Oct 09, 2023 City Commission Conference Agenda

[1. Call to Order]

[00:00:12]

2023. THIS IS THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE CONFERENCE AGENDA. PLEAS STAND FOR THE PLEDGE. PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. OUR FIRST ITEM

[a. Development Review Task Force Update - Planning]

THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. >> MADAME MAYOR AND MEMBERS THE CITY COMMISSION THESE FIRST THREE ITEMS ARE TO BE BROUGHT T YOU TODAY BY MR. FREEMAN THE DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND FIRST WE ARE GOING TO TALK ABOUT THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW TASK FORCE WHICH IS A GROUP ORIGINATED BY THE ST. LOUIS COUNTY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. THE BEEN MEETING WITH OUR STAFF TO FIND WAYS TO IMPROVE PERMITTING AND DEVELOPING PROCESS.

>> THANK YOU SIR. MAYOR AND COMMISSIONERS THIS MORNING AS YOU KNOW WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT THREE DIFFERENT THINGS. THIS ON COMES FROM A LONG TIME AGO. BETWEEN 2016 AND 2018 WHERE THE TASK FORCE DEVELOPMENT REVIEWS HERE WITH THE ECONOMIC COUNSEL.

WITH THE TREASURE CASH BUILDERS ASSOCIATION. IT CAME WITH A NUMBER OF RECOMMENDATIONS WITHI THE REPORT AND WE'VE ALREADY ADDRESSED THOSE FROM EARLIER IN THE YEAR. AND THERE WILL BE ANOTHER ONE COMING SOON. SOME OF THE MONITORS ARE NOT ON.

THERE WAS A REPORT THAT CAME FORWARD IN THE CITY ACTED ON A NUMBER OF ITEMS. ONE DID INCLUD THE PLAQUE PROCESS AND WE WILL BE COMING BACK TO YOU WITH REVISIONS. THIS ITEM IS LOOKIN AT ANOTHER RECOMMENDATION AND THE THRESHOLDS FOR MAJOR AND MINOR SITE PLANS. THE THRESHOLD FOR THE MAJOR AND MINOR SITE PLANS DETAIL WHETHER OR NOT THOSE ARE GOING TO BE DEALT WIT ADMINISTRATIVELY OR COMING THROUGH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY COMMISSION. THE RECOMMENDATIONS AT THIS TIME AR TO LOOK AT THE RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS MOVING FROM 20 UNITS T 50 UNITS. SO THE BREAKPOINT WOULD BE ANYTHING 50 UNITS ARE ABOVE AS A MAJOR LEVEL. COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRY SITE PLANS WOULD BE BASED ON SQUARE FOOTAGE AND THE EXISTING SQUARE FOOTAGE IS 4000. SEE YOU SEE AN DEVELOPMENT COMING IN THAT WAS MORE THAN 4000 SQUARE FEET UP T 50,000 SQUARE FEET. THIS CAME TO THE PLANNING BOARD WHO MOVE IT TO THE CITY COMMISSION SOMETIME IN 2019. THE CITY COMMISSION AT THAT TIME SAID THAT THEY WERE NOT SURE ABOUT IT. SO LET'S TAKE IT BACK WITH MORE RESEARCH TO THE PLANNING BOARD. AND I DON'T THINK THAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED. SO MY TASK TODAY IS TO GET SOME FEEDBACK T SEE WHERE WE ARE WITH THIS. I HAVE LOOKED AT THE NEIGHBORING AUTHORITIES NEAR THE CITY OF. SAINT LUCIE AND LOOKED AT THE COMPARISONS THERE. I'VE ANOTHER COMPARISON AT THE END THAT YOU MAY WANT TO CONSIDER. AT THE MOMENT WE HAVE 20 DWELLING UNIT'S 4000 SQUARE FEET FOR COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL. TO GET A PERSPECTIVE IN MIND IF WE ARE LOOKING AT 20 UNITS PER ACRE, SILENTLY REPHRASE THAT IF WE AR LOOKING AT UNITS PER ACRE, 20

[00:05:02]

MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OF LESS THAN 100 UNITS WOULD BE ADMINISTRATIVE. NONRESIDENTIAL USE OF LESS THAN 50,000 SQUARE FEET WOULD BE ADMINISTRATIVE. THE CITY OF PORT ST. LUCIE HAS A MINOR SITE PLAN WHICH IS RESIDENTIAL PROJECT LESS THAN 50. NON-RESIDENTIAL MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT IS LESS THAN 10,000 SQUARE FEET. THOSE EAR COMPARISONS THAT WE SEE BETWEEN THE AUTHORITIES AND THE THRESHOLDS BETWEEN RESIDENTIAL AND NONRESIDENTIAL. I THREW THE COMPARISON OUT IN TERMS OF ACREAGE EARLIER WHETHER OR NOT IT MAY BE A BETTER BASIS OF LOOKING AT THE SIZE OF APPLICATIONS THAT COME FORWARD WITHIN THE CITY. I LOOK VERY QUICKLY AT THE SIZES OF OUR PARCELS THAT WE SEE IN THE STRI MALLS OR BIGGER DEVELOPMENTS. WHAT THE COMMISSION HAS ALREADY SEEN AND THEY KNOW THE SIZE OF THE OUT PARCELS THAT OF ARTIE BEEN APPROVED IN THE PAST. THE SIZE OF THOSE AVERAGES BETWEEN HALF AN ACRE AND THREE QUARTERS OF AN ACRE. IN TERMS OF COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL PARTICULARLY COMMERCIAL, THE COMMISSION MAY WANT TO CONSIDER THE ACREAGE OF A PROPERTY RATHER THAN THE SIZE OF THE UNI THAT GOES ON IT. THE ACREAGE OF PROPERTY WILL DETERMINE ABSOLUTELY THE SIZE OF THE UNIT THAT CAN GO ON THERE. WHAT WE ARE SEEING ARE PRIMARILY THE MCDONALD'S AND STARBUCKS AND THOSE KINDS OF IDEAS. THERE MAY BE DRIVE-THROUGH'S OR OTHER THINGS. A CARWASH TENDS TO TAKE SLIGHTLY MORE THAN THAT. BUT UNDER THE CONSIDERATION OF THAT AND THOSE ARE QUITE VEHICULAR INTENSIVE USES. THERE IS A BREAKPOINT SOMEWHERE BETWEEN LOOKING AT THE IMPACT OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND THE SIZE OF THA SAME DEVELOPMENT. SOMETIMES YOU WILL HAVE LESS THAN 4000 SQUARE FEET WHICH IS A LARGE VEHICULAR IMPACT AND WILL HAVE LARGER THA 4000 SQUARE FEET WITH MINIMAL VEHICULAR IMPACT. IT IS A COMPLEX ISSUE IN TERMS OF RESIDENTIAL UNITS AS I SAID EARLIER 20 UNITS IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE CITY ZONING YOU WILL BE BETWEEN ONE AND 1 1/2 T 2 ACRE PROPERTIES. KNOW WHETHER OR NOT THAT AGAIN IS THE BREAKPOINT RATHER THAN THE NUMBER OF UNITS, THAT IS A DIFFERENT QUESTION. SO MY INQUIRY TO AND THE DISCUSSION THAT WE WILL HAVE HERE IS THER A NEED TO THE COMMISSION OR REQUIREMENT TO LOOK AT THE THRESHOLDS FOR THE BREAKPOINT BETWEEN ADMINISTRATIVE AND COMING BEFORE THE COMMISSION AN THE PLANNING BOARD? AND IF THER IS, ARE THERE PARAMETERS THAT THE STAFF SHOULD BE LOOKING AT AND COMING BACK WITH BASED ON ONE SIDE OR THE OTHER? THERE IS A WIDE-RANGING DISCUSSION AND I'M JUST LOOKING FOR SOME FEEDBACK. I THINK THE NEXT STEP WOULD BE BASED ON THE FEEDBACK TO GO BACK TO THE PLANNING BOAR WITH THE FINDINGS THAT WE ARE DIRECTED TO LOOK AT. THANK YOU

MA'AM. >> INTERESTINGLY ENOUGH I WAS ON THE PLANNING BOARD WHEN THIS TOOK PLACE. AND I DO REMEMBER I QUITE WELL. THE THRUST OF IT THE PLANNING BOARD HAD CONCERNS THAT THERE WAS INSTABILITY AT THAT TIME. AND THERE WERE STAFF CHANGES AND ETC. THE INSTABILITIES HAVE ALWAYS SLEEP

[00:10:06]

CITY COMMISSION OR NOT. >> MY MEMORY IS THAT WE DID DISCUSS IT BRENT WE WERE IN FAVOR OF THE 10,000 SQUARE FEET BUT I DON'T REMEMBER THE NUMBER OF UNITS. I DON'T REMEMBER WHAT

HAPPENED TO IT AFTER THAT. >> THE OTHER COMPONENT OF THIS IS THE SPEED OF THE TURNAROUND. AND THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS TH PLANNING BOARD WAS LOOKING AT. IF WE ARE VOIDING THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY COMMISSION I CUTS 90 TO 120 DAYS OUT OF THE PROCESS AND I THINK IT IS SOMEWHAT OF A DEVELOPMENT FRIENDLY SCENARIO BUT THE 50,00 WE WERE NOT COMFORTABLE WITH MOST HERE WE ACTUALLY HAD A CALCULATION AT THAT TIME IF I'M REMEMBERING IT CORRECTLY. IT WA IN THE VICINITY OF 80 TO 85% AND LOWER THAN THE 50,000 SQUAR FEET. HENCE THE REASON WE WENT TO THE TEND TO GIVE IT MORE LATITUDE AND THAT IS 50 UNITS

NON-RESIDENTIAL. >> I REMEMBER THAT AS WELL.

