[1. CALL TO ORDER]
[00:00:14]
PIERCE -- WE ARE OPENING THE FORT PIERCE PLANNING MEETING -- I CAN'T KEEP UP WITH THIS. I WAS TRYING TO GET DATES AND MONTHS AND I COULD NOT GET ANY OF IT STRAIGHT SO IF I MESS UP TODAY, IT'S YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO GET ME STRAIGHT AND YOURS BECAUSE YOU'RE SIGNATURE ON EITHER SIDE OF ME.
I NEED ALL THE HELP I CAN GET. IF WE COULD, LET'S STAND FOR PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE, PLEASE.
A REMINDER REAL QUICK, WE DID THIS HERE A MONTH AGO I THINK AND I WAS TELLING YOU ABOUT THIS LITTLE BUTTON I FOUND ON MY IPHONE THAT I COULD TURN OFF AND IT WOULDN'T RING.
RIGHT. AND THEN SOMEWHERE IN THE MEETING IT RANG. SO I DID TURN IT OFF.
AND I'M NOT GOING TO TOUCH IT TELLING YOU ABOUT IT.
SO IF YOU HAVE A BUTTON TO TURN YOUR RINGER OFF, PLEASE DO SO.
. >>> YOU WERE ABSENT LAST WEEK.
[5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES]
I HOPE EVERYTHING IS OKAY. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES, PLEASE.>> MOVE FOR APPROVAL. >> SECOND.
>> MOTION BY MS. CLEMMONS, SECOND BY MR. EDWARDS.
[a. Future Land Use Map Amendment - Resurrection Life - 1910 S. Jenkins Road - Parcel ID: 2418-322-0001-000-5]
. >> THE FIRST ITEM OF BUSINESS IS THE HEARING ON THE LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY.
THIS BOARD WILL NOW FUNCTION AS THE LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY FOR THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE. AND WE HAVE MR. I'M GOING MESS YOU UP AGAIN, I CAN'T FIND MY NOTES.
I'LL GET IT ONE OF THESE DAYS. WE'LL GET IT WORKED OUT.
BOARD, CHAIRMAN, TODAY I AM PRESENTING TO YOU AN APPLICATION FOR A FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT FOR RESURRECTION LIFE.
THE APPLICANT IS EDC INC. THE PROPERTY OWNERS ARE RESURRECTION -- RESURRECTION LIFE FAMILY WORSHIP CENTER.
THEIR REQUEST IS FOR REVIEW OF AN APPLICATION FOR A FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT FOR ONE PARCEL OF LAND TO CHANGE THE FUTURE LAND USE CLASSIFICATION FROM MEDIUM TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL FOR 4.83 ACRES OF SAID PARCEL.
THIS IS THE LOCATION OF THE PARCEL WHICH ALL TOGETHER IS 17.9 GIVE OR TAKE ACRES. THIS IS FOR A LITTLE INSIGHT INTO THE ACTUAL PART OF THE PARCEL THAT IS GOING IN FOR THE FUTURE LAND MAP AMENDMENT. THIS SUB PARCEL ONE RIGHT HERE.
THIS IS THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION THAT WOULD ENSURE THAT SUB PART OF THE PARCEL IS HAVING THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT.
FOR THE EXISTING FUTURE LAND USE, I DO NEED TO CLARIFY THAT THIS PARCEL AND THIS PARCEL RIGHT HERE ARE ACTUALLY BOTH -- THEY WERE -- HAD A CHANGE OF THEIR FUTURE LAND USE THAT YOU GUYS ALL ACCEPTED A FEW MONTHS BACK TO RESIDENTIAL HIGH DENSITY. AGAIN, THIS PARCEL RIGHT HERE AND THIS PARCEL ARE BOTH RH. THE PROPOSED FUTURE LAND USE CHANGE WOULD CHANGE THIS SUBSECTION TO RESIDENTIAL HIGH DENSITY. AND IT WOULD MATCH THE SURROUNDING AREA. AND BECAUSE OF THAT, THE STAFF
[00:05:03]
IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL FOR THE PLANNING BOARD TO THEN APPROVE IT TO CITY COMMISSION. THE ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATIONS TODAY ARE APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS OR A RECOMMENDATION OF DISAPPROVAL. THANK YOU.THANK YOU. >> ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. ALTEIZER? NO. OKAY. NOT SEEING ANY.
I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THE MEETING.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON. FOR THE RECORD, BRAD CURRY WITH EDC REPRESENTING THE PROPERTY OWNER.
DON'T REALLY HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD.
STAFF DID APP EXCELLENT JOB PRESENTING THIS THE IS THE FIRST OF MANY APPLICATIONS YOU WILL SEE ON THIS PROJECT.
THE INTENT HERE IS TO DEVELOP THE NORTHERN PIECE ABOUT 13 PAC.
AS A CHURCH FACILITY, LIT HAVE THREE COMPONENTS, A SANCTUARY WORSHIP FACILITY, EDUCATION FACILITY AND THEN A SPORTS FACILITY AS WELL ON THAT PROPOSED CHURCH.
SO OUR BELIEF IS THAT THIS MULTIFAMILY HOUSING THAT WE'RE PROPOSING ON THIS PROPERTY THAT WILL ALL INTERACT TOGETHER SO THAT SOME OF THE PEOPLE STAYING AT THIS LESS DID HE RECALL PORTION WHICH YOU ARE REVIEWING TODAY WILL INTERACT WITH THE CHURCH. WE'RE TRYING TO HAVE A CAMPUS STYLE FACILITY HERE WHERE PEOPLE CAN WALK FROM FACILITY TO FACILITY AND WE'RE GOING TO SUBMIT A ZONING APPLICATION FOR THESE PARCELS. A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR THE SOUTHERN PIECE WHICH IS ARGUE RESIDENTIAL PIECE AND THEN WE'LL SUBMIT A PED FOR THE CHURCH PA SIMILARITY AS WELL.
SO HOPEFULLY WE'LL GET THOSE SUBMITTED TO YOU NEXT MONTH AND YOU'LL SEE IT THE FOLLOWING MONTH.
THIS WILL BE THE FIRST OF MANY APPLICATIONS YOU'RE GOING TO SEE ON THIS PROJECT. PRETTY EXCITED ACT IT.
A ONE OF A FIND KAISER PERMANENTE FACILITY.
DEFINITELY IN FORT PIERCE BUT MAYBE THE COUNTRY.
THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. THANK YOU.
>> DO YOU HAVE ANY -- BOARD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
>> I WOULD LIKE MR. BANKS TO COME UP AND EXPLAIN WHAT THIS IS GOING LOOK LIKE. BRIEF SYNOPSIS.
MAYBE SOME INSIGHT? >> HE WOULD LOVE TO.
CAN YOU BRING THE PREVIOUS SLIDE.
THE PREVIOUS SLIDE SHOWING THE TWO PARCELS? THERE YOU GO. PARCEL ONE IS THE PARCEL THAT WE'RE HERE TODAY HEARING. AND THAT IS FOR DEVELOPMENT OF RESIDENTIAL, IS THAT CORRECT, SIR?
>> THAT IS CORRECT. >> DID YOU SIGN IN BY THE WAY?
>> I DID NOT. >> DID BRAD TAKE THE PEN? SEE THAT? [LAUGHTER].
>> NOW WE KNOW WHO THE GUY IS TAKING THE PEN.
[00:10:36]
>>> WHEN YOU LOOK AT THAT BEAUTIFUL SIGN YOU HAVE UP THERE, IS THAT ALL GOING ON THROUGH THE SMALLER SECTION OF THIS PROPERTY OR IS THAT THE WHOLE PLAN AHEAD?
>> THAT WILL BE ON THE 12.8 ACRES.
>> LOOKS GREAT. >> THIS IS JUST THE LAND USE AMENDMENT. UNFORTUNATELY IT CAN'T SHOW YOU THE PICTURES AT THIS POINT. IT'S REALLY ABOUT JUST LOOKING AT THE LAND USE AND SEEING IF IT MAKES SENSE WITH THE OVERALL PLAN AND WHAT THE SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT IS.
WE'LL DEFINITELY BRING THE PRETTY PICTURES.
WHEN WE COME IN FOR THE PED. >> QUESTIONS?
IT'S THAT THE CHURCH NOT JUST THE CHURCH BUT FOR THE SPOT, IS THAT JUST FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT YOU'RE GOING TO BUILD OR IT'S GOING TO BE OPEN FOR THE COMMUNITY?
>> IT IS A COMMUNITY FACILITY. >> OKAY.
>> JUST A QUESTION IN THE BACK OF MY MIND AND I DON'T WANT TO GET TOO DEEP INTO THIS. OBVIOUSLY THERE ARE FEDERAL PROGRAMS TO ASSIST IN THE COST OF BUILDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING, WORKFORCE HOUSING. I GUESS THAT'S THE TERM THAT THE MODERN TERM IS WORKFORCE HOUSING.
PROBABLY BECAUSE THERE WAS SOME NEGATIVE VIEWPOINTS CONCERNING AFFORDABLE HOUSING. SO WE'VE CHANGED IT NOW AND MODERNIZE IT.
I WOULD ASSUME THERE'S SOME FEDERAL DOLLARS INVOLVED THAT COULD COME YOUR WAY IN THE GOMENT OF THIS.
>> ABSOLUTELY. AS OF RIGHT NOW WE GO BEFORE THE BOARD FOR FLORIDA HOUSING FINANCE COOPERATION IN MARCH TO OBTAIN $750,000 FOR PREDEVELOPMENT.
TAKES US THROUGH THIS PROCESS AND GETS US THROUGH OUR CONSTRUCTION DEVELOPMENTS. GETS US THROUGH OUR TAX EXEMPT BOND FUND UP TO $3,600 TO FUND OUR DEPARTMENT AND WE'RE ALSO DOING LOW INCOME TAX CREDITS TO OFFSET THE COST.
>> IS THERE CITY DOLLARS INVOLVED RIGHT NOW IN WORKFORCE
HOUSING PROGRAMS? >> CDBG WILL ALSO BE GOING AFTER CDBG DOLLARS AS A CITY CONTRIBUTION DOWN THE ROAD LATER. IT WILL CONTRIBUTE.
>> OKAY. WELL, FORT PIERCE NEEDS THIS.
THIS IS PROBABLY A GOOD NEIGHBORHOOD FOR IT.
BECAUSE OF THE GROWTH ALONG JENKINS ROAD PRESENTLY, A LOT OF NEW BLUE COLLAR JOBS ARE FLOWING IN THAT DIRECTION WITH THE WAREHOUSING AND SO ON THAT'S BEING DONE.
I'VE LOST TRACK OF THE MILLIONS OF SQUARE FEET OF WAREHOUSING THAT THIS BOARD HAS APPROVED OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS.
