[a. Ordinance 21-029 levying and collection taxes for Fiscal Year beginning October 1, 2021 and ending September 30, 2022, adopting final millage rate. FIRST READING]

>>> AND TO PAY FUNDS COLLECTED INTO THE ACCOUNT PROVIDED THEREFORE. ADOPTING THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE MILLAGE DATE THAT THE FINAL MILLAGE RATE FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2021 IS LEVIED AT 6.90 FOR GENERAL CITY PURPOSES. SAID RATE BEING IN EXCESS OF THE ROLLBACK RATE BY 4.62%. SECTION 2, THE CITY COMMISSION AND THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE, FLORIDA LEVY A TAX ON ALL REAL AND PERSONAL PROPERTY WITHIN THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF SAID CITY SUBJECT TO TAX ON THE FIRST DAY OF JANUARY, 2021.

AND PROVIDED THAT SUCH 6.9 SHOULD NOT BE LEVIED UNDER ANY PROPERTY EXEMPT UNDER STATE STATUTE.

THE CITY MANAGER IS HEREBY INSTRUCTED AND DIRECTED TO CERTIFY TO THE COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER THE ABOVE MILLAGE TO BE LEVIED FOR ALL PURPOSES FOR THE 2021-22 FISCAL YEAR PRUDENT TO THE LAW OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA AND THE CHARTER OF THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE. THIS SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE ON

OCTOBER 1, 2021. >> THIS IS A FIRST READING.

THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. ANYONE WISHING TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION, PLEASE COME FORWARD. SEEING NO ONE, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND ENTERTAIN DISCUSSION OR A MOTION.

>> MADAME MAYOR, I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE ORDINANCE 12-029.

>> SECOND. >> A MOTION AND A SECOND.

CALL THE ROLL. >> COMMISSIONER C. JOHNSON.

[b. Ordinance 21-030 Adopting a Final Budget for Fiscal Year 2022, beginning October 1, 2021 and ending September 30, 2022. FIRST READING]

>> YES, MA'AM. >> COMMISSIONER J. JOHNSON.

>> YES, MA'AM. >> COMMISSIONER CORONA.

>> YES, MA'AM. >> MADAME MAYOR.

>> YES, MA'AM. >> ADOPTING A FINAL BUDGET FOR THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE, FLORIDA BEGINNING OCTOBER 1, 2021, AND ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2022, PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

THE CITY COMMISSION OF FORT PIERCE, FLORIDA AFTER HAVING HELD A PUBLIC HEARING HEREBY ADOPTS AS ITS FINAL BUDGET FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF SAID CITY BEGINNING OCTOBER 1, 2021, AND ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2022, THE ESTIMATES MADE BY THE CITY MANAGER OF SAID CITY PRESENTED TO THE CITY COMMISSION ON SEPTEMBER 13, 2021, WHICH DETAILED AMENDED ESTIMATES ARE ON FILE WITH THE CITY CLERK AND THE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE.

THAT IT SHALL BE THE DUTY OF THE CITY MANAGER TO SET UP THE APPROPRIATION OF REVENUES AND EXPENSES ON THE ACCOUNT RECORDS OF SAID CITY TO KEEP SUCH ACCOUNTS THEREOF AS REQUIRED BY THE CHARTER OF THE SAID CITY AND AS MAY BE DIRECTED FROM TIME TO TIME BY THE CITY COMMISSION. SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE

OCTOBER 1, 2021. >> THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING.

ANYONE WISHING TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE, PLEASE COME FORWARD.

SEEING NO ONE, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND ENTERTAIN A

MOTION. >> MOVE FOR APPROVAL.

>> SECOND. >> CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE.

>> COMMISSIONER C. JOHNSON. >> YES, MA'AM.

>> COMMISSIONER J. JOHNSON. >> YES, MA'AM.

>> COMMISSIONER PERONA. >> YES, MA'AM.

[a. Review of City Attorney applicants and selection of final candidates for interview.]

>> MAYOR. >> YES, MA'AM.

>> NEXT WE HAVE THE REVIEW OF CITY ATTORNEY APPLICANTS IN SELECTION OF FINAL CANDIDATES FOR INTERVIEW.