MCNAMARA WANT TO THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THAT UP AND WENT BACK TO THE PLANNING BOARD WITH THE DISCUSSION OF LESS THAN 50,000.

BUT I DO LIKE THE IDEA 50 UNITS IF YOU LOOK AT THE MATRIX AND THE PARCELS THAT ARE AVAILABLE WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS, EVEN WITH THE URBAN SERVICES BOUNDAR IT DOES MAKE SENSE. BUT AT THE SAME TIME I THINK THE PARAMETER WITH UTILITIES I FEEL LIKE THAT'S IMPORTANT AT THE CITY COMMISSION WEIGH IN ON THIS FOR ANYTHING THAT GETS LARGER. WE'VE HAD SOME DISCUSSIONS INCLUDING FOLKS IN THE INDUSTRY ANYTHING THAT DEALS WITH PLAQUE AND REZONING WILL STILL GO THROUGH THE PROCESS?

>> YES. >> THEY WANTED TO MAKE SURE THE WEREN'T CIRCUMVENTING A SYSTEM OUT THERE. WE JUST HAD THE APPLICATION THAT CAME THROUGH A COUPLE WEEKS AGO WHERE THERE WA A UNITY OF TITLE ON A PARCEL. THAT ONE SPECIFICALLY WAS A RESIDENCE. IS THERE ANYTHING THAT WE SHOULD TALK ABOUT OR WORRY ABOUT IF THERE PARCELS BEING JOINED? IS THERE A FLAG

THERE AT ALL? >> WHEN WE GET A REQUEST LIKE THAT FIRST WHILE WE ESTABLISH I THE PERSON WAS JOINED IT'S STIL GOING TO MEET THE PLANNING ZONING REGULATIONS. IF THERE WA A COMPATIBILITY ISSUE, THAN THE COMMISSION PLANNING BOARD WOULD SEE THAT. WHAT MAY NEED A VARIANCE IF THE EXISTING LOT I THERE BEING GRANDFATHERED IN AN EXPANDING FURTHER OR CO-JOINING WITH ANOTHER LOT. IT MAY BRING ISSUES OF SETBACKS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. SO WE WOULD BE LOOKING AT THAT. ANY CONSIDERATION WOULD AUTOMATICALLY HAVE TO COME BACK TO THE PLANNING BOARD WITH THE CITY COMMISSION IF IT MEETS THE CORRECT ZONING PARAMETERS AND WAS LOUD UNDERNEATH THE CODE THERE WOULD BE NO ACTION THE PLANNING BOARD OF THE CITY COMMISSION COULD TAKE WITH LAND DEVELOPMENT ENTITLEMENTS PUT WITHIN THE PROPERTY. IN ESSENCE THAT IS ANOTHER CONSIDERATION WITH THESE PARAMETERS AS WELL. THAT WE HAVE A SMALLER DEVELOPMENT THAT WENT THROUGH A TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE AND

[00:15:02]

>> I USUALLY HAVE THESE EPIPHANIES ON WHAT ALTERNATIVE WAYS WE CAN LOOK AT THIS. WE AR A SMALL CITY AND THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN BROUGHT UP. SO WHAT IS THE IMPACT ON THE CITY OF THIS SIZE? ARE THERE TURN OVER LOTS AND PROPERTIES? IS THERE A MAGIC MAGIC ACREAGE WER YOU CAN SAY YES WE KNOW ALL THE LOTS OF A CERTAIN ACREAGE WOULD BE ADMINISTRATIVE? THAT IS THE ANALYSIS THAT WE COULD RUN TO LOOK AT THE SIZE OF THE LOTS WITHIN THE CITY. I DIDN'T DO IT YET BUT I WAS WAITING TO SEE THAT. IT IS SIMPLER AND MORE STRAIGHTFORWARD IF YOU LOOK AT THE UNITS AND THE SQUARE FOOTAG IS.

>> YOU GAVE THAT ACREAGE FOR TH 20 UNITS. YOU KNOW WHAT IT IS

FOR THE 50 UNITS? >> WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE NUMBER OF UNITS YOU LOOK AT THE FUTURE LAND USE IN THE CITY. AND THE DENSITY ALLOWED. IT'S 30 UNITS PER ACRE AND IF YOU GO OUT IT COULD BE 1 TO 6 UNITS PER ACRE. SO YOU DO THE AVERAGE OF HOW MANY ACRES WOULD BE REQUIRED OR WHAT WOULD BE REQUIRED FOR 50 AND THAT COULD BE ANYWHERE BETWEEN 15 UNITS PER ACRE TO THREE OR FOUR ACRES. THAT WOULD BE THE MAXIMUM THAT YOU COULD

HAVE ON FOUR ACRES. >> COMMISSIONER GAINS?