THE RV MARKETPLACE SEEMS TO HAVE FOUND THE JENKINS ROAD CORRIDOR FOR ALL PRACTICAL PURPOSES. I KNOW THAT THERE'S SOME BUILDING ON THE WEST SIDE OF 95 BUT I STILL LOOK AT THAT AS THE JENKINS ROAD CORRIDOR BECAUSE IT HAS TO FEED OFF OF JENKINS ROAD REGARDLESS. SO THERE'S A LOT OF NEW BLUE COLLAR JOBS ALONG THERE AND WE NEED HOUSING IN THAT AREA.
I WOULD GUESS WITH THE CHURCH BEING INVOLVED IN THIS THE CHURCH WILL HAVE YOUR OWN SECURITY MEASURES IN THE
ON SITE SECURITY 24 HOURS ESPECIALLY FOR THE APARTMENTS.
>> OKAY. TO ME THAT'S ONE OF THE KEYS IN THE SUCCESS OF WORKFORCE HOUSING, PROPER SECURITY AND I'VE SEEN DEVELOPMENTS LIKE THIS IN OTHER AREAS OF THE COUNTRY AND ACTUALLY OTHER CITIES HERE IN FLORIDA THAT HAVE SUCCEEDED DUE TO SECURITY. VERSUS THOSE THAT DID NOT HAVE SECURE -- ADEQUATE SECURITY AND THERE SEEMS TO ALWAYS BE TROUBLES IN SPOTS. UNFORTUNATELY, IT COMES WITH
THIS TYPE OF HOUSING. >> SURE.
>> I'M TRYING TO PICK MY WORDS CAUTIOUSLY.
[00:15:10]
BUT I'M VERY HAPPY TO SEE IT. I THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT THE COMMUNITY CAN CERTAINLY USE. AGAIN, PARTICULARLY IN THAT CAR C CORRIDOR, WE'VE HAD OTHER DEVELOPERS THAT HAVE COME BEFORE US THAT'S TALKED ABOUT WORKFORCE HOUSING BUT THEY NEVER SEEM TO REALLY GET INTO THE DISCUSSION DEEP ENOUGH TO ASSURE US THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING AT.AND IT'S GOOD TO SEE THIS. THAT SEEMS ALSO CHURCH ROAD ALONG THE JENKINS ROAD CORRIDOR PARTICULARLY IN THAT -- RIGHT IN THAT GENERAL VICINITY WE'VE GOT TWO OTHER FAIRLY LARGE CHURCHES THERE WITH CHURCH SCHOOLS. SO THAT'S GOOD TO SEE TOO.
I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT OVERALL THE COMMUNITY IS NEEDING AND I SEE THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY THAT CHARTER SCHOOLS AND CHURCH SCHOOLS SEEM TO BE VERY WELL AT TIMES ARE THE SELECTION OF CHOICE OF PARENTS. I'M EXCITED TO SEE HOW YOUR PROJECT MOVES FORWARD. WE'LL BE LOOKING FORWARD TO
SEEING YOU COME BACK. >> ABSOLUTELY.
>> THANK YOU. >> ONE MORE QUESTION.
THE. >> IS IT GOING TO BE GATED
SO WHEN YOU SEE OUR FACILITY, YOU WON'T LOOK AT IT AS AFFORDABLE OR WORKFORCE. IT WILL LOOK JUST LIKE A LUXURY APARTMENT STYLE APARTMENT COMPLEX.
ALL THE SAME AMENITIES AND SECURITY MEASURES.
THE SAME WAY WE ONBOARD. THE SAME LEVEL AS MARKETPLACE
ANYTHING ELSE? NOT HEARING ANY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> IS THERE ANYONE ELSE HERE SPEAKING TO THIS PROJECT? I ONLY SEE ONE OTHER SMILING FACE ALL THE WAY IN THE BACK.
DO YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO IT? NO.
OKAY. I WILL PLACE THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THE MEETING AND COME BACK TO THE BOARD. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS?
>> MR. CHAIR, I NEED TO ABSTAIN FROM VOTING ON THIS ISSUE.
I DO NEED TO -- >> I WISH WE HAD OUR LEGAL REPRESENTATION HERE. WE DO.
IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE, STEP UP TO THE MICROPHONE.
>> THERE ARE TIMES LIKE THIS THAT I LIKE TO RELY ON OUR ATTORNEY. WE HAVEN'T HAD ONE FOR A COUPLE YEARS. WE DID HAVE AN ATTORNEY SITTING ON THIS BOARD FOR MANY YEARS AND SUDDENLY OUR ATTORNEY DISAPPEARED A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO.
IT'S NOT THAT WE HAVE LEGAL QUESTIONS OFTEN BUT WHEN WE DO I LIKE TO GET A LEGAL ANSWER RATHER THAN TO FIELD IT MYSELF.
WHAT PROCEDURE DO WE NEED TO GO THROUGH?
>> CONFLICT OF INTEREST THAT YOU'RE WORRIED ABOUT.
HAVE YOU TO ANNOUNCE THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST THAT YOU HAVE. THERE SHOULD BE A FORM BY STAFF FOR YOU TO FILL OUT REGARDING YOUR CONFLICT.
AND THEN YOU WOULD ABSTAIN FROM VOTING.
>> CAN YOU PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND TITLE FOR THE RECORD.
>> SARAH HEDGES, ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY.
>> SO GO AHEAD. MY CONFLICT IS I'M ON THE RDLC
SO THAT'S MY CONFLICT. >> YOU'RE ON THE BOARD OF THE
>> YEAH. >> BUT IT'S THE NONPROFIT THAT'S INVOLVED IN THE DEVELOPMENT. OKAY. SO YOU WILL NEED TO GET ACTUALLY YOU CAN GO ONLINE -- I CAN'T GO ONLINE AND GET IT BUT I HAVE A TECH SUPPORT MEMBER THAT LIVES WITH ME THAT IS VERY GOOD WITH THOSE THINGS AND SOMEHOW SHE GOES ONLINE AND THEN SHE HANDS ME THE COMPUTER AND I FILL IT OUT AND ALL OF A SUDDEN THE FORM COMES OUT OF THE PRINTER.
IT'S AMAZING. OKAY. SO YOU'LL NEED TO TAKE CARE OF THAT. OKAY. ANYTHING ELSE? NOT SEEING ANYTHING. I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
>> MOVE FOR APPROVAL >> SECOND.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL WITH RECOMMENDATIONS.
THERE ARE NO RECOMMENDATIONS. >> IT'S NO RECOMMENDATIONS.
[00:20:02]
WE'LL SEE YOU BACK TOMORROW? [LAUGHTER].
>> I THINK YOU'RE INTENDING TO MOVE AN ITEM UP.
[c. Resolution 23-R17 - Extending the Peacock Arts District Boundaries and Providing for an Effective Date]
>> YES, I AM. THE NEXT ITEM OF BUSINESS IS ITEM 7. NEW BUSINESS.
I AM GOING TO MOVE ITEM C FORWARD AND HEAR THAT NOW.
THAT SHOULD BE RESOLUTION 23-R17.
>> I DON'T HAVE A PRESENTATION. THIS IS VERY BRIEF.
I'M GOING TO PULL UP THE MAP HERE.
WE ADOPTED THE FIRST RESOLUTION FOR THE PEACOCK ARTS DISTRICT IN 2017. SOME OF YOU MAY HAVE BEEN ON THIS BOARD WHEN THAT HAPPENED. THEN WE EXTENDED IT FURTHER TO INCLUDE THE CREATIVE ARTS ACADEMY OF ST. LUCIE ON DELAWARE AVENUE. SO WE EXPANDED IT THEN AND NOW WE'RE COMING BACK ONE MORE TIME BECAUSE IF YOU SEE HERE, THE BOUNDARY, THE SOUTHERN BOUNDARY WAS ALWAYS DELAWARE AVENUE EXCEPT IT WENT DOWN THE MIDDLE OF THE STREET SO WE DID NOT INCORPORATE THE PARCELS ON THE SOUTHERN SIDE OF DELAWARE AVENUE WHICH IS -- IT KIND OF DIDN'T COME UP REALLY UNTIL RECENTLY WHEN WE'RE SEEING ALL OF THIS EXCITING DEVELOPMENT HAPPENING ON DELAWARE AVENUE. A LOT OF REUSE PROJECTS WHICH THIS PRESENTS AN ISSUE BECAUSE THE ADAPTIVE REUSE PROJECTS GET A PARKING REDUCTION. SO WE HAVE A FEW PROJECTS THAT I THINK ACTUALLY HAVE COME BEFORE YOU ON THE SOUTHERN SIDE OF DELAWARE. WE HAVE A COMMERCIAL FACADE GRANT THAT WE'RE WORKING ON. SO BASICALLY I'M JUST HERE TODAY TO UPDATE YOU AND GET A RECOMMENDATION THAT YOU CAN FORWARD TO THE CITY COMMISSION TO INCLUDE THE PARCELS ON THE
SOUTH SIDE OF DELAWARE AVENUE. >> DID I MISS AN AMENDMENT? TO THIS? ORIGINALLY WHEN WE KEY ATEED THE PEACOCK ARTS DISTRICT, I DON'T RECALL IT GOING ALL THE BAY OVER
>> SO WE AMENDED IT ONCE ALREADY.
I'LL SHOW YOU THAT MAP TOO. SO THIS WAS -- ORIGINALLY THIS IS THE LIGHT GREEN. RIGHT.
THIS WAS THE ORIGINAL BOUNDARY. THEN IT EXPANDED TO THIS ORANGE PEACH AREA TO CAPTURE THE CREATIVE ARTS ACADEMY
>> YOU SAY WE DID THAT IN 2019. >> 19.
>> FOR SOME REASON THAT'S THE ONE THAT'S RIGHT HERE NOW.
>> THAT'S OKAY. WE'RE HERE IN 2023 AND WE'RE GOING TO THE
>> SO YOU MAY NOT HAVE BEEN SITTING IN THE CHAMBER WHEN I WAS HAVING BRIEF CONVERSATIONS WITH MR. GILMORE AND FOR SOME REASON, I WAS STRUGGLING WITH MY MEMORY ON -- AND WHEN I LOOKED AT OBVIOUSLY THE DOCUMENT I'M -- I DON'T REMEMBER ALL THESE OTHER SIDE STREETS, SIXTH, FIFTH, AND SO ON GOING ALL THE WAY OVER TO DELAWARE BUT YOU'RE TELLING ME THAT WE DID THAT IN 19.
>> YES, SIR. >> SOMEHOW I -- IT'S NOT IN HERE ANYMORE. AND GENERALLY I TRY TO REMEMBER THINGS LIKE THIS BUT IT JUST ISN'T IN THERE.
MY MICROCHIP IS NOT WORKING OR SOMETHING.
BUTTOCK. SO WE'RE ONLY ADDRESSING THE
SOUTH SIDE OF DELAWARE AVENUE. >> CORRECT.
JUST THE PARCELS ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF DELAWARE.
>> THOSE ARE THE ADDRESSES THAT RUN FROM U.S. 1.