>> ALL RIGHTY, MS. COX, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO LEAD OFF WITH

THIS? >> I WILL JUST SAY THAT WE HAVE BEEN WORKING VERY CLOSELY WITH MR. BOB SLAVEN AND HIS ASSOCIATE DAVID CRIGGS ON GETTING THESE APPLICATIONS TO YOU.

[00:05:05]

I KNOW YOU WERE PROVIDED THE PACKET LAST WEEK.

THERE WAS AN ADDITIONAL CANDIDATE THEY FELT WAS WELL QUALIFIED SO I HAVE INCORPORATED THAT INTO THE AGENDA PACKET THAT'S ONLINE AND YOU WERE ALSO PROVIDED A COPY OF THAT.

SO WITH THAT, I'M GOING TO INTRODUCE MR. BOB SLAVEN.

>> I DON'T KNOW WHO WANTS TO GO FIRST, BUT PLEASE PROCEED.

>> THANK YOU, MADAME MAYOR. CAN YOU HEAR ME?

>> YOU NEED TO SPEAK UP A LITTLE BIT.

>> OKAY. >> THERE YOU GO.

>> IS THAT BETTER? THANK YOU.

DAVE AND I WORKED CLOSELY TOGETHER ON THIS SEARCH IT'S THE CITY ATTORNEY SEARCH WHICH REQUIRES MEMBERSHIP IN THE FLORIDA BAR. AND FLORIDA AS WE TALKED EARLIER HAS NO RECIPROCITY. SO WE DID CAST A NET WIDE ENOUGH SO THAT PEOPLE OUTSIDE THE STATE THAT MIGHT BE MEMBERS OF THE FLORIDA STATE BAR WOULD SEE THE ANNOUNCEMENT.

BUT WE FOCUSED OUR RECRUITMENT EFFORTS IN THE STATE FOR OBVIOUS REASONS. THE RESULT WAS THAT WE RECEIVED I BELIEVE 14, BUT WITH THE ADDITIONAL ONE 15 RESUMES.

MOST OF THEM WERE WELL WORTH A SECOND LOOK AND THERE WERE SEVEN WE THINK WERE WELL WORTH YOUR TIME AND ATTENTION.

WE CAN GO INTO DETAIL ABOUT THEM IF YOU WANT, BUT THE PURPOSE OF TONIGHT IS TO GET IT DOWN TO THE NUMBER OF FOLKS THAT YOU WANT TO ACTUALLY MEET REALIZING THAT OUR NEXT STEP WHICH IS TO BEGIN THE IN DEPTH BACKGROUND WORK ON THESE FOLKS.

SO WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE YOU FOLKS DO IS RANK THESE CANDIDATES 1 TO 7, EACH OF YOU RANK THEM 1 TO 7, DON'T TELL ANYBODY. AND RANK THEM WHETHER YOU'D HIRE THEM OR NOT, AND WHAT WE PLAN TO DO, I DON'T KNOW WHY I HAVE NINE PLACES FOR YOU FOLKS TO RANK THEM ON THIS TABULATION FORM BECAUSE IT SHOULD BE ONLY FIVE. BUT I DIDN'T INTEND THAT.

ONCE YOU'VE ACCOMPLISHED THAT, WE'LL GIVE YOU THE RESULTS OF THAT TABULATION. AND WHAT WE'LL DO HOPEFULLY IS DETERMINE WHICH FOLKS YOU'RE MOST INTERESTED IN AND WHICH FOLKS YOU'RE LEAST INTERESTED IN AND GIVE US WHAT WE NEED TO MOVE FORWARD. WOULD IT BE HELPFUL TO GO THROUGH AND HAVE YOU HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK AT THE REPORT AND MAKE SOME DECISIONS ABOUT HOW TO RANK THEM?

>> SO I READ, AM I ECHOING? I THINK I AM.

I READ THE REPORT AND I GOT AN IDEA ABOUT RANKING AND THERE'S A COUPLE OF ISSUES, THERE'S A COUPLE OF CANDIDATES THAT WANT TO BE OUTSIDE COUNSEL. HAD I READ THAT CORRECTLY?

