to traverse that trail to either go down

[3:17:49] through the town or to go up to the boardwalk and go to the boardwalk and

[3:17:53] come back. So that that sounds great. I look forward to that getting done. Um

[3:17:58] you mentioned the presentation by first tryon to the finance committee. Um, I

[3:18:03] felt as I was listening to the presentation,

[3:18:06] I was feeling um feelings of relief of thinking that that's exactly what we

[3:18:15] need. And I didn't even think that that's what we were missing. But uh and

[3:18:19] by that what I mean is that um if they were to be retained what they would do

[3:18:25] is give us guidance on the effect of buying a new fire truck 5 years from

[3:18:30] now, how to go about planning a budget in order to do that. uh and any other

[3:18:35] capital projects just to have a team there that can help us understand the

[3:18:41] financial consequences of the decisions we make up here because sometimes I feel

[3:18:45] a bit helpless you know and trying to say okay that project sounds good we'll

[3:18:49] we'll go ahead and do it and uh while they would not be uh making those

[3:18:54] decisions on what projects to do they would be telling us how to finance these

[3:18:58] things for one thing and that sounded very appetizing to me so I like that and

[3:19:03] the last thing I want to say because I you know finance committee uh is

[3:19:07] composed of volunteers. We have a number of volunteer boards here and I

[3:19:11] appreciate everyone who serves on all of these boards. It's the it's residents

[3:19:16] who love this city and this area and who want to serve and I know I served on a

[3:19:22] couple boards but coming here and it's you don't do it for anything other than

[3:19:26] your desire to help the city out. So I appreciate everyone who serves on all

[3:19:30] those boards. Thank you, >> Mr. Sherman. Yeah. Um I the first thing

[3:19:35] I wanted to update everybody on um the uh oh gosh it's it's late. I'm sorry.

[3:19:40] The the Keith Flagler Beach beautiful group. They picked up uh we I

[3:19:44] contributed five pounds of garbage myself but um 450 pounds of garbage were

[3:19:49] picked up on um Saturday. So that was you know they had a huge turnout for it.

[3:19:54] Um I think the ROC from a Kansas high school came out in full strength. Um it

[3:19:58] was a really really great turnout to see. Um gosh, cigarette butts are just

[3:20:04] still, you know, the the number one thing we're finding. I mean, I found

[3:20:07] some flip-flops. Somebody found a break pad out there, I think. Um there was

[3:20:12] interesting things that you'll find. Uh and I think this was just in the

[3:20:15] downtown corridor and and uh throughout the beach, but um gosh, you know, the I

[3:20:21] don't know what we what more we can do. I mean, just you know, it's I guess just

[3:20:24] educating people and hopefully um we can get away from these cigarette butts. But

[3:20:29] uh again, Keep Flaggler Beach Beautiful did a great job and uh the hotel I think

[3:20:33] sponsored some of the event as well. So they had some great raffles and I think

[3:20:37] they raised some money. So it was a good community event to see people out there

[3:20:40] for that. Um the other talk two other talking points I had was um I'm noticing

[3:20:45] I don't know our former mayor was it was kind of a big sticking point for a while

[3:20:49] there where you know um at the beach approach there where uh it used we used

[3:20:53] to have like a post and rope there. it it's getting destroyed again with uh

[3:20:57] foot traffic and everything. Uh there's no rope or anything there. I wasn't sure

[3:21:02] what if if the policies lightened up on that that we're just allowing people to

[3:21:06] trample all over it or if there's a reason for it. I I understand like when

[3:21:10] the for our lifeguards um wrapping up now and thanks to them for all they did

[3:21:14] this year, but you know, it's it's just it's it's free rain. You're seeing

[3:21:18] people just constantly go over there. I don't know. I don't know if any barriers

[3:21:22] would do any good, but you know, I don't know um what what your thoughts are

[3:21:27] there. And then um my last point for you would be is um when we went over the

[3:21:31] insurance benefits for the employees, you know, there there was he was a

[3:21:34] little contentious there a little bit about raises and you know, why should I

[3:21:38] fill out this uh performance evaluation if you're not going to give me this

[3:21:42] raise? Well, you know, that that's all part of it, you know, and part of