>> OKAY. NOW THE CONVERSATION I HAD WITH MR. GILMORE AND I WOULD SAY THAT YOU MIGHT LIKE TO LOOK INTO THIS AS WELL.
MY CONCERN THAT I EXPRESSED WAS AS THE PEACOCK ARTS DISTRICT HAS EXPANDED THAT SOME TIME IN THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS, WE DID AN AMENDMENT TO THE REQUIREMENT OF CONDITIONAL USE FOR ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES. AND MR. GILMORE CONFIRMED THAT WHEN WE DID THAT, THE BELIEF IS THAT IT INCLUDED PEACOCK ARTS DISTRICT. BUT POSSIBLY NOT OBVIOUSLY THE RESIDENTIAL STREETS THAT ARE INVOLVED IN PEACOCK ARTS DISTRICT. HIS RECOLLECTION WAS THE
[00:25:03]
THOROUGHFARE OF ORANGE AVENUE. BUT THERE IS DEVELOPABLE PROPERTY ON THE SIDE STREETS BETWEEN DELAWARE AND ORANGE AVENUE THAT COULD DEVELOP INTO VENUES THAT MAY OR MAY NOT WANT TO SERVE ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES AND ALONG DELAWARE AVENUE, THERE ARE DEFINITELY SOME AREAS THAT PRESENTLY NOW, ONE IN PARTICULAR, THAT SELLS ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES WHICH IS PRESENTLY IN THE PEACOCK ART DISTRICT FROM WHAT YOU'RE REMINDING ME THAT WE DID.AND I CAN ALSO SEE THAT SOME OF THOSE PROPERTIES ALONG THE SOUTHSIDE OF DELAWARE AVENUE THAT COULD BE BOUGHT UP AND COULD BE TURNED INTO LITTLE CAFES SELLING ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES, MAYBE EVEN A NIGHTCLUB, WHO KNOWS.
SO WHERE I'M GOING WITH THIS PART OF THE CONVERSATION IS I THINK THAT AS A CITY WE NEED TO BE LOOKING AT THAT AS WELL.
AND TAKING A LOOK AT THE CONDITIONAL USE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE SALES AND BE CERTAIN THAT SHOULD SOMEONE WANT TO DO THAT, THAT ORDNANCE DOESN'T -- ORDINANCE DOESN'T GET IN THE WAY AND CREATE US AN ISSUE MOVING FORWARD.
>> OKAY. WILL DO. WITH THAT SAID I'LL TURN THIS OVER TO MY BOARD TO ASK ANY QUESTIONS YOU WOULD LIKE TO ASK.
>> I HAVE A QUESTION. COULD YOU EDGE KATE ME ON WHY WE'RE DOING THIS? WHY DO WE EXTEND THIS ART DISTRICT? IS THERE A BENEFIT TO THE
>> OR THE BUILDING OWNERS? >> WELL, YES.
THERE ARE DEFERENT BENEFITS. THE REASON THIS CAME UP AND IT ACTUALLY CAME FROM ONE OF YOUR FORMER BOARD MEMBERS WHO IS NOW OUR COMMISSIONER BROAD RICK. HE BROUGHT UP THERE ARE SOME PROJECTS COMING ON THE SOUTHSIDE OF DELAWARE.
AS OF RIGHT NOW THERE'S NO REAL BENEFIT FOR PARKING REDUCTIONS ON THE SOUTHSIDE OF DELAWARE. THOSE THAT ARE IN THE ARTS DISTRICT I THINK IT'S A 5% REDUCTION FOR ADAPTIVE REUSE AND THEN THERE'S A 25% FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION, SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES. THAT'S THE MAIN BENEFIT.
THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE AT THE PLANNING BOARD.
BUT THERE ARE OTHER WE CAN DO TOO.
>> WE'RE DOING IT SO THEY CAN OPEN UP STORAGE AND HAVE LESS PARKING. IS THERE A BOARD FOR THIS
PEACOCK DISTRICT? >> THERE'S NOT.
IS THERE ANYTHING THAT HAS TO GO THROUGH THEM TO GET APPROVAL TO
DO SOMETHING THERE? >> THERE IS NO PEACOCK ARTS
DISTRICT BOARD. >> OKAY. SO YOU HAVE NO SAY SO
>> JUST BENEFICIAL IS THE PARKING REDUCTION.
>> THAT'S THE MAIN LIKE CODE RELEVANCE OF THIS.
BESIDES OTHER EFFORTS THROUGH THE CITY BUT IN TERMS OF DEVELOPMENT THIS IS THE MAIN BENEFIT.
AND IF I MAY JUST TO GO BACK TO THE INITIAL ADOPTING RESOLUTION BACK IN 2019, THIS WHOLE THING CAME ABOUT BECAUSE THE ORANGE AVENUE PROPERTY OWNERS GOT TOGETHER AND WE HAD A COMMUNITY MEETING. I THINK THE PLANNING STAFF PUT THAT ON. DO YOU REMEMBER THAT? AND THEY DECIDED WE WANT TO BRAND THIS AREA AS SOMETHING UNIQUE AND FUNKY AND THE COMMUNITY CAME UP WITH THE NAME PEACOCK ARTS DISTRICT OR THE PAD.
THAT'S HOW IT INITIALLY STARTED FROM THE COMMUNITY.
ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? I'LL OPEN AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC
[00:30:01]
PORTION OF THE MEETING. IF THERE'S NOTHING FURTHER THE BOARD WOWED LIKE TO ADD I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION.>> MOVE FOR APPROVAL. >> SECOND.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL AND SECOND.
>> THANK YOU. >> OKAY. NOW I UNDERSTAND YOU'VE GOT WORK YOU GOT TO RUN OFF AND DO.
OKAY. NOT A PROBLEM. NEXT ITEM OF BUSINESS IS ITEM A,
[a. Annexation - Joseph Land - Parcel ID - 2427-801-0085-000-5 ]
ANNEXATION OF JOSEPH LAND PARCEL 2427-801-0085-000-5.I THOUGHT I WAS GOING TO GET OUT OF HAVING TO DO THAT ANYMORE.
OKAY. MR. GILMORE, YOU'RE ON. >> IF I MAY JUST BEFORE WE START, KEVIN FRIEDMAN PLANNING DIRECTOR.
WE RECEIVED AN EMAIL FROM THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE SCHOOL BOARD APOLOGIZING FOR HIS ABSENCE TODAY.
HE DID STATE IN THAT EMAIL HE HAS NO COMMENTS OR OBJECTIONS TO ANY OF THE ITEMS ON THE BOARD TODAY.
>> THAT'S GREAT. I WAS SURPRISED NOT TO SEE HIM HERE IN THE PLAN STAGE. BUT HE IS A BUSY GENTLEMAN.
OKAY. GOOD AFTERNOON. PLANNING CHAIRMAN.
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS. WE HAVE AN ANNEXATION FOR A SUBJECT PROPERTY AT OR NEAR 277 DIXIELAND DRIVE.
BY APPLICANT GEORGE -- AND THE PROPERTY OWNER IS JOSEPH LAND, LLC AT THE SUBJECT PARCEL ID LISTED.
THE REQUEST IS A VOLUNTARY APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION OF ONE PARCEL. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING THIS ANNEXATION. CURRENTLY THE FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION IS RESIDENTIAL HIGH WHICH IS 15 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE AND A ZONING DESIGNATION OF RESIDENTIAL MULTIFALLY 11 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE. THE APP SCANT PROPOSING A FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL WITH THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ZONE R5.
THE APPLICATION -- THE PROPERTY IS CONFIGOUS -- THE ANNEXATION WILL NOT RESULT IN THE CREATION OF AN ENCLAVE.
IT MEETS OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE CURRENT VALUE OF THE PROPERTY IS APPROXIMATELY $130,200.
SHOULD THE APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION BE APPROVED IT COULD CREATE A NEW SOURCE OF TAX REVENUE AND RELATE TO THE CITY IF DEVELOPED. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS 1.02 ACRES. IT'S LOCATED JUST SOUTH OF DIXIELAND DRIVE. THIS IS THE EXISTING AND PROPOSED FUTURE LAND USE AND ZONING FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
AS PROPOSED, THE ANNEXATION MEETS THE STANDARDS FOR THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SPECIFICALLY POLICY SECTION 1.11 REGARDING ANNEXATIONS PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION. POSSIBLE ACTIONS OF THE PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION. THANK YOU.
>> MR. GILMORE. WOULD YOU GO BACK TO THE OVERVIEW OF THE SITE? VERY GOOD.
THIS APPLICANT IS ASKING FOR THE HIGHEST RANGE OF DEVELOPMENT ALLOWED ON THIS PROPERTY. THIS IS EH GREASE OFF OF DIXIE.
I'M NOT AWARE OF ANY OTHER' INGRESS OR EGRESS SO IT WOULD TEEM TO BE TO BE PROBABLY VERY LITTLE DEVELOPMENT ON THE NARROW
STRIP COMING INTO THIS PROPERTY >> CORRECT.
>> IF HE WERE TO -- THE LAND OWNER WERE TO PUT IN A STREET THAT'S MEETS OUR CITY REQUIREMENTS.
>> CORRECT. >> SO THE R5 ACTUALLY FOR THE MOST PART IS REALLY ONLY THIS SMALL RECTANGLE WHICH MAKES UP WHAT IT APPEARS TO BE. I THOUGHT IT WAS TWO LOTS.
[00:35:06]
BUT WHAT I JUST READ WAS ONE LOT.SO AT SOME POINT IN TIME IT'S ALREADY BEEN CONNECTED WE WOULD GET INTO THE COUNTY BY ONE PARCEL.
>> I ASSUME SO. THAT'S WHAT IS CURRENTLY ONE
SO IT LOOKS LIKE IT SHOULD BE MORE THAN THAT.
I'VE GOT A COUPLE OF POTENTIAL ISSUES MOVING FORWARD WITH IT WITH THIS -- WITH AN R5 DESIGNATION.
>> OKAY. >> AND I'M SURE KEVIN IS SITTING THERE GOING OH, HELL, HERE HE GOES AGAIN.
THIS PARCEL OF PROPERTY HAS TO DRAIN INTO WHAT'S KNOWN AS THE DITCH. EVERYTHING SOUTH OF HIGH POINT DRIVE HIGH POINT BOULEVARD SOUTH HAS TO DRAIN INTO.
INCLUDING A TOYOTA DEALER THAT'S SITTING IN FRONT OF THIS PROPERTY BETWEEN U.S. ONE AND THIS PARCEL.
[00:40:56]
VERY QUICKLY TO ME NOW IS SHORTER INCREMENT'.I DON'T LOOK AS FAR OUT AS MS. CLEMMONS MIGHT BECAUSE MY INCREMENTS ARE SHORTER NOW. SO I LOOK AT THESE PROBLEMS FROM A DIFFERENT PER SUSPECT I BUT THE IDEA THAT SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT AND THEY DO A GOOD JOB, I HAVE CONVERSATION WITH THEM ON A REGULAR BASIS.