>> YES, YOU DID. AND WHETHER OR NOT THEY WOULD ACCEPT A POSITION AS A CITY EMPLOYEE IS STILL UP IN THE AIR A LITTLE BIT. DAVE, DO YOU HAVE ANYMORE INSIGHT INTO THAT THAN I DO, DAVE? THEY WROTE ON THE QUESTIONNAIRE THAT THEY WOULD BE HIRED ON A CONTRACT RATHER THAN THAT CITY EMPLOYEE.

THAT IS NOT THE WAY YOU'RE USED TO DOING BUSINESS, BUT IT WORKS IN OTHER PLACES. THE QUESTION THAT I WOULD HAVE OF THEM IS WHAT ELSE WOULD THEY BE DOING OTHER THAN FUNCTIONING AS YOUR CITY ATTORNEY IF YOU ALLOW THAT KIND OF ARRANGEMENT

TO TAKE PLACE? >> THAT IS CORRECT.

THEY WILL HAVE SOME SORT OF RELATIONSHIP WITH THE FIRM THAT THEY'RE CURRENTLY WORKING WITH. WE DON'T HAVE A DEFINITION OF WHAT THAT KIND OF A RELATIONSHIP IS.

I DIDN'T PRESS THEM. THERE'S NO AGREEMENT ON THAT.

IN MY OPINION THAT'S THE TYPE OF QUESTION THAT YOU ALL SHOULD ADDRESS, WHAT IS ACCEPTABLE TO YOU AND THEN I WOULD PRESENT

[00:10:03]

THAT LEADERSHIP DIRECTION FROM YOU ALL.

>> OBVIOUSLY WE CAN DISCUSS THAT WITH THEM.

A SERIOUS ISSUE WITH YOU FOLKS AND THE PEOPLE FURTHER INTO THE LIST AND IT'S A CONDITION MOVING FORWARD, WE CERTAINLY WILL DETERMINE THAT BEFORE WE DO ANY DEPTH WORK ON IT.

IN OTHER WORDS IF THEY ARE NOT WILLING TO -- IF YOU DETERMINE THAT IF YOU WANT TO HAVE A DIRECT EMPLOYMENT RELATIONSHIP WITH THEM AND THEY'RE NOT WILLING TO DO THAT, WE'LL SCREEN

THEM OUT. >> RIGHT.

AND SO I SHOW THEM AS SUSAN GARRET AND ANDREW MAI.

>> THOSE ARE THE TWO. >> I DON'T KNOW HOW THE REST OF THE COMMISSION FEELS, BUT UNLESS THERE'S SOME COMPELLING REASON, I WOULD RATHER NOT HAVE A CITY ATTORNEY THAT ALSO HAS AN

OUTSIDE PRACTICE. >> I AGREE.

>> YEAH, SO ALTHOUGH ONE OF THOSE CANDIDATES NOW LIVES IN FORT PIERCE, THAT GAVE ME PAUSE. I THINK THEY'RE ALL VERY, VERY QUALIFIED. HOW DOES THE COMMISSION FEEL? DO YOU WANT THEM TO GO THROUGH EACH CANDIDATE OR HOW DO YOU

FEEL? >> MADAME MAYOR, I READ THAT.

I KNEW ONE HAD INDICATED AND I HAD A REAL STRONG CONCERN WITH THAT THAT WAS STATED IN THE LETTER.

TO ME I COULDN'T GET MY HEAD AROUND IT AND IT BOTHERED ME BECAUSE WE'RE LOOKING AT SOMEONE THAT'S DEDICATED THAT WORKS EXCLUSIVE WITH THE CITY. AND WHEN I READ THE LANGUAGE OF BEING A PART OF THAT, THAT WAS INITIALLY MY CONCERN.

HOW MUCH WOULD BE DEDICATED HERE, HOW MUCH WOULD BE OUTSOURCED. I THINK WE'VE KIND OF GONE THAT PATH BEFORE. I'VE BEEN A SHORT TIME ON THE COMMISSION, BUT I DO KNOW THAT THEY DO USE OUTSIDE COUNSEL FOR SOME CASES. I'M JUST CONCERNED THAT WE DON'T OVEREXTEND THAT IN SOME OTHER AREAS AND CAPACITY.