>> THANK YOU COMMISSIONER FREEMAN. I DO HAVE A QUICK QUESTION, I DON'T MIND THE NUMBERS AND TRYING TO MAKE THE PROCESS EASIER ON YOUR SIDE. BU THIS IS MY CONCERN. YOU CAN BLAME ME ON THIS ONE. BUT HOW WOULD I KNOW? HOW WOULD I KNOW WHAT IS BEING BUILT IN THE CITY I UNDERSTAND 10,000 SQUARE FEET OR 50 UNITS IF WE GO TO THAT. BUT HOW WILL I OR THE COMMISSIO NO IF IT'S ON THE ADMINISTRATIV SIDE WHAT EXACTLY IS BEING BUIL FROM NOT SEEING IT? OTHER THAN ADDING ANOTHER BOARD ON MY SCHEDULE. I'M JUST CURIOUS HOW WOULD I KNOW?

>> IT COULD BE REPORTED BY STAF EITHER MONTHLY OR BIWEEKLY WHEN THE ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL WAS COMING TO THE PROCESS.

>> I AM JUST FOR SEEING THAT I DON'T HAVE A SAY SO IT'S ADMINISTRATIVE AND I TRUST YOUR JUDGMENT BUT IF SOMETHING IS BUILT WITH A NEIGHBOR ON THE LEFT AND A NEIGHBOR ON THE RIGH AND THEY DON'T LIKE IT I'M GETTING 1000 EMAILS AND I GO BACK AND I LOOK AND SEE HAD I KNOWN THIS I MIGHT HAVE SAID SOMETHING DIFFERENT. SO THAT'S MY ONLY CONCERN. I WANTED TO MOVE FAST BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY I THINK ALL OF US APPEAR NEED TO KNOW EXACTLY WHAT IS BEING BUILT. THAT IS MY ONLY

CONCERN IN MY ONLY QUESTION. >> COMMISSIONER GAINS, I KIND OF LIKEN THIS TO WHEN YOU ALL GAVE THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE ADDITIONAL BUYING POWER. WHEN I WENT FROM 10,000 TO 50,000

[00:20:05]

YOU'RE ASKING? >> IT IS SIMPLE. AND I LIKE THA REPORT SO I DO READ THAT REPORT BUT ALL I'M SAYING IS THAT WE AGREED TO SAY IT IS ADMINISTRATIVE AT 50 UNITS OR LESS AND 10,000 SQUARE FEET OR LESS. THAT COULD BE ANYTHING. I MEAN IT COULDN'T BE ANYTHING BU IT COULD BE ANYTHING. AND I JUS WANT TO KNOW IF THERE IS AN APPROVAL WHAT IS IT? AND SHOW ME WHAT IS BEING APPROVED AND WHAT IS BEING BUILT AND I WILL

KNOW. THAT'S ALL I'M SAYING. >> THAT WOULD BE THE BUILDING

PERMIT. >> I THINK WHAT WE WILL BE LOOKING AT IN THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT IS NOTIFYING THE CIT COMMISSION WHEN THESE THINGS COME IN. OBVIOUSLY AFTER IT WAS APPROVED YOU'RE MISSING THE OPPORTUNITY WITH IT BEING APPROVED. SO OUR REPORT WOULD BE ESTABLISHED AND WHAT CAME IN DURING THAT. AND WHAT WAS APPROVED.

>> HOW MANY TIMES HAVE YOU BEEN ASKED WHAT IS COMING UP NEXT TO

THE PUBLIC'S IN THE NORTH? >> A LOT.

>> AND I KEPT TRYING TO REMEMBE IF IT WENT THROUGH THE COMMISSION. SO IT MUST'VE BEEN LESS THAN 4000 SQUARE FEET. AN I THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE SAYING RIGHT NOW.