IT WILL DRAIN INTO THIS WATERWAY AND THIS DRAINS TO HERE AND HERE AND I CAN GO THROUGH THE WHOLE CHAIN OF WHERE THIS WATER WOULD LEAVE THIS LOT AND GO AND I'M GOING TO TELL YOU NOW IT WIND UP IN TEN-MILE CREEK WHICH TEN MILE CREEK HAS A PROBLEM WITH THE VOLUME OF WATER IT'S TAKING WHICH BACKS UP -- HAPPENS TO BACK UP FIVE MILE CREEK AND WE'VE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT MAJOR DEVELOPMENT ALONG FIVE MILE CREEK IN THE PAST FEW MONTHS AND WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT IT AGAIN VERY SOON.
WATER RUNS DOWNHILL, GUYS. >> CHAIRMAN, I ALSO MAY STATE I'M NOT SURE IF YOU NOTICED BUT THE CURRENT FUTURE LAND USE FOR THE COUNTY IS RH WHICH IS RESIDENTIAL HIGH 15 DHOLLING UNITS. IT'S BASICALLY THE SAME SO IF THE PROPERTY WASN'T ANNEXED THEY WOULD STILL BE ABLE TO DO THE 15
UNITS PER ACRE. >> THAT'S A GOOD NOTE.
I'M NOT OPPOSED TO IT BEING ANNEXED.
I JUST QUESTION OUR WISDOM IN IT BEING ASSIGNED AN R5.
YOU COULD STILL HAVE THE SAME AMOUNT OF NONPARVOUS AREA IF IT WAS -- PERVIOUS AREA IF IT WAS AN R5.
>> RIGHT. >> OKAY. ANY OTHER COMMENTS BY OUR WONDERFUL BOARD?
>> YES, SIR. >> JUST ONE OBSERVATION AND THEN
A QUESTION FOR STAFF. >> I'M NOT EXACTLY SURE HOW THE COUNTY BUT NORMALLY FUTURE LAND USE IS A MORE LONG RAIN GE KIND OF PLANNING, FOR EXAMPLE, IN AN R4 YOU'RE ALLOWED AT BASE TO DO TEN UNITS PER ACRE. BUT THE FUTURE LAND USE ALLOWS YOU TO DO UP TO APPROXIMATELY 12 SO THE APPLICANT WOULD HAVE TO -- IN THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE APPLY FOR A CONDITIONAL USE.
[00:46:43]
WHEN YOU CALCULATE IN THE LIKELY IMPACT ON THE CITY YOU PROBABLY -- YOU WOULD USE MORE LIKELY A FUTURE LAND USE THAN THE ZONING. IF YOU THINK OF ZONING BEING A LAYER ON A CAKE AND THE FUTURE LAND USE BEING THE CAKE ITSELF, THAT THE ZONING IS SLICED IN DIFFERENT PROPORTIONS ULTIMATELY THE PROPERTY OWNER HAS TENDS LYING FUTURE LAND USE AS THE MAXIMUM YOU CAN DO. THE CITY WILL CONTROL THAT BY THE ZONING, VARIOUS LEVELS OF ZONING THAT ARE PLACED ON THAT PROPERTY. BUT ESSENTIALLY, THE PROPERTY OWNER HAS A DEGREE OF ENTITLEMENT TO GO TO 15 UNITS PLUS THERE ARE OTHER THINGS IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WHICH THE CHURCH IF YOU JUST RECALL GO BACK TO THE CHURCH APPLICATION AND THEY'RE INVOKING POLICIES WITHIN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WHICH IS AFFORDABLE HOUSING CAME THEN THEY CAN ALMOST -- WELL, THEY COULD DO A ONE FOR ONE BENEFIT FROM MARKET RATE TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING. YOU COULD HAVE THE NUMBER OF UNITS STILL COMPRESS INTOED THE FLAG PIECE.REGARDING CALCULATING THE GROSS DENSITY.
>> YEAH. BECAUSE YOU'RE TAKING THE ORDINANCES TOTAL ACREAGE FORGETTING ANYTHING THAT YOU'RE GOING TO DO WITH IT OTHER THAN BUILDING HOUSES.
IT'S STILL CALCULATED IN THE TOTAL UNIT DENSITY.
DO WE KNOW IF THE APPLICANT OWNS THE WHITE SQUIRE THAT'S -- THAT WHITE SQUIRE TO THE NORTH OF WHERE IT SAYS RH, R51234.
[00:50:04]
THERE ARE DUPLEXES THERE AS WE SPEAK.WE DON'T KNOW IF THE APPLICANT OWNS THAT.
>> I DON'T BELIEVE SO. >> OKAY.
ANYTHING FURTHER? NOT HEARING ANYTHING, I'LL OPEN TO THE PUBLIC.
I'LL CLOSE TO THE PUBLIC. THERE'S NO ONE PRESENT.
I'LL COME BACK TO THE BOARD. ANY FURTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? NOT HEARING ANY I'M OPEN FOR A MOTION AND IN THIS MOTION WE CAN MAKE A RECOMMENDATION IF WE CHOOSE TO.
>> NOT AT THIS TIME. >> OKAY. I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
>> I MOVE FOR APPROVAL. >> SECOND.
>> WE WAY MOTION FOR APPROVAL AND A SECOND.
CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE. >> YES.
OKAY. THE NEXT ITEM OF BUSINESS IS 7D.
OH, THAT'S OUR SUNSHINE. >> NO.
>> I'M SORRY. GOING RIGHT ON DOWN THE LIST HERE. I NEED TO START CHECKING STUFF OFF HERE. OKAY.
HERE WE GO. I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHERE WE'RE AT. THANK YOU.
YOU DOING YOUR JOB. KEEP ME STRAIGHT.
[b. Zoning Atlas Map Amendment - Oak Alley Planned Development Scrivener's Error - 4483 S. 25th Street]
OKAY. NEXT ITEM OF BUSINESS ITEM 7B.ZONING ATLAS AMENDMENT FOR OAK ALLEY PLAN DEVELOPMENT.
I REMEMBER THIS. THIS IS MORE OF A HOUSEKEEPING
>> SO GO AHEAD, MR. GILMORE. >> GOOD EVENING.
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS. BEFORE YOU WE HAVE A ZONING ATLAS MAP AMENDMENT WHICH CONSISTS OF A SCRIVENER'S AREA.
THE APPLICANT IS OF COURSE THE CITY ON BEHALF OF THE PROPERTY OWNER. FOR THE SUBJECT PARCEL LISTED ABOVE. HERE'S A STAFF ANALYSIS.
IT WAS BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT THAT THERE'S A SCRIVENER'S ERROR THAT OCCURRED.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY LOCATED AT OR NEAR 4485 SOUTH 25TH STREET WAS ANNEXED INTO THE CITY LIMITS OF FORT PIERCE.
THE SUBJECT PARCEL WAS ACCIDENTALLY ANNEXED ALONG WITH OAK ALLEY SUBDIVISION PLAN DEVELOPMENT ZONING DESIGNATION.
THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT IS INITIATING THE VIVE NE'ER'S AREA CORRECTION ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE.
AS YOU CAN SEE THIS SUBJECT PROPERTY ABUTS THE OAK ALLEY PLAN DEVELOPMENT TO THE NORTH IS APPROXIMATELY 1.52 ACRES AN IT CONSISTS OF A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE.
THE CURRENT FUTURE LAND USE IS LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ON THE CURRENT ZONING PD PLANNED DEVELOPMENT WHICH IS OAK ALLEY AND WE'RE TRYING TO CORRECT THAT WITH A ZONING R1 SINGLE FAMILY LOW DENSITY ZONE. APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMOUNTING ORDINANCE 22-046 IN ORDER TO CORRECT A SCRIVENER'S ERROR OF A PARCEL INCLUDED WITHIN THE ADOPTED ORDINANCE REMOVING THE SUBJECT PARCEL LOCATED AT 4483.
THE SUBJECT 25TH STREET AND AMENDING ITS ZONING CLASSIFICATION TO R1 SINGLE FAMILY LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ZONE.
>> I WAS NOT ON THE BOARD AT THE TIME.
I REMEMBER WHEN OAK ALLEY WAS ANNEXED.
[00:55:04]
THIS PROPERTY AS I UNDERSTAND THE DISCUSSIONS IT WAS ANNEXEDIN WITH OAK ALLEY. >> CORRECT.
>> THE OWNER HAD COME TO THE CITY DO YOU UNDERSTAND THIS CORRECTLY? THAT THE OWNER CAME TO THE CITY AROUND THAT SAME TIME TO BE ANNEXED?
>> SO SOMEHOW IT GOT ALL TIED TOGETHER INTO ONE ANNEXATION
THEN? >> SO WHAT I THINK HAPPENED BECAUSE I WENT AND TOOK A LOOK BACK AT THE MAPS THAT OAK ALLEY SUBMITTED. APPARENTLY THERE WERE DISCUSSIONS OF THEM PURCHASING THE PROPERTY AND THEN THEY STILL LEFT I GUESS THAT PARCEL ON THERE AS WELL.
AND I GUESS BY MISTAKE THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT JUST OTHEREDED IT FROM THE MAPPING IN THE ANNEXATION AND GAVE THE PARCEL THE PD ZONING CLASSIFICATION.
WHICH IT SHOULD NOT HAVE AND WE'RE JUST TRYING TO CORRECT THAT AND THE APPLICANT THERE'S SOME THINGS THAT THE OWNER WOULD LIKE TO DO WITH HER PROPERTY. SHE DIDN'T EVEN KNOW IT.
I THINK SHE WAS TRYING TO SELL THE PROPERTY.
THAT'S WHEN WE REALIZED YOU'RE OAK ALLEY PD.
>> IT HAS TO BE SEPARATED. >> YES.
>> IT COULD STILL BE IN THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE.
>> STILL IN THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE.
>> SO THE ANNEXATION IN TERMS OF THE ANNEXATION STILL EXISTS.
>> STILL EXISTS. >> JUST BEING SEPARATED AS A PD.
>> YES. >> I WANTED TO BE CERTAIN THAT I
WAS GETTING THIS CLEAR. >> AND IT WILL TAKE TWO
ORDINANCES TO CORRECT THIS. >> IT WILL TAKE THIS ACTION.
>> YEAH. SO IT WILL BE ACTUALLY THEY SHOULD BE ORDINANCES. SO THEY'LL BE THE ORDINANCE TO REMOVE IT FROM THE PD AND THEN THERE WILL BE THE ORDINANCE TO REZONE IT. OKAY. THAT WILL NOT -- THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY WILL NOT INCUR ANY EXPENSE FROM THE CITY
REGARDING ANY OF THIS ACTION. >> CORRECT.
BECAUSE WE'RE CLEANING UP SOMETHING THAT HAPPENED AS AN
>> VERY GOOD. ANY QUESTIONS OF OUR BOARD? NO? OKAY. PUBLIC PORTION OF THE MEETING IS OPEN. NOT SEEING ANYONE, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THE MEETING.