[3:21:46] working and you know, you have to write, hey, I've got goals. I've got, you know,

[3:21:50] things. This is what I did this year. So, this gives your managers an idea of

[3:21:54] what to give, you know, incentivize the employees and give them raises. Um,

[3:21:58] where I'm going with this is a couple I I don't know. It was early on in my

[3:22:01] tenure here, you know, on the board, we did a rate study at, you know, that went

[3:22:05] out. I don't think it's necessary for it to go back out for another company. But

[3:22:08] what my question for you is is, you know, one of the employees brought up,

[3:22:12] well, I have all these certificates and we should be going to these other

[3:22:15] municip I go to these other municipalities, make all this extra

[3:22:17] money. Um, so I guess maybe, you know, it wasn't a goal for you this year, but

[3:22:21] maybe I can tweak your goals. I know you kind of mentioned that, but maybe um

[3:22:26] over the course of this next fiscal year, you can also kind of give us, you

[3:22:29] know, um a pay study. You know, I'm not asking you to go out um out and find a

[3:22:35] consultant. I don't think it's necessary. I think there's enough data

[3:22:38] out there that could show you, okay, well, based on the population here in

[3:22:41] Flaggler Beach, um, you know, this is what, uh, you know, a a a wastewater

[3:22:47] person makes versus, you know, and what we're paying. And just to kind of have a

[3:22:51] make sure we're we're paying competitive wages. Um, you know, I know this was the

[3:22:55] first time in a while where we've heard anything about raises and, you know, um,

[3:22:59] like I said, my first year, you know, that was a that was a really big

[3:23:02] sticking point, but that hadn't surfaced again till around this, you know, this

[3:23:07] year. So, I just think that it'd be important to maybe just do another rate

[3:23:10] study. I don't know what the practice is um for cities to do that every so often.

[3:23:15] Um, but I just wanted to kind of put that on your radar as well. I think it

[3:23:18] was a a topic that kind of was a sticking point with me when we had the

[3:23:21] debacle with the insurance. >> Um, and just to build on that, I have

[3:23:26] directed the the directors that if they want to promote

[3:23:33] training or certifications that it's up to them to decide what

[3:23:38] training skills we need. For example, Commissioner Cunningham brought up, you

[3:23:42] know, training for people to operate the sewer sewer crawlers. Okay. Well, if you

[3:23:46] want if you go and get your sewer crawler operator license, we'll give you

[3:23:52] an increase. And so have the director say, "These are the skills that I want

[3:23:56] to have improved. So these are the skills or the training or the

[3:23:59] certificates that I'm going to incentivize for you." Um, I think the

[3:24:03] current rate study was done. I think that was completed the year before I got

[3:24:07] here. I think it's still pretty relevant or or um in line because I don't think

[3:24:12] there's too many. the ranges were so great within

[3:24:18] each job description that I don't think anybody is really bumping up against the

[3:24:23] higher echelon of the range that was presented in that rate study. But I'll

[3:24:27] I'll pull it out and share it with you where we stand now and and uh the whole

[3:24:32] salary structure will be presented to you again as part of the September 24th

[3:24:36] meeting as well. >> Thank you. I appreciate that.

[3:24:40] » Mr. Cunningham. I think couple things

[3:24:46] and this may relate to the what you were talking about with veterans part of the

[3:24:51] uh redesign. Is that what we're waiting on to put the flag pole back up?

[3:24:55] Correct. Just to if if you don't mind, Commissioner Cunningham, what the

[3:24:59] conceptual plan shows um and if you want to see the hard copies in my office, but

[3:25:03] I'll email it to you. It shows the elimination of the fountain and the

[3:25:08] placing of a flag pole in the center of that circle surrounded by

[3:25:14] knee high type, for lack of a better term, let's call

[3:25:18] them granite stone monuments with each military crest of the six military

[3:25:23] branches and bought a brass plate mounted in a

[3:25:28] circle around that flag pole. And then the the understanding was that um so

[3:25:35] yes, that's where the flag pole is planned to go.

[3:25:37] » Gotcha. >> If and again that's going to be that's

[3:25:40] the spaghetti at the wall if you want to have the flag pole relocating somebody

[3:25:43] else. But this is the point of the discussion.