IF ANYTHING, I THINK MAYBE IN THE PROCESS WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT THE TOP 3 OR 4, WE'LL DETERMINE THAT AS A COMMISSION.

WHEN WE LOOK AT 3 OR 4 WE'RE GOING TO BRING THEM ALL IN?

>> THREE. >> OKAY, SO THAT HELPS ME.

I CAN RANK THEM BECAUSE I'M ONLY LOOKING AT THE TOP THREE THAT I

LIST ON MY LIST. >> COMMISSIONER PERONA, I REMEMBER THE LAST TIME WE WENT THROUGH THIS, YOU BROUGHT UP THE INTERNAL CANDIDATES YOU AUTOMATICALLY INCLUDED AT THAT TIME. DO WE REMEMBER DOING THAT? YOU THOUGHT THAT SHOULD BE AUTOMATICALLY INCLUDED?

>> I DID AT THAT TIME. I'VE DONE THAT BEFORE WITH THE UTILITY DIRECTOR, EVEN WITH THE CITY MANAGER SEARCHS AND STUFF.

THIS PARTICULAR CASE, I'LL SUPPORT THAT, BUT I'M NOT

NECESSARILY -- >> IF WE'RE RANKING, MAYBE WE

HAVE DIFFERENT RANKINGS. >> I FEEL LIKE IT'S IMPORTANT TO FIND THE RIGHT PERSON NO MATTER WHAT AND I THINK THIS IS SPECIALIZED ENOUGH THAT IF YOU WANTED TO DO THAT THEN MAYBE WE NEED TO EXTEND TO THE NUMBER OF FOUR.

I WOULD NOT USE THE TOP THREE SPOTS FOR SOMEBODY THAT YOU'RE AUTOMATICALLY GOING TO CONSIDER. NOW IF THAT PERSON ENDS UP IN THE TOP THREE, THEN IT'S FINE. BUT I WOULD SAY THAT IF THAT PERSON IS NOT GOING TO GO THROUGH THE SELECTION PROCESS, THE FIRST SELECTION PROCESS AND AUTOMATICALLY BE IN THE CONSIDERATION, THEN WE NEED TO FIND THREE ALTERNATES TO GO IN.

>> SO YOU WANTED TO RANK THE INTERNAL CANDIDATE HIGH, HE'S

ASKING FOR RANKING, RIGHT? >> I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE

SAYING. >> MAYBE I'M CONFUSING YOU.

>> THE THING ABOUT IT IS IS THAT I DON'T WANT TO TAKE A SPOT AWAY FROM WHAT WE HAVE DECIDED IN OUR OWN RANKING.

AND IF YOU WANTED TO ADD AN INTERNAL CANDIDATE WITHOUT GOING THROUGH THAT PROCESS, IT SHOULD BE PUT ON AS NUMBER FOUR UNLESS NATURALLY THAT PERSON BECAME ONE OF THE TOP THREE.

>> I GUESS I JUST LOOKED AT ALL OF THEM AND I WENT THROUGH AND PICKED THE CANDIDATES I WOULD LIKE TO INTERVIEW AND I RANKED THEM BASED ON WHAT I READ AND WHAT I SAW.

AND SO I DIDN'T COME IN WITH ANY AUTOMATIC.

>> THAT'S FINE. >> I APPRECIATE YOU ASKING THAT, MYOR. THIS PARTICULAR TIME I THINK IT'S MORE SUBJECTIVE THIS TIME. IT'S ABOUT WHO IS A GOOD FIT AND FOLKS THAT HAVE SPENT A LOT OF TIME IN THEIR APPLICATION AND I ACTUALLY LEARNED SOME THINGS READING THROUGH THE APPLICATION ABOUT HOW PEOPLE LOOK AT US MORE THAN WE LOOK AT THEM.

THAT WAS INTERESTING. >> YEAH, IT WAS.

[00:15:01]

>> AND IT HELPED ME THROUGH THE PROCESS.