COME BACK TO THE BOARD. IF WE HAVE NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
>> MOVE FOR APPROVAL. >> SECOND.
>> OKAY. MS. WHICH HE -- CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE.
[d. Sunshine Presentation]
>> OKAY. NOW THEN, WE GET TO DO THE SUNSHINE LAW DISCUSSION.
IS THAT RIGHT? CORRECT. OKAY. I TOLD YOU I NEED HELP
>> VERY GOOD. SO, AGAIN, I'M SARAH HEDGES.
I'M THE ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY. SO IT'S A LITTLE BIT MORE BROAD THAN JUST SUNSHINE. BASICALLY WE'RE GOING OVER THE THREE COMPONENTS OF OUR OPEN GOVERNMENT SO ONE OF THAT IS SUNSHINE. ONE IS RELATED TO PUBLIC RECORDS. AND THE LAST IS VOTING CONFLICTS
OF INTEREST. >> WHAT WE'RE GOING TO SEE
[01:01:04]
PROBABLY THE BEST PRACTICE OF IT DON'T ALWAYS ALIGN BECAUSE IF YOU MAKE THAT SIMPLE MISTAKE OF STEPPING OVER THAT LINE AND MAKING THAT RECOMMENDATION BUT YOU DIDN'T HAVE YOUR MEETING IN THE SUNSHINE WELL YOU VIOLATED SUNSHINE.SO THE ADVICE WE ALWAYS GIVE IS IT'S BETTER TO FOLLOW SUNSHINE AND I THINK EVERY BOARD AND COMMITTEE IN THIS CITY DOES FOLLOW SUNSHINE. NOT I THINK.
I KNOW. SO WHEN YOU -- THE QUOTE AT THE BOTTOM HERE IS FROM THE FLORIDA SUPREME COURT.
THE PRINCIPLE TO BE FOLLOWED IS SIMPLE, WHEN IN DOUBT FOLLOW THE OPEN MEETING POLICY OF THE STATE.
ONE OF THE THINGS YOU'LL SEE WHEN WE GO THROUGH ALL OF THIS IS THE WHOLE GOAL IS OUR LEGISLATURE WANTS EVERYTHING THAT WE'RE DOING TO BE IN THE PUBLIC SO THE PUBLIC KNOWS WHEN WE'RE DOING SO THAT THEY HAVE THEIR OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK AND BE INFORMED OF WHAT'S HAPPENING IN OUR GOVERNMENT.
AN EXOFICIO MEMBER -- THE MAYOR IS ON CERTAIN BOARDS BECAUSE SHE'S THE MAYOR. IF YOU'RE EVER ON THE BOARD WITH AN EXOFICIO MEMBER, SUNSHINE APLAYS TO THEM AS WELL.
-- APPLIES TO AS WELL. STAFF AND NONBOARD MEMBERS.
LIKE I SAID AT THE BEGINNING THE BIG THING ABOUT SUNSHINE IS IT IS YOUR BOARD SO YOU CAN INDIVIDUALLY HAVE CONVERSATIONS WITH STAFF MEMBERS AS MUCH AS YOU WANT.
THAT DOES NOT HAVE TO BE DONE HERE IN A PUBLIC OPEN MEETING IN THE SUNSHINE. WHAT YOU CANNOT DO IS USE THE STAFF MEMBERS BASICALLY AS A CON DUE WIT.
YOU CAN'T DO TO A STAFF MEMBER AND SAY CAN YOU ASK BOARD MEMBER SO AND SO WHAT THEY THINK ABOUT THIS NEXT AGENDA ITEM.
SO WHAT YOU COULD NOT DO ONE-ON-ONE YOU CAN'T USE A THIRD PARTY TO KIND OF END AROUND TO GET THAT COMMUNICATION OUTSIDE OF THE SUNSHINE. I THINK EVERYONE THINKS WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A MEETING YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT EVERYONE SITTING HERE HAVING A CONVERSATION IN A ROOM, TABLES, CHAIRS ALL OF THOSE THINGS. MEETINGS UNDER THE UNDERSTANDING OF SUNSHINE DO NOT HAVE TO BE A FORMAL MEETING.
SO WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO AVOID IS TRIGGERING AN ACCIDENTAL MEETING THAT'S OUTSIDE OF THE SUNSHINE.
THAT'S WHERE OUR PROBLEMS COME IN.
SO A MEETING CAN BE SOMETHING FORMAL LIKE THIS.
IT COULD BE SOMETHING AS INFORMAL AS YOU ALL RUNNING INTO EACH OTHER AT PUBLIX OR THE PARK OR A RESTAURANT AND DISCUSSING ANYTHING COMING BEFORE YOU. YOU ALL REVOLVE FREE TO TALK TO EACH OTHER AS MUCH AS YOU WANT JUST NOT ABOUT ANYTHING THAT IS COMING BEFORE YOU OR IS LIKELY FORESEEABLE TO COME BEFORE YOU.
IT'S NOT JUST THE VERBAL COMMUNICATIONS EITHER.
SO IT INCLUDES ANY TYPE OF COMMUNICATIONS.
SO WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS. YOUR TEXT MESSAGES, EMAILS, PUBLIC SOCIAL MEDIA POSTS. IF YOU ARE COMMUNICATING BACK AND FOESHTH TO EACH OTHER ABOUT ITEMS THAT ARE BEFORE YOU OR LIKELY TO BE COMING BEFORE YOU THAT WOULD BE A VIOLATION OF SUNSHINE. IF IT'S NOT AT A PROPER MEETING.
THERE IS A WAY FOR YOU ALL TO SEND ONE WAY COMMUNICATION.
SO IF YOU HAVE SOMETHING WHERE YOU WANT EVERYONE TO KNOW ABOUT AN ARTICLE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT BEFORE AN UPCOMING MEETING,
[01:05:05]
YOU CAN TECHNICALLY SEND THAT TO EVERYONE IN A ONE WAY COMMUNICATION. THE PROBLEM IS IF ANYBODY RESPONDS BACK THAT TWO WAY COMMUNICATION HAS TRIGGERED A MEETING. THAT'S WHY I SAY THE TECHNICAL RULES AND THE BEST PRACTICE SOMETIME AREN'T THE SAME BECAUSE BEST PRACTICE IS DON'T SEND THOSE EMAILS.BECAUSE AS SOON AS ONE PERSON REPLIES TO YOU OR TO ALL YOU'VE TRIGGERED THAT MEETING. THE BEST PRACTICE IS IF YOU WANT EVERYBODY ELSE ON THE BOARD TO SEE SOMETHING OR KNOW SOMETHING PRIOR TO A MEETING SEND THAT TO STAFF AND STAFF IS THE ONE THAT CAN TAKE CARE OF HANDLING THAT. AND GETTING IT TO YOU ALL IN THE APPROPRIATE MANNER.
FLORIDA STATUTE 826.0114 DEALS WITH YOUR ABILITY TO CONTROL YOUR MEETINGS. BASICALLY YOU CAN SET UP RULES AND PROCEDURES TO WHERE PROPER DECORUM IS FOLLOWED IN ALL MEETINGS BUT YOU HAVE TO GIVE EVERYONE A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD ON A PROPOSITION BEFORE THE BOARD OR COMMISSION. SO THIS STATUTE IS GOING TO CONTROL ANY RULES THAT YOU CAN CREATE.
AND THEN THE FOUR THAT YOU CAN CREATE ARE RELATED TO THE AMOUNT OF TIME PEOPLE ARE ALLOWED TO BE GIVEN TO SPEAK.
THE PROCEDURES TO ALLOW REPRESENTATIVES OF AN ENTIRE GROUP TO SPEAK SO THAT IT'S NOT 50 OR A HUNDRED MEMBERS.
YOU CAN CONTROL THAT. YOU CAN CREATE PROCEDURES OR FORMS FOR PEOPLE TO GIVE THEIR INPUT TO YOU.
AND YOU CAN DESIGNATE A SPECIFIC PERIOD OF TIME FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. YOU'RE AN ESTABLISHED BOARD SO I THINK ALL OF YOUR ROLES AND PROCEDURES ARE PRETTY LAID OUT ALREADY BUT I THINK WE DID JUST GET A NEW BOARD SO FOR THEM THEY'RE GOING TO CREATE THEIR NEW RULES AND PROCEDURES.
SOME OF THE THINGS THAT YOU CANNOT DO, YOU CANNOT ASK SOMEBODY TO LEAVE THE MEETING VOLUNTARILY JUST BECAUSE YOU DON'T LIKE THEM OR YOU DON'T LIKE THEIR OPINION OR THE COLOR OF THEIR SHIRT OR WHATEVER IT IS THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO BE THERE.
UNLESS THEY RISE TO A LEVEL OF REMOVING THEM WHICH I DON'T THINK YOU ALL WILL HAVE THAT PROBLEM.
YOU CANNOT BAN VIDEOTAPING, TAPE RECORDING, OR PHOTOGRAPHY AT THE MEETINGS BECAUSE THEY ARE PUBLIC SO LONG AS THEY'RE NOT STOPPEDING THE MEETING. YOU CANNOT REQUIRE THEM TO PRODUCE SOME SORT OF IDENTIFICATION CARD IN ORDER TO ATTEND THE MEETING. I DON'T THINK YOU ALL ARE DOING SECRET BALLOTS. I SAT THROUGH MULTIPLE VOTES.
YOU'RE DOING THEM ALL ON THE ROBBED VERBALLY.
-- RECORD VERBALLY. YOU CAN DO WRITTEN BALLOTS IF YOU CHOOSE TO DO SO BUT THOSE HAVE TO BE PRESERVED.
THEY HAVE TO BE TAKE IN THE MEETING.
YOUR NAME HAS TO GO ON IT AND YOUR VOTE.
THAT WAY IT'S DOCUMENTED IN THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF WHAT EVERYONE'S VOTE WAS. THAT WILL BE OPEN FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION. SO THE BIG QUESTION WE ALWAYS GET IS RELATED TO VIOLATING SUNSHINE.
SO WHAT HAPPENS IF SUNSHINE IS VIOLATED.
THEY'RE KIND OF TWO TRACKS THAT COME WITH THIS.
ONE IS YOUR INADD VERY -- KNOWING VIOLATIONS OF THE SUNSHINE. NO MATTER WHICH ONE IT IS, IF A DECISION IS MADE BY ANY BOARD OR THE COMMISSION OR WHOMEVER IN OUR LOCAL GOVERNMENT, THAT IS DONE OUTSIDE OF THE SUNSHINE.
THAT VOIDS WHAT THAT DECISION WAS.
IT IS A SECOND DEGREE MISDEMEANOR PUNISHABLE BY JAIL AND UP TO A $500 FINE. AND THE THING THAT THE SUNSHINE LAW INCLUDES IS THAT IF YOU DO THOSE ACTIVITIES EVEN OUTSIDE OF THE STATE YOU CAN STILL BE HELD TO THOSE CRIMINAL PENALTIES EVEN IF YOU DO THOSE OUTSIDE OF FLORIDA.