[3:25:46] » I think that sounds like a pretty good idea. I'd like to see it whenever

[3:25:53] » uh the beach walk over for the furthest south walk over that's closed up right

[3:25:59] now because it's missing a step. We just are we waiting for turtle nesting season

[3:26:03] to get over. >> Correct. Then the city and Mr. Freeman's

[3:26:06] been more involved with it than I've been um working with lads construction

[3:26:10] to come up with a new design that actually and I hope I'm speaking right.

[3:26:14] I think it's more for a parallel to the dune once you get to the so it doesn't

[3:26:20] go straight toward the water. There's a 90° bend

[3:26:24] but we can't do anything uh until the end of turtle season. But we are in the

[3:26:28] design process right now. So as soon as poss as soon as we possibly can we'll

[3:26:34] move forward with that project we'll bring it to you. What we have done at a

[3:26:38] resident's request is at least open the walk over enough for people to access

[3:26:44] the platform and the seating area so they can use the first half of the the

[3:26:48] walkway to get to the bench and the platform but they can't go all the way

[3:26:52] down to the beach. So city staff and I think it's Mr. Inhoff still here. He had

[3:26:56] some questions about it. I think staff has addressed some signage issues, some

[3:27:01] vegetation issues uh in that area. Um so it should be should be cleaner now. Um

[3:27:07] so thanks Mr. Vanhoff for for bringing that up. But so that's where we stand on

[3:27:12] the southern >> all the signs say lease dogs.

[3:27:14] » Nope. It's corrected now. >> I mean all the signs that were all the

[3:27:18] way through town. >> Yeah. At least the one down at the south

[3:27:23] end has been corrected say leashed instead of leased.

[3:27:30] it. But I don't know who's proof reading

[3:27:33] back then, but >> Yeah.

[3:27:37] » Well, I think Penny, you said you had a uh

[3:27:40] a design for the beach walkovers when they were doing all the work down there.

[3:27:44] » I do. when uh the when we did that last uh big one uh where we replaced uh 40ome

[3:27:52] walkovers, I have the sealed plans that we own uh for the ones that go straight

[3:27:59] down to the beach and the ones that run parallel with the dune. So, we have

[3:28:04] those plans. >> So, I think we were going to try we were

[3:28:06] going to try to find out if it was built correctly to begin with. So, I think

[3:28:11] » Well, >> Army Corps did that, didn't they? How's

[3:28:14] that? I didn't see

[3:28:18] an engineer to read plans, but I've seen enough of the dune stuff to know a

[3:28:22] little bit about it >> and it just didn't appear to be as beefy

[3:28:26] as what we had built in the past. However, it wasn't as flimsy as the ones

[3:28:32] FDOT contracted built when they did the secant wall on the north side because

[3:28:36] those were >> core did that.

[3:28:39] » I'm sorry. >> Oh, it was F dot. It's core that did it.

[3:28:42] » No, it's F DOT. It's whoever they contracted with to do it.

[3:28:47] » We had a lot of problems with that. >> North were bad. Real bad.

[3:28:54] » They they came back and rebuilt them. Well, we paid they paid us to rebuild

[3:28:59] them. Uh, last thing. Are we Is the Venice

[3:29:05] Park Swale project complete?

[3:29:17] There were some punch list items still outstanding. Uh some sod still remained.

[3:29:22] Uh couple little things like that they had to address. Um

[3:29:27] some broken cleanouts. Just a few things like that.

[3:29:34] » When do you expect that to be bunchless to be complete?

[3:29:38] They said they were going to get to it by the end of this week. So, we'll see

[3:29:41] what they do tomorrow. >> Okay. It's all I got.

[3:29:47] I don't have anything. So, mayor, I left you for the absolute last.

[3:29:53] » Thank you. >> I um do enjoyed the finance committee

[3:29:58] meeting this week. It was um very informative and I think will provide a

[3:30:02] lot of great information and transparency to not only us but uh

[3:30:07] residents as well. Um I want to the end of our meeting last our last

[3:30:15] meeting. I went home and I was so upset at the way city staff had been

[3:30:23] treated and spoken to. Um we're better than that. It's a bad look for our city

[3:30:29] when we're berating city staff from sitting up here. It angered me in such a

[3:30:35] way it took me a long time to calm down from

[3:30:38] it. Um I was angry that I did not put a stop to it at the time it was going on.