I THANK YOU FOR THAT, BUT I DON'T THINK IT'S --

>> ARE YOU INTERESTED IN HAVING THE HEARING ABOUT EACH CANDIDATE

FROM THE SEARCH TEAM? >> WE COULD.

>> WE COULD. >> I'M READY TO RANK TOO AT THE

SAME TIME. >> YEAH, I'M READY TO RANK.

SO UNLESS YOU FOLKS HAVE ANYTHING THAT YOU WANT TO POINT

OUT OR -- >> I THINK THE RANKING WOULD BE HELPFUL BECAUSE I THINK IT WILL CAUSE SOME FOLKS TO BE ON THE BOTTOM OF THE LIST, IT DOESN'T MEAN THEY'RE BAD PEOPLE.

IT JUST MEANS PREFERENCES. WE'RE REALLY TALKING ABOUT PEOPLE WHO YOU WANT TO INTERVIEW, NOT PEOPLE WHO YOU'RE

GOING TO HIRE. >> RIGHT.

>> AND THE OTHER, I'M NOT SO SURE THIS IS THE CASE WITH ATTORNEYS AS IT IS WITH MANAGERS THESE DAYS, BUT THE FALLOUT FROM PEOPLE TAKING OTHER JOBS AND PULLING OUT OF THE PROCESS EVEN AT THE LAST MINUTE IS SOMEHOW I THINK COVID-19 IS A MAJOR FACTOR IN THAT. WHAT I'M REALLY SAYING IS I WOULD ERR ON THE SIDE OF BEING MORE INCLUSIVE THAN BEFORE IN THE EVENT THAT WE HAVE THAT. WE'RE DOING A CITY MANAGER SEARCH RIGHT NOW WHERE FIVE PEOPLE WERE SELECTED TO BE INTERVIEWED LAST WEEK, WE HAVE THREE RIGHT NOW BECAUSE ONE WAS HIRED BY ANOTHER CITY AND THE OTHER ONE DROPPED OUT FOR PERSONAL REASONS. AND THEY WERE THE TOP TWO ON THAT RANKING FOR THIS PARTICULAR POSITION.

SO WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT TO DO ABOUT THAT.

BUT THAT IS NOT UNUSUAL IN THE WORK THAT WE'RE DOING RIGHT NOW

FOR THAT TO HAPPEN. >> OKAY.

>> UNLESS IT'S SOMEBODY YOU WOULDN'T HIRE, BUT I WOULD SUGGEST ERR ON THE SIDE OF BEING MORE INCLUSIVE.

>> AS OPPOSED TO FEWER, MORE, ERR ON THE SIDE OF MORE, IS THAT

WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? >> THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING.

AND YOU'LL SEE WHEN YOU GET THE RANKINGS, IF EVERYBODY IS WITH REAL LOW SCORES, THAT'S ONE THING.

IF THERE'S A MAJOR GAP BETWEEN ONE CANDIDATE AND ANOTHER, IN OTHER WORDS THERE'S THREE THAT ARE PRETTY CLOSELY RANKED AND THEN A FOURTH THAT'S A DISTANCE APART.

YOU MAY WANT TO CONSIDER THAT TOO.

>> ALL RIGHTY. SO WE'LL PROCEED RANKING, RIGHT? YOU'RE ALREADY DONE. I HAVEN'T EVEN STARTED HERE.

>> BEEN READY FIVE MINUTES AGO. DID HIS HOMEWORK.

PROUD OF YOU, COMMISSIONER PERONA.

>>> THIS IS YOUR CITY ATTORNEY POSITION.

BUT MY UNDERSTANDING HERE UNDER FLORIDA LAW IS THAT YOU'VE GOT TO -- YOU DON'T HAVE TO ANNOUNCE WHO VOTED HOW, BUT UNDER FLORIDA

LAW, YOU HAVE TO SIGN IT. >> SIGN IT?

>> YEAH. >> WE ALWAYS ANNOUNCE IT.

>> NO SECRET BALLOTS. >> SIGN IT AND PUT YOUR NAME OR

JUST SIGN IT? >> PUT YOUR INITIALS.