[01:10:18]
WHO KNOWS ABOUT THE SITUATION THAT HAPPENED IN SEBASTIAN A FEW YEARS BACK WITH THEIR CITY COUNCIL?>> I'M GOING TO GO THROUGH IT AND I THINK THIS UNDERSCORES THE IMPORTANCE THAT WE'RE PLACING ON MAKING SURE WE'RE DOING EVERYTHING IN THE SUNSHINE. THE ALLEGATIONS OF WHAT HAPPENED IN SEBASTIAN ARE THAT THREE MEMBERS OF THEIR CITY COUNCIL HELD A MEETING OUTSIDE OF THE SUNSHINE.
IT WAS BASICALLY A CLOSED DOOR. THE ACCUSATION IS THAT THEY -- THEY VOTED TO REMOVE THEIR MAYOR, FIRE THEIR CITY MANAGER, CITY CLERK, AND CITY ATTORNEY. THEY WIPED OUT THEIR -- EVERYONE. SO THE THREE PEOPLE CHARGED HE ENTERED A PLEA TO TWO CIVIL INFRACTIONS.
WAS ORDERED AH PAY FINES, COURT COSTS, COST OF INVESTIGATION AND ORDERED TO ATTEND REMEDIAL SUNSHINE TRAINING.
COUNT THREE 45 DAYS IN THE COUNTY JAIL.
AND COUNT FOUR. THAT WAS THE PERJURY CHARGE.
SO I THINK THIS QUOTE FROM THE FLORIDA SUPREME COURT SUMS THE SERIOUSNESS OF WHAT THEY'RE DOING UP.
WE NOTE THAT THE SUNSHINE LAW WAS ENACTED IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC FROM CLOSED DOOR POLL SICKS AND AS SUCH -- POLITICS. THE BIG TAKEAWAY FROM SUNSHINE FROM THE SUNSHINE LAW IS YOUR DISCUSSIONS HAVE THEM HERE IN THIS ROOM. AS LONG AS YOU'RE DOING THAT AT A PROPERLY NOTICED MEETING YOU'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE ANY PROBLEM WITH SUNSHINE. DON'T CALL A MEETING NOT NOTICED AND START FIRING EVERYONE. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT SUNSHINE LAW?
ALL RIGHT. >> I HAVE ONE QUESTION.
SO I WOULD ASSUME THAT THE RESTRICTION FOR DISCUSSING OFFICIAL BUSINESS OF THIS BOARD WOULD EXTEND TO ANY OTHER
[01:15:03]
APPARATUS THAT IS ALSO VOTING ON THE SAME MEASURES.ONE-ON-ONE YOU CAN SPEAK WITH THE COMMISSIONER.
YOU COULD NOT GO WITH AS A GROUP BECAUSE THERE WOULD BE TWO OR MORE OF YOU MEETING AND DISCUSSING MATTERS THAT ARE BEFORE YOU. BUT YOU COULD INDIVIDUALLY TO SPEAK WITH A COMMISSIONER IF YOU WANTED TO.
>> NO RESTRICTIONS ON ANY INDIVIDUAL MEASURE OF INVESTIGATION ABOUT ANY ISSUES THAT COME BEFORE THE BOARD AS FAR AS JUST FACT FINDING RESEARCH ABOUT IF WE WANTED TO SPEAK TO AN APPLICANT OR SOMETHING OF THAT MEASURE.
> YOU ARE NOT QUASI JUDICIAL. SO WITH A QUASI JUDICIAL YOU HAVE RESTRICTIONS BECAUSE YOU WOULD HAVE TO DISCLOSE ALL OF THOSE. OUR GOAL IS TO PROTECT THE CITY.
WHEN I TALK ABOUT TECHNICAL RULES VERSUS BEST PRACTICE I'LL GIVE AN ANSWER THAT KEEPS US A THOUSAND FEET AWAY FROM CAUSING ANY SORT OF PROBLEM FOR THE CITY ULTIMATELY.
WITH THAT CAVEAT, I THINK IT'S MORE OF AN ISSUE OF THE APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY AND WHILE IT MAY NOT BE A TECHNICAL VIOLATION, IT PROBABLY DOESN'T LOOK GOOD IF YOU'RE HAVING THOSE ONE-ON-ONE CONVERSATIONS OUTSIDE AND THAT TYPE OF THING.
>> THE REASON I BRING IT UP IS BECAUSE WE SERVE IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST OBVIOUSLY WE'RE NOT HERE JUST BECAUSE OF OUR UNIQUE SKILL BUT ALSO BECAUSE WE'RE CITIZENS OF THE CITY.
WHEN THINGS COME UP I LIKE TO TALK TO PEOPLE THAT I KNOW ABOUT THEM AND THIS IS NOT A BIG CITY SO THAT CAN WHEN I DO THAT PRIOR TO HEARING THE KATES I GENERALLY TRY TO MAKE -- WITH MR. JONES CONCERNING THIS PROJECT. THAT'S DISCLOSING OF EX PARTE CONVERSATION. SHOULD A BOARD MEMBER HAVE THAT INTERFACE WITH AN APPLICANT AND THAT BOARD MEMBER ACKNOWLEDGES IN THE PUBLIC MEETING THAT HE OR SHE HAS HAD THEN THAT SOLVES THE ISSUE CONCERNING SUNSHINE LAW. DOES IT NOT?
>> THAT THAT WOULD NOT SPECIFICALLY IMPLICATE SUNSHINE
[01:20:01]
BUT I THINK IT GOES MORE TO ANY SORT OF APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY. I'LL TALK ABOUT THAT WHEN WE GET TO VOTING CONFLICTS.IT'S MORE OF WE WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYONE KNOWS WHAT WE'RE DOING SO IT DOESN'T HURT ANYONE TO PUT ON THE RECORD IN LAWYER SPEAK PUT ON THE RECORD ANY CONVERSATIONS YOU HAVE THAT YOU THINK MAYBE TOO CLOSE TO THAT SPECIFIC AGENDA ITEM.
SO, FOR EXAMPLE, YOUR CONVERSATIONS WITH AN APPLICANT.
I DON'T THINK IT HURTS ANYTHING TO PUT IT ON THERE.
I HAVE COMMENTED MORE THAN ONCE IN OUR BOARD COMMENTS SECTION OF OUR MEETING WHICH WILL BE COMING UP HERE SHORTLY.
AND I RECOMMEND TO OUR BOARD MEMBERS TO DO THE SAME.
I STILL KEEP IT JUST IN CASE SO THAT LATER ON IF THERE IS A REQUEST FOR SOME OR THE OF PUBLIC RECORD IT'S BETTER TO VITEAE THAN NOT AND THEN THE DECISION CAN BE MADE IS IT ACTUALLY A PUBLIC RECORD THAT WE HAVE TO TURN OVER OR NOT.
SO YOUR PERSONAL NOTES THAT YOU MAKE, THOSE ARE PUBLIC RECORDS IF YOU INTEND TO COMMUNICATE PERPETUATE OR FORMALIZE
[01:25:03]
KNOWLEDGE OF SOME TYPE. IS THE RECOMMENDATION I'VE BEEN MAKING IS THAT IF YOU ALL ARE TAKING PERSONAL NOTES AND YOU'RE NOT SURE IF THEY ARE PUBLIC RECORD OR NOT YOU CAN ALWAYS GIVE THOSE TO CITY STAFF AND THEY CAN BE THE ONES TO KEEP THOSE SO THAT YOU DON'T HAVE A GIANT BOX AT HOME OF YOUR OWN PERSONAL NOTES FROM THE MEETINGS OR WHATEVER IT IS.AND WE WILL KEEP THOSE FOR YOU. ONE OF THE BIG THINGS ARE EMAILS. YOU ALL DO NOT HAVE CITY EMAILS.
IT'S A LOT EASIER FOR US BECAUSE WE HAVE AN INTERNAL SYSTEM THAT KEEPS ALL OF OUR EMAILS. ANY EMAILS THAT YOU ARE SENDING OR RECEIVING THAT RELATE TO THE OFFICIAL BUSINESS OF THIS BOARD ARE GOING TO BE SUBJECT TO PUBLIC REPORTEDS.
SO A COUPLE -- RECORDS. SO A COUPLE OF SUGGESTIONS THAT I'VE HEARD THAT I PASS ALONG WITH THAT YOU CAN CREATE AN EMAIL ADDRESS SPECIFICALLY FOR TO BOARD.
SO THAT ALL OF YOUR EMAIL COMMUNICATIONS FROM CITY STAFF OR TO CITY STAFF OR WHOMEVER IN THE PUBLIC THAT MAY WANT TO EMAIL YOU THEY CAN USE THAT EMAIL ADDRESS.
SO IT'S EASY FOR YOU TO FIND ANY PUBLIC RECORDS THAT MAY EXIST.
THE OTHER THAT PEOPLE HAVE SAID THEY DO IS THEY CREATE FILE FOLDERS IN THEIR EMAIL ADDRESS AND ANYTHING THEY GET OR SEND GETS MOVE INTOED THAT FILE FOLDER.
SO THAT THEY CAN FIND IT EASILY IF THERE IS A PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST.
IF YOU ARE USING SOME SORT OF GOVERNMENT EQUIPMENT JUST BECAUSE YOU'RE USING THAT WHATEVER IS ON THERE DOESN'T NECESSARILY MAKE IT A PUBLIC RECORD SO IF YOU SEND A PERSONAL TEXT THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH YOUR BOARD IF YOU HAD A BOARD CELLPHONE THAT DOESN'T MAKE IT A PUBLIC RECORD JUST BECAUSE.
I THINK THIS IS WHERE WE GET THE MOST QUESTIONS RELATED TO TEXT MESSAGES ENEMAILS AND STUFF LIKE THAT.
DOES ANYONE HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT THOSE? IT DOES HAPPEN AND IT'S NOT FUN BECAUSE YOU GET A CALL SAYING WE NEED YOU TO TURN OVER YOUR EMAILS.
>> I ON OCCASION GET EMAILS FROM THE PUBLIC.
SOME OF THEM ARE VERY BRIEF. I DON'T LIKE THE PROJECT.
SOMETIMES THEY NOTE THE APOLOGETIC NAME.
SOMETIMES THEY DON'T. I RAZE IT AND I GO WHAT PROJECT? YOU KNOW. SO THAT I DON'T GENERALLY TURN OVER BUT I HAVE ON OCCASIONS WHERE I'VE GOT MORE DETAILED QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM PUBLIC.
I HAVE TURNED THEM OVER TO ALICIA AND JUST SAID I THINK SEVERAL TIMES I'VE SAID LETHE MAKE THIS PART OF THE RECORD ON FILE.
>> SURE. SO IF YOU DON'T WANT TO HAVE TO KEEP TRACK OF ALL OF YOUR EMAILS, YOU CAN ABSOLUTELY PRINT THEM OUT, GIVE THEM TO ALICIA.