>> I'M REALLY NOT TRYING TO BE STICKLER THIS MORNING I KNOW IT IS MONDAY BUT WITH CERTAIN THINGS, WHEN THEY ARE PUT UP IN DISTRICT 1 I GET ASKED 1000 QUESTIONS WHY. LET'S TALK ABOUT THE CARWASHES SINCE IT'S ON THE TABLE. NOT EVERYBODY WANTS A CARWASH IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD. MEAN THEY JUST DON'T. FOR ALL THE OWNERS OF SELF STORAGE IS DON'T EMAIL ME. I DON'T KNOW WHERE SELF STORAGE IS FALL IN THIS NUMBER WOULD HAVE GOTTEN MORE EMAILS ABOUT SELF STORAGE FACILITIES AND SAY THEY DID EVERYTHING RIGHT IT'S THEIR PROPERTY THEY CAN DO IT. BUT I WANT TO KNOW SO THAT IF THERE I AN ISSUE WE WILL HAVE THE CHANCE TO READ IT AND GO FROM THERE BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO GENERALLY KNOW WHAT YOU'RE DOIN ANYWAYS. I DON'T THINK IT'S GOOD TO HAVE THAT HERE. BUT YOU HAVE TO HAVE SOME IDEA IN CASE I'M STOP BY A CITIZEN OR RESIDENT AND YOU SAY HOW CAN YOU BUY THIS PROPERTY AND I'M LIKE WHAT PROPERTY? IT DOESN'T LOOK GOOD THAT'S ALL I'M ASKING

>> I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT IF YO NEED TO REPORT ANY SPARE CONTRO REPORT GENERATED BY STAFF OR RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT SINCE MY OFFICE AND I WILL DISTRIBUTE THAT TO THE CITY COMMISSION.

>> AT THE CRITICAL JUNCTURE WHE WE KNOW IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN WHENEVER THAT IS. THE POINT IS THE APPROVAL OF THE PERMIT KNOWING THAT SOMEONE HAD THE IDEA I'M NOT QUITE SURE THEY

WILL FOLLOW THROUGH. >> I THINK WE ARE ALL GOOD WITH THIS. I ALSO THINK THAT WE DO NEED TO BE READY TO SEE HOW YOU YOU COULD LET THAT GO IN THERE AND THEN SAY BECAUSE THIS IS TH RULE THAT WE VOTED FOR UNDER CERTAIN UNITS OR SQUARE FEET.

THIS IS ADMINISTRATIVE AND YOU WILL HAVE TO CALL MR. FREEMAN.

CITIZENS ALONG ON AN EMPIRIC ROLE WHEN I HEARD MR. FREEMAN SPEAK WAS THAT WE HAVE OTHER ORDINANCES OF THE CITY AND

[00:25:06]

NEIGHBORHOODS. THANK YOU. >> DO YOU HAVE ANY MR. FREEMAN?

[b. Discussion of a proposal to require applicants of development to post site notice and send mailout notice of a Planning Board hearing.]

>> THE NEXT ITEM IS DISCUSSION OF THE PROPOSAL FOR APPLICANT T DEVELOPMENT OF POST-SITE NOTICE AND SEND MAIL OUT NOTICES OF A

PLANNING BOARD HEARING. >> MAYOR AND THE CITY COMMISSION, SOMETIME AGO THE CITY COMMISSION DID REQUEST STAFF TO THE CITY MANAGER TO INVESTIGATE A PROPOSAL REGARDIN THE PLANNING BOARD PUBLIC NOTIFICATION. THIS CAME AROUND FROM ISSUES THAT WE HAD WITH TH CONDITIONAL USE THAT WAS IN A NEIGHBORHOOD AND CITIZENS FELT THAT THEY DID NOT HAVE ENOUGH PUBLIC NOTIFICATION. THE CITY STAFF DID UNDERTAKE WHAT WAS IN THE CODE AND WE KNOW THAT THE APPLICANT DID GO OUT AND DO THINGS THEMSELVES. IT DID MISS SECTION OF CITIZENS WITHIN THE CITY AND THA SECTION I THINK IS PROBABLY THE FOLKS WHO ARE RENTING AND ARE NOT PROPERTY OWNERS OF THOSE IN PROXIMITY TO THE APPLICATION. WHAT NORMALLY HAPPENS IS THE CITY STAFF UNDERTAKE THE NOTIFICATIONS WITHIN 500 FEET OF THE APPLICATION AND YOU HAVE TWO PROPERTY OWNERS. NOT NECESSARIL THE OCCUPIERS OR THE ADDRESSES WITHIN THAT 500 FEET. SO WE MAY CONSULT SOMEONE WHO IS LIVING I NORTH CAROLINA BECAUSE OF THE PROPERTY IN THAT LOCATION. UNLESS THEY SEE THE ADVERTISEMENT THEY ARE UNAWARE. AND I THINK THAT HAS REALLY BEE THE BREAKING POINT WITH SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT I'VE SEEN. THE OCCUPIERS OF THE CURRENT ADDRES AND LOCATION ARE NOT NOTIFIED B MAIL. IN A KNOW WE HAVE ISSUES SOMETIMES WITH THE DELIVERY AND PROPERTY OWNERS. THERE IS NO GUARANTEE SEE IF THIS PEOPLE DO GET REACHED. ANYTHING THAT GOES TO THE PLANNING BOARD PEOPLE SHOULD BE NOTIFIED OF AN AT THE MOMENT IT IS PRIMARILY CONDITIONAL USE AND THERE'S ANOTHER CATEGORY WHICH HAS ZONING CHANGES THAT GET MAILED OUT. WE HAVE DIFFERENT STATUTE REQUIREMENTS WITH OTHER KINDS O APPLICATIONS THAT ARE ADVERTISE AND NOTICED WITHIN STATE STATUTES AND WE NEED THESE THINGS. SO THE QUESTION IS DO W EXTEND THAT REQUIREMENT AND AS CONSEQUENCE OF THAT, WHO PAYS FOR IT? ONE OF THE BIGGEST