[00:20:08]

>> SO I WILL READ THEM ALL AND I'M GOING TO ASSUME YOU GUYS

WILL DO THE TALLY. >> YEAH.

>> COMMISSIONER JOHNSON RANKED -- WHERE DID YOU -- NUMBER FIVE IS RAPHAEL SAUREZ-RIVAS.

>> THAT'S FIVE, OKAY? >> BUT I HAVE THE SAME NAME FOR NUMBER SIX. NUMBER SEVEN IS SUSAN GARRET.

>> SO COMMISSIONER J. JOHNSON IS TONYA EARLY.

ALEXANDER. ELIZABETH LACONTI.

RAPHAEL SUEZ-RIVAS. SUSAN GARRET.

AND ANDREW MAI. ARE WE READY TO MOVE ON? SO COMMISSIONER PERONA HAS TONYA EARLY.

ALEXANDER. ELIZABETH LACONTI.

SUSAN GARRET. ANDREW MAI.

RAPHAEL SUEZ-RIVAS. MAYOR HUDSON RANKED TONYA EARLY.

ELIZABETH LACONTI. RAPHAEL RIVAS.

ALEXANDER BUSTNER. SUSAN GARRET AND ANDREW MAI.

THREE OF YOU HAD THE SAME TOP THREE.

ACTUALLY TOP FOUR. >> TRYING TO BE DIFFERENT OVER HERE.

[00:25:49]

>>> WHAT'S THE SCORE? >> 14.

>> THANK YOU. >> ELIZABETH CONTI IS 15, SHE'D

BE THE NEXT ONE. >> BETWEEN OUR NUMBER TWO SPOT,

WHAT IS THOSE TWO SCORES? >> I MEAN BETWEEN THE TWO -- 15?

2 OR 3? >> MADAME MAYOR.

>> YES, SIR? >> WHAT I WOULD USUALLY DO IS

DRAW THE LINE AT THE BIGGEST -- >> DIVIDE?

YEAH. >> THAT'S WHY WHEN YOU SAID TWO, THAT'S WHAT I WOULD USUALLY DO, SO WE TALKED ABOUT DOING THREE.

FOUR MAYBE. I THINK LACONTI WAS RANKED 3 OR 4 OR 5 WITHIN EVERYONE'S BALLOT, RIGHT?

>> LACONTI HAD THREE FOURS AND A THREE.

BOXNER HAD THREE THREES AND A FIVE.

>> I'M GOOD WITH 2, 3, OR 4. IF ANYONE HAS A PASSION.

>> IF YOU FEEL THAT WAY, COMMISSIONERS, LEAVE IT AT FOUR BECAUSE WHO KNOWS WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN BETWEEN NOW AND TWO WEEKS FROM NOW WHEN THE INTERVIEWS TAKE PLACE.

ONE THING THAT'S HAPPENING IS WE'RE DOING BACKGROUND WORK, I DOUBT ANY OF THESE PEOPLE WILL FALL OUT BECAUSE OF THAT.

BUT THEY MAY PICK OTHER JOBS OR DECIDE IT'S NOT A GOOD TIME IN THEIR LIFE TO MOVE. I THINK IT'S BEST TO LEAVE THE OPTIONS THERE UNLESS THERE'S SOMEBODY ON THIS LIST YOU

CLEARLY DON'T WANT. >> I'M OKAY WITH FOUR I THINK.

>> THAT'S FINE. >> I THINK THAT'S GOOD ADVICE.

>> I ALSO WANT TO GIVE PERSPECTIVE THERE WAS ONE VOTE FOR LACONTI THAT BROUGHT HER INTO THE TOP THREE SO I WANT TO

RESPECT THAT ALSO. >> YEP.

HOW YOU REACT TO PERSONALITIES IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN THESE

SCORES. >> CORRECT.

>> RIGHT. >> ARE WE GOOD WITH FOUR?

>> GOOD WITH FOUR. >> THANK YOU.

ANYTHING ELSE YOU WANT TO ADD? GENTLEMEN, DAVID OR ROBERT?