>> ONE QUESTION I GOT FROM ANOTHER BOARD IS IF ALICIA SENDS ME AN EMAIL THAT SAYS WHATEVER IT SAYS I CAN GO AHEAD AND DELETE MINE BECAUSE IT'S PRESERVED ON HER END.
IN MY OPINION IS THAT IS INCORRECT BECAUSE YOU RECEIVING THAT EMAIL IS ALSO A PUBLIC RECORD.
SO EVEN IF YOU THINK OKAY IT'S PRESERVED ON THE CITY'S END YOU STILL SHOULD KEEP IT BECAUSE YOU'VE RECEIVED IT THAT'S STILL A PUBLIC RECORD OF WHAT YOU'VE RECEIVED.
>> YOUR PERSONAL EMAIL. >> CORRECT.
AN EMAIL TO YOUR PERSONAL ACCOUNT ABOUT YOUR BOARD.
YES. A PERSONAL EMAIL IF SHE'S TELLING YOU HAPPY BIRTHDAY THAT'S PROBABLY NOT A PUBLIC RECORD. BUT AGAIN TO MY PARANOIA, I KEEP MY HAPPY BIRTH DAY EMAILS JUST BECAUSE I GUESS I'M PROBABLY MY OPINION IS IT'S BETTER TO HAVE IT THAN NOT.
OKAY. SO RETENTION OF PUBLIC RECORDS.
THERE ARE RULES REGARDING HOW LONG YOU HAVE TO KEEP EVERYTHING AND I WILL BE COMPLETELY CANDID AND TELL YOU I DO NOT KNOW ALL OF THOSE NUMBERS BUT THE CITY CLERK DOES AND THAT'S WHO WOULD
[01:30:01]
CONTROL HOW LONG TO KEEP THINGS. SO WHENEVER YOU'RE DONE WITH YOUR BOARD IF YOU WANT TO GO AHEAD AND TURN OVER EVERYTHING SO YOU'RE DONE AND YOU SAY I DON'T WANT YOU GUYS CALLING ME HERE'S ALL MY RECORDS, YOU CAN DO THAT.BUT IT MIGHT WITH SIX MONTHS AFTER YOU'RE DONE WITH YOUR BOARD.
BOTTOM LINE IS DON'T DESTROY, DON'T DELETE OR ALTER PUBLIC RECORD. IF YOU'RE UNSURE MY RECOMMENDATION IS TO JUST KEEP IT.
PUBLIC RECORDS REQUESTS IF WE GET A REQUEST FOR YOUR EMAILS OR YOUR TEXT MESSAGES OR WHATEVER IT MIGHT BE IF YOU DON'T WANT TO GIVE IT UP WE CAN'T SAY, YOU KNOW, HE DOESN'T WANT TO TURN IT OVER WE CAN'T COMPLY. WE CAN'T WITHHOLD IT JUST BECAUSE YOU DON'T WANT TO TURN IT OVER.
WE ARE NOT REQUIRED TO -- THEY ARE NOT REQUIRED TO GIVE US ANY SORT OF LEGITIMATE PURPOSE. IT COULD JUST BE BECAUSE TODAY THEY FELT LIKE REQUESTING EVERY EMAIL THAT EVER CAME TO THE PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS. WHY THEY'RE DOING THAT IS IRRELEVANT TO THE PUBLIC RECORDS.
EVEN IF THEY LIKE I SAID IF THEY SAY I WANT EVERY EMAIL THAT'S EVER COME TO THE PLANNING BOARD WE CAN'T SAY WELL THAT'S TOO MUCH. WE CAN'T PROVIDE THAT.
THAT'S OVER BROAD. WE CANNOT DO THAT.
SO IT COULD BE THAT BROAD OR IT COULD BE VERY SPECIFIC.
I WANT EVERY EMAIL TO BOARD MEMBER SO AND SO REGARDING THIS PROJECT. IT COULD BE NARROW OR BROAD.
WE CANNOT EVEN AUTHORIZE THEM OR REQUIRE THEM TO IDENTIFY THEMSELVES. SO PEOPLE CAN DO PUBLIC RECORDS REQUESTS ANONYMOUSLY.
THE REASON FOR THAT IS PENALTIES THAT COME WITH NONCOMPLIANCE WITH PUBLIC RECORDS LAWS. LIKE SUNSHINE THERE ARE SEVERAL AND CRIMINAL PENALTIES TO VIOLATING PUBLIC RECORDS LAWS.
AND A LOT OF THAT COMES DOWN TO, AGAIN, THE UNINTENTIONAL VERSUS YOUR INTENTIONAL VIOLATIONS. SO ONE OF THE BIG THINGS IS IF WE ARE -- IF WE FAIL TO COMPLY AND BY WE I MEAN THE CITY AND YOU AS A BOARD AS WELL IF ANY ENTITY WITHIN THE CITY FAILS TO COMPLY CIVIL ACTION CAN BE BROUGHT AGAINST US.
TO FORCE US TO COMPLY WITH THE PUBLIC RECORDS LAWS AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT CHAPTER 119 SAYS IS THAT ATTORNEYS FEES SHALL BE AWARDED IF THE AGENCY IS FOUND TO HAVE UNLAWFULLY WITHHELD PUBLIC RECORDS. AS WE ALL KNOW PRIVATE ATTORNEYS ARE EXPENSIVE AND WE WOULD LIKE TO AVOID PAYING THOSE FEES TO ANYONE EVER. SO CIVIL PENALTIES INDIVIDUALLY.
FOR AN UNINTENTIONAL VIOLATION IT'S A NONCONTROL INFRACTION PUNISHABLE UP TO $500 FINE FOR A CRIMINAL VIOLATION THESE ARE YOUR KNOWING AND INTENTIONAL VIOLATIONS.
THEY ARE FIRST-DEGREE MISDEMEANOR.
[01:36:11]
ONE THING I WANT TO POINT OUT IS WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE DEFINITION OF RELATIVE IT'S VERY BROAD AND NARROW.ALL AT THE SAME TIME SO IT INCLUDES YOUR SON-IN-LAW AND DAUGHTER-IN-LAW BUT IT DOESN'T INCLUDE YOUR GRANDPARENTS.
SO IT DOESN'T MAKE A WHOLE LOT OF SENSE.
HOW THEY'VE DEFINED RELATIVE. BUT YOU ALL CAN READ THROUGH ALL THOSE DEFINITIONS. I'M NOT GONG TO READ THEM TO YOU. I THINK -- PEOPLE HAVE SOME
SO WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT THIS SPECIAL PRIVATE GAIN OR LOSS THIS IS TALKING ABOUT AN ECONOMIC BENEFIT OR HARM TO YOU AND THEY'RE GOING TO LOOK AT SOME FACTORS TO DETERMINE IF THERE IS A SPECIAL GAIN OR LOSS, ECONOMIC PRIVATE GAIN OR LOSS SO THE SIZE OF THE CLASS THAT'S AFFECTED THE NATURE OF THE INTEREST, THE DEGREE TO WHICH THE INTEREST OF ALL MEMBERS OF THE DOLLARS ARE AFFECTED, AND THE DEGREE TO WHICH THE OFFICER OR WHOEVER IT IS THAT HE HAS THE CONFLICT ON HOW THAT COMPARES TO THE OTHER MEMBERS OF THE CLASS.
THE BIG THING WITH CONFLICTS OF INTEREST IS IF YOU ALL KNOW THAT SOMETHING IS COMING UP THAT YOU THINK YOU MAY HAVE AN ISSUE WITH, YOU CAN CALL ME. I WILL HELP YOU AS MUCH AS I CAN. IF I CAN'T GIVE YOU AN ANSWER I MAY REFER YOU TO THE COMMISSION ON ETHICS.
YOU CAN ALWAYS START WITH THEM IF YOU WOULD LIKE I HAVE IN THE PAST REACHED OUT TO THE COMMISSION ON ETHICS FOR BOARD MEMBERS THAT HAVE TO GET AN ANSWER FOR THEM.
SO THE SOONER YOU KNOW THE CONFLICT, THE BETTER.
THAT WAY WE CAN GET THE ANSWER AS SOON AS WE POSSIBLY CAN.
SO ADDITIONAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST UNDER 112.311 THAT GIVES YOU REALLY THE LEGISLATIVE INTENT IN DECLARATION OF POLICY.
AND THAT IT'S A BROAD DEFINITION OF WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO AVOID WITH CONFLICTS. UNDER 313 THAT GOES THROUGH TOPICS LIKE ACCEPTING GIFTS DOING BUSINESS WITH YOUR OWN AGENCY MISUSE OF YOUR PUBLIC POSITION SO I WOULD SUGGEST THAT YOU ALL READ THROUGH THOSE. THEY ARE LENGTHY.
I AM NOT GOING TO DO THAT TO YOU TODAY.
BUT KNOW THAT'S WHERE TO FIND THEM.
AGAIN, IF YOU EVER HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT ANY OF THOSE FEEL FREE TO CALL ME WITH SPECIFIC ISSUES THAT YOU HAVE.
SO ULTIMATELY WHEN IT COMES TO A CONFLICT OF INTEREST WHAT YOU HAVE TO DO SEVEN WE TALKED ABOUT THIS IN THE BEGINNING ANNOUNCE THE NATURE OF YOUR CONFLICT ON THE RECORD.
ABSTAIN FROM VOTING AND HAVE YOU TO FILE THE MEMORANDUM OF VOTING CONFLICT THAT'S YOUR COMMISSION AND STAFF WILL HAVE THAT FOR YOU. NOW YOU MAY STILL PARTICIPATE IN THAT AGENDA ITEM. IN THAT VOTE.
IN THE SENSE OF YOU CAN -- THEY DEFINE IT AS ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION ORALLY IN WRITING BY YOURSELF OR AT YOUR
[01:44:11]
DIRECTION. >> BUT ALSO I THINK THAT ANYONE WATCHING THE MEETING FROM OUTSIDE ON THE TV MAY GET CONFUSED, DID THEY REFUSE THEMSELVES OR NOT.
SO I'VE ALWAYS FELT LIKE GOOD POLICY FOR US WAS JUST TO STEP DOWN FROM THE DAIS. BUT I CAN SEE YOUR POINT AS FAR AS LEAVING THE ROOM. I THINK YOU'RE RIGHT.
ANYTHING ELSE FROM ANYONE ELSE?
>> ALL RIGHT. I WENT THROUGH THAT FASTER THAN USUAL. YOU'RE WELCOME FOR THAT.
GOOD JOB. I APPRECIATE YOU COMING AND TO
[01:45:03]
DO THAT. KEVIN I THANK YOU FOR SPONTANEOUSLIEDING AS YOU DID WHEN I MADE THE REQUEST TO COVER THESE AREAS AND IF WE'RE NOT TAKING IT TO OTHER BOARDS, MAYBE WE SHOULD. SGLING P BEING CIRCULATED TO EACH BOARD.>> SO YOU'RE HITTING EVERYONE. VERY GOOD.