[3:30:44] So for that I apologize to city staff. I think as a commission we can do better.

[3:30:52] we can treat our city staff with the respect that they've earned, that they

[3:30:58] deserve from us from up here. Um, that's it. So, my apologies to staff.

[3:31:06] Thank you.

[3:31:09] » And with that, I'll open this up to public comments.

[3:31:12] Um, citizens are speak three minutes, please. And if you could just uh state

[3:31:18] your name and address for the record. >> Yes. Uh Kevin Sullivan, South Ocean

[3:31:22] Shore Boulevard referring uh I'm on the personal review board and the comment

[3:31:27] that uh Commissioner Cunningham made about being biased is a slap in the face

[3:31:33] to our soul volunteers spent 17 hours on that last case. And uh we don't get

[3:31:38] paid. We we we all come and if that's how you feel about the volunteers, every

[3:31:43] week we get something from email from Penny asking for volunteers, but for him

[3:31:47] to on a flippid comment because he didn't think anybody would call him out

[3:31:50] on it, that was wrong and I'm sorry that was wrong and I didn't mean to get

[3:31:54] excited a little bit early and I apologize for that, but that was wrong

[3:31:58] and I'm Thank you. >> Thank you. Anyone else for public

[3:32:02] comment?

[3:32:08] Mos South Finder. When are we getting into bike racks? I I've been talking to

[3:32:14] you for months. We're talking about putting a trail and we can't even put a

[3:32:17] bike rack out there. >> We address it now.

[3:32:21] » Not yet. After a public comment. >> All right. Well, I mean, I asked this

[3:32:26] after the meetings not to get a thing started, but it's been going on too

[3:32:30] long. Getting tired of tying my bike to a flag pole out there. It's just crazy.

[3:32:37] So, we're talking about putting a bike trail. We don't have any bike racks

[3:32:42] at all. Thanks. All right. Thank you. Anyone else for public comment?

[3:32:50] Melanie Thompson, John Anderson Highway. Um,

[3:32:56] my question is the parking in front of the pier, the sand and the rain that

[3:33:01] there's standing water and I was just wondering is that going to be addressed

[3:33:06] once all the construction's done. I mean, I see cars parked there and their

[3:33:11] tires are this deep in water. You get out of your car, you're in water, it

[3:33:15] stands for quite some time. Is that going to be redesigned some way that

[3:33:19] it's more flat or is that the way it's going to be for drainage?

[3:33:23] Um, my second comment is is that I've talked to Mr. Cunningham last week

[3:33:30] addressing the rough streaks on Compass Hotel and I noticed coming here tonight

[3:33:36] that they have been painted over. So if you're um involved in getting that

[3:33:41] happened or fixed, I appreciate that because if it looked

[3:33:45] like it was the rust was degrading or the ray bar was rusting. So and my last

[3:33:53] comment is your comment about Mr. Shimento getting together and wanting to

[3:33:58] bring in the second half of Randa Bay annexed in. That is going to bring in

[3:34:03] that enclave again. That's the whole reason why they separated to begin with.

[3:34:08] So that just tells me why the stakes are on John Anderson to continue the

[3:34:13] sidewalk because he assumes or somebody assumes that that's going to happen. So

[3:34:19] not happy again because here we go. So it we're going right back to where we

[3:34:23] started before to skate around other stuff to go back to square one. Thank

[3:34:28] you. >> Thank you. Anyone else for public

[3:34:32] comment? >> Mark Hoff Flagler Beach. Um since it was

[3:34:37] brought up um the board the boardwalk you're talking about it goes over the

[3:34:41] beach is down where I live. Um so now we're going um and I use that quite a

[3:34:46] bit. Um, I've been going there and thinking

[3:34:50] I could fix this yesterday. It's so easy. All All I need is a shovel. But of

[3:34:55] course, if I take all that stuff off of there and go down there and actually fix

[3:34:59] the thing with a shovel, it's just uh the basically what's happened is the uh

[3:35:05] the ocean's blown the sand out from the bottom of the boardwalk. It doesn't need

[3:35:09] a new boardwalk. It doesn't need any studies. It doesn't need any blah blah

[3:35:13] blah. It's a solid boardwalk that they they didn't build it lengthy enough.