>> THIS IS A PUBLIC MEETING BUT YOU HAVE AN INTERNAL CANDIDATE, MY ADVICE WOULD BE FOR SOMEBODY, THE MAYOR, TO TALK TO HER.

[00:30:02]

>> TALK TO HER -- >> WAIT A MINUTE.

OKAY, DON'T WORRY ABOUT IT. DON'T WORRY ABOUT IT.

WE'LL TAKE CARE OF IT. SHE'LL BE DELIGHTED.

>> I'LL STILL TALK TO HER, I PLAN ON TALKING TO HER.

>> THAT WAS MY POINT, SOMETIMES WHEN THIS HAPPENS AND INTERNALS ARE NOT CHOSEN, OBVIOUSLY IT'S HARD FOR YOU FOLKS TO TELL THAT

CANDIDATE THAT. >> SO THE DATE THAT WE HAVE SET ASIDE AND WE HAVE ALL DAY IS MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 27TH I THINK WE HAVE A SPECIAL MEETING AT 8:00 IN THE MORNING FOR MAYBE ONE ITEM OR SOMETHING. I THINK SO, MAYBE NOT.

>> THE WAY WE DID IT LAST TIME WE HAD THE INDIVIDUAL INTERVIEWS AND WE HAVE A SET LIMIT OF TIME. WE ROTATED EVERYBODY BETWEEN THE ROOMS AND THEN WE BROKE FOR LUNCH AND DID THE PUBLIC INTERVIEWS IN THE AFTERNOON. THAT'S HOW I ANTICIPATED DOING IT AGAIN UNLESS YOU WANT TO DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT.

>> WE DID INDIVIDUAL, ONE ON ONE AND THEN IN THE AFTERNOON THAT'S

WHAT WE DID? >> WITH EVERYBODY IN HERE.

>> OKAY. >> IS THAT GOOD?

>> GOOD FOR ME. >> GOOD FOR ME.

>> WE HAVE A MEETING AT 9:00 OR A MEETING AT 5:00?

>> RIGHT NOW IT'S 9:00 A.M., THAT'S FOR THE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE AUDIT COMMITTEE. THE AUDITOR SELECTION COMMITTEE.

>> DON'T WE HAVE OUR HEARINGS FOR BUDGET ALSO?

>> NOT ON THE 27TH. WE'LL BE DONE ON THE 20TH.

WHAT WE MIGHT WANT TO CONSIDER DOING, IF WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A PUBLIC MEETING IN THE AFTERNOON, THEY MIGHT WANT TO DO THAT BUDGET RECOMMENDATION WITH THE AUDIT COMMITTEE IN THE AFTERNOON. ONCE WE GET THIS SOLIDIFIED AND THE TIMING DOWN, I THINK THAT WILL BE GOOD FOR ALL OF US.

>> WE'RE TAKING THE WHOLE DAY OF SEPTEMBER 27TH AND DEVOTING IT

TO THESE THINGS? >> YES, MA'AM.

>> ATTORNEYS. >> WHEN CAN WE START? WHAT'S THE EARLIEST EVERYONE IS COMFORTABLE WITH?

>> WHAT DID HE SAY? >> I CAN DO ANY TIME.

I CAN START AT 8:00 IF YOU WANT. >> HOW ABOUT WE START AT 9:00, IT'S A MONDAY. INDIVIDUAL MEETINGS.

LET'S WORK IT BACKWARDS WITH SCHEDULING.

>> I THINK WE DID 45 MINUTES. >> THE OTHER QUESTION IS DO YOU WANT BOB OR DAVID TO BE HERE IN PERSON FOR THAT PROCESS?

>> I THINK THAT WOULD BE GOOD, ONE OR THE OTHER, RIGHT?

HOW DO YOU FEEL? >> IN THE AFTERNOON, RIGHT?

>> YEAH, IN THE AFTERNOON. >> THEY DON'T HAVE TO BE HERE IN THE MORNING, YOU CAN HANDLE THE MORNING, THAT'S NO PROBLEM.

BUT IN THE AFTERNOON I THINK IT WOULD BE.

>> I REMEMBER WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY WE DID HAVE THE GENTLEMEN STAY. THAT'S WHAT YOU FEEL, YOU GUYS?