VERY GOOD. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME. PUBLIC COMMENTS.
[9. DIRECTOR'S REPORT]
ANYBODY IN THE PUBLIC WANT TO COMMENT? NO. I DON'T SEE ANYONE.DIRECTOR'S REPORT. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR.
SO RECENTLY OVER THE LAST TWO WEEKS I'VE BEEN INVOLVED WITH THE DEPARTMENT HEADS AND THE CONSULTANT AND CITY MANAGER REGARDING THE CITY'S STRAY TENOLIC PLAN I THINK THE COMMISSIONERS ARE MEETING TODAY TO DISCUSS THAT TO WE'RE LIKELY TO HEAR MORE ON THAT DISCUSSION.
I TRIED TO ATTEMPT TO BE AS SPECIFIC IN TERMS OF AN OVERALL POINT THAT WE'RE TRYING TO GET TO WITH THE PLANNING PIECES THAT YOU'LL SEE COMING FORWARD BUT I'M WAITING FOR COMMISSIONERS TO NOTIFY STAFF WHAT PRIORITIES THEY WANT TO GO FARED WITH.
SO WHATEVER HAPPENS I THINK WE'VE GOT ENOUGH THINGS THAT WE WERE WORKING ON THAT WILL PLAY INTO THIS IN SOME WAY.
YOU'LL GET TO SEE ALL THOSE I'M SURE.
RECENTLY OVER THE LAST CITY COMMISSION THERE WAS A DISCUSSION ABOUT NOTIFICATION PUBLIC NOTIFICATION.
NOTIFYING PUBLIC AND MAILING OUT LETTERS AND DOING SITE NOTICES AND PRESS NOTICES. BUT WE HAD SOME FOLKS IN FROM THE LAST MEETING WHO FROM WHATEVER REASON HAD NOT HAD THEIR MAIL DELIVERY IN A TIMELY MANNER.
AND SO THERE WAS CONCERN ABOUT IT FROM THE CITY COMMISSION ABOUT WHAT WE COULD DO WITH THAT.
AND OTHER THAN AMENDING THE CODE TREMENDOUSLY AMENDING THE CODE AND REALLY GETTING THINGS OUT. IN ADVANCE OF BEING ABLE TO ACTUALLY ALLOCATE A PUBLIC NOTICE.
DATE ON THOSE THINGS. I THINK IT'S TOMORROW TO PUT FORWARD AN THAT I'M PROPOSING AND I HOPE THAT IT WOULD BE AN ADVANCED NOTIFICATION OF THINGS FOG OUT TO PEOPLE WHO WERE IN THE VICINITY OF PLANNING APPLICATIONS TO AT LEAST JUST GET THEM NOTIFIED THAT SOMETHING IS GOING ON.
FAR IN ADVANCE OF WHEN WE SET A PUBLIC HEARING OR A PLANNING BOARD DATE SO AT LEAST THEY'RE AWARE OF SOMETHING GOING ON PRIOR TO THAT AND KEEP AN EYE ON THAT.
I THINK IT'S YES IT'S STAFF'S AND THE CITY'S DUTY TO GET NOTIFICATION OUT WHEN WE CAN BUT I THINK IT'S ALSO THE CITIZENS DUTY TO MAINTAIN IN OBSERVATION OF WHAT'S GOING ON IN THE AREA I THINK WE TRY TO PULL THOSE THINGS TOGETHER.
SO THAT'S BEING DISCUSSED AND I DON'T HAVE AN ANSWER YET BUT I'VE GOT A GOOD IDEA.
>> SO IN OUR NOTIFICATION PROCESS IN THE PAST IT'S BEEN GENERAL PRACTICE THAT WE DON'T NOTIFY CITIZENS OF MEETING DATES FOR THE PLANNING BOARD BUT WE DO FOR THE COMMISSION.
>> USUALLY GET NOTIFICATION OF PLANNING BOARD DATES IF WE NOTIFY PEOPLE. IF IT'S A NOTICE IN THE PRESS OR BY MAIL OR WHATEVER IT IS. THEY WILL GET NOW NOTIFICATION OF PLANNING BOARD MEETING IS LIKELY TO AFFECT THEM.
IT'S A TIMELINE BETWEEN SENDING OUT THOSE NOTICES, PEOPLE
[01:50:04]
GETTING THAT NOTICE AND THEN MAKING ARRANGEMENTS.NOT ONE FORM OF MEDIA SEEMS TO DO EVERYTHING IN TERMS OF NOTIFICATION THAT WE'D WANT IT TO DO WITHOUT GOING OVERBOARD AND TRYING TO DO EVERY FORM, EVERY AVENUE IS -- I DON'T KNOW IF WE'LL GET TO THAT POINT.
>> OKAY. SO THAT'S WHAT I'M WORKING ON.
[10. BOARD COMMENTS]
ARE THAT'S ALL I HAVE >> YOU'RE NOT WORKING VERY HARD.
>> COME AND SIT WITH ME FOR A MOMENT.
[LAUGHTER] I KNOW VERY WELL WHAT YOU'RE DOING AND WHAT YOUR DEPARTMENT'S DOING. WE NEED TO GET YOUR DEPARTMENT
MANNED UP A LITTLE BIT MORE. >> YEAH.
I'M HOPING TO -- WE WENT THROUGH AN INTERVIEW PROCESS RECENTLY.
I'M HOPING I'M GOING TO GET CONFIRMED THROUGH HR THE RECRUITMENT OF A PLANNER SO WE'RE HOPING THAT'S EARLY MARCH.
>> THAT WOULD BE. >> TAKE SOME PRESSURE OFF THESE
GUYS. >> I LEAVE THE PRESSURE ON
VINCENT. >> I'VE SAID IT NOW IT'S TOO
LATE. >> KEEP THE PRESSURE ON HIM.
>> YEAH. >> HE WORKS WELL UNDER PRESSURE.
>> I HAD A QUICK QUESTION. KEVIN.
SO THE OTHER MONTH OR SO I WAS ON THE CITY WEBSITE AND I SAW THAT WE'RE INTRODUCING FORUM BASED ZONING.
IS THAT SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO BE APPLIED SOON OR LIKE
WHAT'S THE -- >> THAT'S -- I SAW THAT IT'S IN THE THINGS THE DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN.
THAT WAS RUN THROUGH THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY I BELIEVE AND IT'S ADOPTED.
[01:55:53]
IT'S GOING TO BE IN PLACE FOR 40 BE 50, 6 YEARS.WE'RE SETTING UP THE FOUNDATION OF THIS TOWN ON TOP OF IT ALREADY YOU KNOW REALLY NICE FOUNDATION WHAT WE'VE CREATED DOWNTOWN WITH THE STRUCTURE AND THE NETWORK AND SOME OF THE BUILDING STYLES THAT WE SEE. TO ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO INVEST IN THE CITY WHAT THEY WOULD LIKE US TO KNOW FOR SURE IS TO KNOW THAT THEIR NEIGHBORS INVESTING IN A PROPERTY TO KNOW THAT THEIR NEIGHBORS ARE WANTING TO SEE VALUE IN THEIR PROPERTY AS WELL AS THEIR NEIGHBORING PROPERTY. THAT THERE IS A SUPPORT.
TO GET THE FOUNDATIONAL LINE IS THAT WE HAVE FOR THE PEOPLE'S OPINION OF THE CITY. I THINK WE CAN RAISE THAT THROUGH DESIGN AND THROUGH IMPLEMENTATION OF QUALITY PROJECTS. AND THAT'S NOT TO SAY THAT WE'RE NOT WELCOMING THINGS. I THINK WE WANT PEOPLE TO THINK MORE ABOUT WHAT THEY'RE BRINGING IN AND TO HAVE SOME PRIDE ABOUT WHAT'S GOING ON HERE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR MR. FRIEDMAN? NOT SEEING ANY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
BOARD COMMENTS. WE HAD A RERECUSION, NICE PRESENTATION. IF THE FUTURE IF YOU NEED TO RECUSE YOURSELF FROM VOTING OR OTHERWISE, I WOULD RATHER YOU DID THAT PRIOR TO ITEM BEING PRESENTED BY STAFF SO THAT YOU SIMPLY CAN EITHER CHOOSE YOU'RE GOING TO LEAVE THE DAIS OR LEAVE THE ROOM ENTIRELY OR WHICHEVER OR NEITHER.
BUT WE CAN HAS BEENED HANDLE IT PRIOR TO THE PRESENTATION I THINK IT WOULD BE BETTER SERVED. I APPRECIATE THAT YOU STEPPED FORWARD WHEN YOU DID. AND DON'T FORGET TO GET THAT FORM FILLED OUT. I AM BEGINNING TO WORK ON SOME RECOMMENDATION OF CHANGES TO OUR OPERATING PROCEDURES OF THIS BOARD. I'M GOING TO WORK WITH ALICIA.
I'M STILL ABLE TO WORK WITH ALICIA ON THAT.
[02:00:21]
YOU WOULD HAVE TO CHECK YOUR RULES BUT I DON'T THINK WE HAVE REMOTE APPEARANCES. BUT I CAN CHECK YOUR RULES ANDPROCEDURES. >> I DON'T THINK OUR PROCEDURES
DO. >> I DON'T BELIEVE SO EITHER.
>> I WAS JUST CURIOUS. SO I WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO CHAIR LET'S SAY FROM ONE OF THE BOXES. I WOULD HAVE TO BE UP HERE OR
NOT CHAIR. >> YOU MEAN LIKE IN CHAMBERS
JUST NOT SITTING UP HERE? >> YES.
>> OH, YEAH. >> CAN I SIT OTHER THAN ON THE
>> SO IF I CAN PHYSICALLY MAKE IT HERE ON APRIL 10G9 BUT I'M
NOT ABLE TO CLIMB STAIRS. >> YES.
>> YOU WOULD BE FINE TO SIT DOWN HERE.
>> THAT'S GOOD. I WILL CONTACT YOU LATER ON THE QUESTIONS THAT I TOLD YOU THAT I WOULD HAVE.
I CHOSE TO DEAL WITH THAT SEPARATELY.
WE MAY HAVE A LITTLE DISRUPTION TO OUR NORMAL PROCEDURES AND IF EVERYONE IS WILLING TO WORK WITH ME ON THAT I'LL DO MY BEST TO BE HERE. AFTER ALL IT'S ONLY A LITTLE HIP REPLACEMENT SO IT'S NOT ANY BIG DEAL.
ALICIA HAS GONE THROUGH KNEE REPLACEMENTS AND SHE'S ALWAYS MADE IT.
SHE'S TOUGH. I DON'T KNOW IF I'M AS TOUGH AS SHE IS. CAUGHT ROOM FOR A -- GOT ROOM FOR A GUSHNY IN FRONT. -- GURNEY.
ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANYTHING? NOT HERING ANYTHING, I'LL ADJOURN NEATING. WE ARE ADJOURNED.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.