[3:35:18] They need maybe two more steps down at the bottom. That's it. I could do it

[3:35:22] tomorrow if you if I have permission. I can fix even faster with a shovel that

[3:35:27] we just leave at the bottom because what happens is the sand comes and goes. So,

[3:35:31] right now the sand has been taken out from the bottom and there's a pretty

[3:35:35] lengthy step down there. But unfortunately, I can't fix it. I have to

[3:35:40] wait for the government to fix it, which is going to take who knows how long. Um,

[3:35:46] when it's an actually an easy fix that you could do in house in in no time if

[3:35:50] you know how to build two stairs. Um, and what's happening is people are now

[3:35:55] piling down the side of that thing. Um, and you know, you know what happens?

[3:36:00] People are just going to go down the side. So that's my if you have

[3:36:04] permission, I'll go fix it tomorrow morning first thing. I got a nice

[3:36:09] shovel. It's ready to go. Thank you.

[3:36:14] Thank you. Anyone else for public comment?

[3:36:19] All right.

[3:36:23] City manager, bike racks. >> I believe the CRA has two of them that

[3:36:28] are scheduled for installation next week. They they've been working

[3:36:33] with the Flagger County Cultural Commission and one other agency that are

[3:36:42] paying for them. So, they should be installed shortly. What locations?

[3:36:47] » I believe there's going to be one by the library and I think one by Veterans

[3:36:51] Park, but I will confirm that to you tomorrow.

[3:36:56] » Okay. Thank you. Um, Mr. Thompson brought up the drop off

[3:37:04] where the parking is in front of the boardwalk

[3:37:09] um where it doesn't have the pavers. Just as a little background, that's a

[3:37:15] file right away and the city has been doing patchwork fixes on that as long as

[3:37:21] I've lived here. And it what is the best I mean we we get the

[3:37:28] best course of action is to put those pavers down but that's a great cost to

[3:37:33] city and that's also an FTO rightway. Do you have any type of solution because

[3:37:39] one of the problems is is that that gets out of control with how bad it is to the

[3:37:46] point of being dangerous. Um what's your take on that? Um I would agree that the

[3:37:52] best solution is to install the open cell pavers cost prohibitive. I actually

[3:37:59] when I was meeting with FDOT and I will work with I don't know if the last

[3:38:03] people are here they left um because is the city if you want to pursue paid

[3:38:10] parking how can there's a f what are the rules or regulations for the city

[3:38:15] charging for paid parking and the f rightway? Um if you move forward with

[3:38:21] paid parking that could be again we've talked about this in general that some

[3:38:25] of the revenues and to address Miss Thompson brought it up you know the

[3:38:29] revenues if you go forward with paid parking can be used to improve our

[3:38:34] parking lots the maintenance and the capacity and things like that. Um, but

[3:38:39] yeah, that's that's part of the discussion that I at least introduced to

[3:38:42] FDOT today was, hey, I'm gonna have the Laz since you selected them begin the

[3:38:49] discussion with FDOT as to how does that work and could we

[3:38:55] could without knowing what FDOT's going to say about paid parking, the FDOT

[3:38:59] rightaway, but if we if we make it a quid proquo, saying, "Listen, FOT, you

[3:39:04] let us use that for paid parking, we will improve the rightway, which will

[3:39:07] help A1A a and the parking and things like that. So that yeah, the best

[3:39:12] solution is put the open cell pavers there, but you're saying putting those

[3:39:15] in our unimproved parking lots, as you said, that's $300,000 and we're talking

[3:39:21] several city blocks um to go forward with that. I I agree wholeheartedly. I

[3:39:26] see it every day after not even just a heavy rain, after any rain. There's

[3:39:31] puddles that the drop off from the pavement into the sand. Yeah, I wouldn't

[3:39:35] take my car over those. I'd need a truck the size of Commissioner Cunninghams to

[3:39:39] go down that cuz I don't want to scrape the bottom of my car. Yeah, it's

[3:39:42] something that needs to be addressed. But like you said, it's F DOT right