>> WE HAVE IT ON OUR CALENDARS, ONE OF US OR BOTH WILL BE THERE.

>> YOU HEARD SEPTEMBER 27TH, RIGHT, MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 27TH,

THAT'S WHAT YOU HEARD? >> I REALLY WANT TO THANK YOU GUYS. JUST MORE THAN IMPRESSED WITH THE APPLICATIONS THAT WE GOT. THEY WERE GOOD READS.

I ALWAYS THOUGHT RIGHT NOW FOLKS WEREN'T GOING TO WANT TO GO TO WORK AND WE WEREN'T GOING TO GET ANYBODY OF CALIBER.

I KNOW IT'S BEEN KIND OF DIFFICULT IN THIS ENVIRONMENT, BUT YOU ALL DID A REALLY GOOD JOB WITH THAT.

>> I APPRECIATE THAT A LOT. >> AND I THINK THESE THESE

[00:35:01]

CANDIDATES ARE INTERESTED IN THIS JOB NOT JUST BECAUSE IT'S ANOTHER ATTORNEY'S JOB. THAT CLEARLY WAS THE CASE.

IT'S NICE TO HAVE OTHER FOLKS AGREE.

IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE? WE CAN EXCUSE YOU, YOU DON'T

HAVE TO STAY FOR THE REST. >> IT'S BEEN A PLEASURE FOR US TOO. IT'S BEEN REALLY A NICE PROJECT FOR US. THANK YOU.

AND WE'LL SEE YOU LATER IN THE MONTH HAVE A GOOD EVENING AND A GOOD REST OF YOUR MEETING AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING YOU LATER

IN THE MONTH. >> THANK YOU.

WE CAN LEAVE THIS MEETING TOO, CAN'T WE?

>> NEED TO PULL UP OUR AGENDA. >> SO THE NEXT ITEM ON THE

[b. Review of applications to serve on the Fort Pierce Utilities Authority Board as an at-large member and selection of final candidates for consideration.]

AGENDA IS REVIEW OF APPLICATIONS TO SERVE ON THE FORT PIERCE UTILITIES AUTHORITY BOARD AS AN AT LARGE MEMBER AND THE SELECTION OF THE FINAL CANDIDATES FOR CONSIDERATION.

>> OKAY. I'M PULLING UP MY AGENDA HERE.

I WILL SHARE WITH THE COMMISSION THAT I WAS ABLE TO REACH EVERYBODY BY PHONE. ON THE LIST.

AND THERE ARE TWO PEOPLE, I'LL SHARE WHAT I FOUND OUT, THERE ARE AT LEAST TWO PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT HERE FULL-TIME.

ONE IS GONE FOR THREE MONTHS AND THE OTHER IS GONE FOR A MONTH.

AND SO I THINK THAT IS SOMETHING TO BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION.

WHEN I TALKED WITH HIM HE REALIZED IT WAS THE FACT THAT HE IS HERE EIGHT MONTHS. BUT HE WILL BE HERE FULL-TIME AT THE END OF 2022. MR. HARDY IS USUALLY GONE FOR

THE MONTH OF AUGUST. >> I'M IMPRESSED WITH ALL OF THE APPLICANTS HERE ON THE LIST. WE HAVE SOME VERY GOOD APPLICANTS, BUT I THINK WE TALKED ABOUT SELECTING OR NARROWING THE LIST. THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE TO NARROW THE LIST DOWN TO THREE AND WE'RE GOING TO PICK 3 OR 4 RIGHT NOW

AND SEE HOW IT PLAYS OUT? >> LET'S DO WHAT WE DID JUST NOW? JUST RANK THEM.

>> I HAVE ONE QUESTION BEFORE WE DO THAT.

[00:40:18]

I WANT CLARIFICATION BECAUSE WITH CHARTER CONFLICTS, DOES THAT FACTOR INTO THIS BOARD BECAUSE MY LAST PICK WAS A PERSON WHO WAS RETIRED AND OBVIOUSLY IT WAS A CONFLICT BUT WHEN I SAW THAT I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE WERE AWARE OF THAT