[00:30:03]

IT'S HOW WE GET OUT THE MESSAGE TO PEOPLE WHO ARE IN A WAY DISENFRANCHISED FROM THE SYSTEM BECAUSE THEY ARE RENTERS OR THE OCCUPY PROPERTY THAT THEY DON'T OWN. SO THAT IS THE QUESTION I' ASKING FOR CONSIDERATION TODAY. DO WE NEED TO CHANGE THE MAIL OUT REQUIREMENTS? IS THE MAIL OUT CARRIED OUT BY THE APPLICANT AND WHAT PARAMETERS T BE USED FOR THAT MAIL OUT? THAT IS THE FEEDBACK I'M LOOKING FOR TODAY.

>> OVER THE YEARS I BELIEVE BAC IN THE PLANNING BOARD THEY NOTIFY THE PUBLIC WITH THE ACTION STEPS PRIOR TO THE PLANNING BOARD MEETINGS. THEY WERE VERY WELL ATTENDED IN ADDITION TO THE NEXT STEPS COMING FORWARD. BUT HERE IS MY QUESTION BEFORE I GIVE YOU THE ANSWER TO YOUR THREE QUESTIONS, WENDY PUT TOGETHER THE LIST OF NOTIFICATIONS? BECAUSE I BELIEV

THIS SHOULD BE THE SAME LIST. >> WE LOOK AT THIS SOMETIME I CANNOT VOUCH FOR ALL OF MY STAF BUT IT CAN GO THROUGH TECHNICAL COMMITTEE AND WE WOULD HAVE THI WITH THE PROPERTY APPRAISER'S LIST. BEARING IN MIND THAT THE LIST THAT WE ARE PROVIDING IS FOR PROPERTY OWNERS WHICH YOU CAN GET FROM THE PROPERTY APPRAISERS THAT WE ONLY MAIL OU TO THE COLUMN WHICH WAS THE PROPERTY OWNERS. AND THAT IS A FAIRLY SIMPLE THING TO DO. YOU IDENTIFY THE PROPERTY AND THE PROPERTY APPRAISER SITE ACTUALL DRAWS A BUFFER AND THEN COMPILE THE SPREADSHEET IF YOU LIKE OF ALL PROPERTIES WITHIN THE DEFINED AREA. SO THEN WE SAVE THAT AS XL AND MERGE FROM THERE YOU JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THI IS CONSISTENT. MORE RESISTANCE SOMETIMES IS THE CHALLENGE. BU I DO BELIEVE THAT THE APPLICANT SHOULD BE HANDLING THIS BUT THE CITY SHOULD PRODUCE THE LIST EARLY IN THE PROCESS AND THEY NEED TO USE THIS FOR THEIR NOTIFICATIONS BEFORE THEY SIGN THE AFFIDAVIT. THE CITY WOULD TAKE THE SAME LIST BEFORE THE COMMISSION WITH ALL REQUIREMENT AND MAKE SURE THAT WE USE THE SAME LIST PRODUCING THE NOTICES THE OTHER PARTS AND PIECES OF I I BELIEVE THERE SHOULD BE SIGNAGE ON THIS PROPERTY. I WORRY ABOUT TRYING TO INVESTIGATE AND DO MORE WITH THOSE THAT MIGHT BE RENTING A PROPERTY. BECAUSE THAT COULD CHANGE TOMORROW OR THE FOLLOWIN WEEK. THERE IS STABILITY IN THE

[00:35:03]

THAT PROCESS? >> THERE ARE CERTAIN APPLICATIONS THAT GO UNNOTICED BEFORE THE PLANNING BOARD AND THOSE WE GO 15 TO 10 DAYS BEFOR THE PLANNING BOARD. AND WE DO

THAT PHYSICALLY A STAFF? >> YES.

>> AND THERE IS DOCUMENTATION THAT WE PUT THE SIGNAGE OUT

THERE? >> YES.

>> I'VE SEEN THE SIGNS AND WE'V HAD A LARGE DISCUSSION AT SOME POINT REMEMBER THE SIGNS THAT USED TO GO OUT IT WAS INTENSIVE WE HAD TO HAVE FACILITIES ASSISTING THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT BECAUSE THEY WERE PUTTING IN PIECES OF PLYWOOD.