[3:39:45] away. So, we'll have to work with FOT to figure out what our options are. I know

[3:39:50] as a temporary thing, um this is back when

[3:39:55] Allan was around. He got a bunch of that sand that's in the parking lot, whatever

[3:40:02] that particular sand is, dumped a ton of it all along there, and just pushed it

[3:40:06] around with a Bobcat, you know, and smooshed it down. And that helped quite

[3:40:10] a bit. Short-term solution, not the best thing in the world, but it it worked for

[3:40:16] a while. Um, quick and easy, but yeah, those open cell pavers, they have a

[3:40:22] proven track record. They've been out in front of uh Funky for a long time and

[3:40:26] they haven't budged. They've held up great. Mr. Sherman,

[3:40:29] » yeah, as um you know, you mentioned F. My ears kind of perked up again. Um I

[3:40:33] meant to mention in my comments, there wasn't a TPO meeting this past month,

[3:40:36] but there will be one in October. Um I can bring that to the TPO at our next

[3:40:41] meeting as a you know, when we have comment. I don't know, um if what

[3:40:45] leverage maybe uh Commissioner Santo might have with Friends of A1A as well.

[3:40:49] I know there's FDOT representation there as well. and you it's that's a little

[3:40:54] bit more of an intimate setting there that you know I'm competing with all of

[3:40:58] district 5 in that room and we're a really small fish in the sea there but

[3:41:02] um I can also um I have a pretty good re working relationship with uh Colleen um

[3:41:07] who oversees the uh I know you do as well. I can always put an email out

[3:41:12] there uh to her as well and um you know have that as you know CC Penney and that

[3:41:16] so she can distribute that out to the rest of the um the board. But if you

[3:41:20] guys want me to, I can definitely pursue um maybe try to get that on their radar

[3:41:24] that way as well in that capacity. If you guys want me to do that, I'll gladly

[3:41:28] do that. >> With the contractor doing the North

[3:41:31] Fourth Street lot now, we might be able to get a an estimate just a ballpark for

[3:41:36] okay, what's per 100 feet or give me an estimate from third to fourth street,

[3:41:41] fourth to fifth street, just so we have some idea of what numbers we're talking

[3:41:44] about. That contractor is already on site. We have a good relationship with

[3:41:47] that contractor, DDS. Um, so we should be able to get some rough numbers.

[3:41:52] » Y'all want Commissioner Sherman talk to >> good with that? Okay.

[3:41:58] » All right. I'll get an email out tomorrow and I'll CC penning that.

[3:42:02] » Okay. Um, next thing was Well, I can tell you uh, Mr. Ramov, the the city

[3:42:10] won't give you official permission. Um but uh one of my concerns is folks going

[3:42:18] down the side of that um there's supposed to be a physical barrier there.

[3:42:21] The fencing and all um probably needs looked at to protect the dune. Um I do

[3:42:29] know that there are some some blocks um North 17th uh comes to front of mind

[3:42:35] that you know citizens uh take care of the

[3:42:38] walkovers like North 17th has 17 street crews. They even had a little placard on

[3:42:44] the somewhere on the hurricane blew it off but they they just go out there and

[3:42:49] take care of things and you know

[3:42:53] they just get it done. Um, but we I know the city would not officially be able to

[3:42:59] give you that permission, but I would uh probably say give a 17th Street crew and

[3:43:05] you know, take a look at what they're doing because they do a lot of cool

[3:43:08] things uh as far as maintaining their used to live on 17th North. You know

[3:43:12] what I'm talking about. I guess my only concern would be sure you could have

[3:43:17] volunteers do that but at the end of the day the city ultimately has the

[3:43:20] liability right of any incidents that happen there due to volunteer efforts.

[3:43:25] » Yeah. and

[3:43:34] » which is why we can't okay it as a city but um I I am concerned about what he

[3:43:40] said about you know folks uh tracking down dunes

[3:43:43] » take a look at it sand fencing we can tie it in

[3:43:46] » all right any other comments on public comment

[3:43:54] » all right and no comments Let's look for a motion to adjurnn.

[3:43:58] » Motion to adjurnn. >> All right, we're Thank you.

09/10/2026 Special and Regular Commission Meeting

Transcript