BELIEVE WE SHOULD DO THAT BEFOR THE PLANNING BOARD TO MAKE SURE IT IS CONSISTENT WHEN THIS HAPPENS AND THAT COULD BE DONE BY CITY STAFF. IF YOU'RE ALREAD DOING IT IT MAKES SENSE THAT IT WILL CONTINUE. BUT LET US AMP U THAT PROCESS TO SEE WHEN IT IS DONE SO THAT THE FOLKS THAT LIV AROUND THE AREA CAN HAVE A VOIC AND COME INSIDE CITY HALL AND SPEAK ABOUT IT IF THEY WOULD

LIKE. >> THE BOTTOM LINE, IS WE ARE TRYING TO NOTIFY PEOPLE WHO WIL BE AFFECTED. SO THAT THEY CAN COME IN EARLIER IN THIS PROCESS SO THAT THE PLANNING BOARD CAN DO A BETTER JOB OF VETTING THIS BECAUSE SOMETIMES THEY HAVE NO ONE AND THEN IT GETS TO THE COMMISSION AND IT GETS EVERYWHERE. COMMISSIONER BRODERICK?

>> THANK YOU FOR THE REPORT. I HAVE BEEN AN ADVOCATE FOR THIS FOR A WHILE. THE PLANNING BOARD HAS BEEN UTILIZED FOR SOLICITATION FOR THE COMMUNITY INPUT. AND THEN WE GET TOLD WE DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THIS. IT IS ANOTHER ABILITY TO COMMUNICATE TO THE PUBLIC THAT SOMETHING IS GOING ON AND THIS IS WHERE YOUR MEETING STARTS. IT IS VERY INTERESTING THAT THE TWIST ON THIS FROM PRIOR DISCUSSIONS IS SHIFTING THE BURDEN TO THE APPLICANT WHICH I THINK IS A PHENOMENALLY GREAT IDEA. I'M NOT SURE WHY WE ARE NOT SHIFTING THE ENTIRE BURDEN TO THE APPLICANT BECAUSE AS YOU ARE INDICATING A LARGE LINE ITE IS FOR MAIL OUTS. ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH OTHER MUNICIPALITIES OR COUNTIES? DO THEY SHIFT THAT BURDEN TO THE

APPLICANT? >> MOST ALL OF THEM.

>> AND THEY ARE SIGNING AFFIDAVITS THAT THEY HAVE DONE IT. THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT PROVIDES THE MAILING LIST AND I'M SURE THERE'S SOME SORT OF FORM OR DOCUMENT THAT IS BEING UTILIZED AS WELL. I THINK WE SHOULD SHIFT IT HERE. TO ME THI IS SOMETHING THAT JUST NEEDS TO BE DONE I'M SUGGESTING GOING TO STEP TWO TO ALLEVIATE THE STAFF OF HOURS OF MAILINGS AND SHIFT THE BURDEN. IT'S NOT AS IF AN APPLICANT HAS 20 OF THESE TO DO LIKE YOUR DEPARTMENT OR HUNDRED POTENTIALLY THEY HAVE ONE. IT'S NOT THAT BIG OF A BURDEN. IF WE HAVE COST SAVINGS WITHIN YOUR STAFF TIME THAT COULD SIMPLY BE BETTER DEDICATED TO OTHER FUNCTIONS THIS HAD NOT CROSSED MY MIND. THE PLANNING DEPARTMEN JUST NEED TO SEND THIS OUT. AND WE SEVER REGULAR SHIFT THAT TO THE APPLICANT WILL SOMEONE CAME UP WITH A GREAT IDEA AND THEN BASED ON YOUR COMMENTARY I'M SUGGESTING HE MAY WANT TO LOOK AT SHIFTING THE ENTIRE BURDEN T THE APPLICANT. THEN WE HAVE A HARD COST SAVING OF POSTAGE AND ON ENVELOPES BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY STAFF TIME BECAUSE THAT HAS TO BE A MAJOR BURDEN.

OUR OFFICE HAS A LOT OF BULK MAILING SO IT IS BURDENSOME. I WOULD TAKE IT TO THE NEXT STEP CERTAINLY. I FEEL THERE IS A COMBINATION OF BOTH SOME STATE STATUTES THAT I THINK STAFF IS OBLIGED TO LOOK AT. WE HAVE TO CERTAINLY LOOK AT THOSE STATUT REQUIREMENTS AND COME UP WITH THE REST OF THE PARAMETERS WORKING WITHIN THE GUIDELINES T SHIFT WHAT WE CAN AND WHATEVER MANDATORILY WE ARE REQUIRED TO DO.

[00:40:01]

>> ARE WE GOOD WITH PROPERTY OWNERS AS OPPOSED TO TENANTS?

>> THAT IS A MOVING TARGET AND QUITE THE CHALLENGE.

>> A TENANT LIVES THERE BUT THE PROPERTY OWNER IS ACTUALLY THE ONE THAT HAS THE INTEREST IN IT

>> I'M GOING TO START WITH THAT YESTERDAY THERE ARE SOME TENANT RIGHTS THAT WE CANNOT IGNORE. AND I THINK I'VE ALWAYS BEEN CONCERNED ABOUT THE PHYSICAL SIGNAGE THAT IS THERE. THERE HAVE BEEN VARYING DEGREES OF THIS UP-AND-DOWN TREASURE COAST OF SEEN THE LARGE PLYWOOD BOARDS THAT HAVE PUBLIC NOTICE AND EVEN A DIFFERENT BORDER COLOR ON IT SO IT KIND OF CATCHES YOUR EYE. SOMETHING IS GOING ON HERE. SO I THINK I'M ALL FOR THE POSTAGE PART. I HAV NO ISSUE WITH THAT SHIFTING THE BURDEN ACROSS HERE BUT I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO SEE AND HEAR FROM YOU BECAUSE I'M NOT SURE WHAT STATE STATUTES ARE REQUIRED BUT I THINK THAT THE APPLICANT SHOULD BE REQUIRED TO PUT A LARGER SIZE POSTAGE THERE. THERE'S A BIG SIGN THERE BECAUS THESE LITTLE YARD SIGNS FOR POLITICAL CAMPAIGNS ON EVERY CORNER. PEOPLE PROBABLY DON'T PAY AS MUCH ATTENTION TO IT IS THEY NEED TO BECAUSE IT COULD B ANYTHING FROM TALKING ABOUT FOO TO GETTING YOUR TAXES DONE. I THINK WE NEED TO BE MORE PRONOUNCED AND THAT'S THE PART OF LIKE TO SEE US INVESTIGATE A BIT MORE. THE REQUIREMENT OF A BIGGER SIZE PLACARD OR PLYWOOD SIZE THAT WOULD GO UP OR DOWN AND I THINK THAT EVEN IF WE PRODUCED IT AND THERE IS A RENTAL FEE OBVIOUSLY SO WE COUL PUT IT UP OR PUT IT DOWN SO IT SITTING THERE AND IS PUBLIC NOTICE THAT THIS PROPERTY IS UNDER PUBLIC NOTICE. WE LET OUR CITIZENS KNOW THAT IF THEY SEE THESE KINDS OF THINGS THAT SOMETHING IS GOING ON HERE THE MAY WANT TO LOOK INTO. AND I THINK THAT IS A FAIR WAY THAT W COULD HANDLE THIS AND THE PEOPL THAT ACTUALLY LIVE THERE. WHAT I FIND IS THAT WHILE YOU ARE CORRECTING THESE MAILINGS A LOT OF THEM ARE GENERATIONALLY OWNED. ONE PART OF FAMILY WILL GET THE LETTER AND THEY'RE NOT CONCERNED ABOUT IT WITHIN THE COUSINS ARE LIVING IN THE HOUSE AND THEY GET RILED UP IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THINGS HAPPEN IN A SHOW APPEAR. SO I JUST WAN TO MAKE SURE WERE COVERING ALL OF OUR BASES WITH THAT AND I THINK IF WE TOOK THE EXTRA STEP TO LOOK INTO THOSE LARGER NOTICES AND SHIFT THAT CAUSE WE WOULD PRODUCE THE SIGN BECAUSE WERE GOING TO PUT IT UP. I KNOW FROM THE CITY STANDPOINT YOU'RE GOING TO POKE HOLES IN IT BUT I'M A MARKETER. AND I BELIEVE I AT LEAST TRYING TO STRIKE A

BALANCE. >> MADAME MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COMMISSION YEARS AGO W CHANGED THE PROCESS BECAUSE WE WERE HAVING ISSUES AND ARE ONLY RESOURCES. NOT ONLY GETTING THI IN THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT BUT TO THE STREETS DIVISION TO CREATE AND POST THE SIGNS. WE SHIFTED THAT BURDEN TO THE DEVELOPERS. I BELIEVE IT SHOULD STAY WITH THE DEVELOPERS AND MAKE THEM POST THE LARGER SIGN. THEY CAN PICK IT UP AND BRING I

BACK. >> BUT WE COULD SPECIFY THE SIZ AND GIVE THEM A PDF OF WHAT THA LOOKS LIKE. THANK YOU.

>> I AM FINE WITH THAT. THAT WAY WHEN THEY SEE THIS SOMETHIN IS HAPPENING IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD THAT YOU NEED TO

PAY ATTENTION TO. >> I DON'T KNOW WHAT THIS IS WE DID REDUCE THE SIZE BECAUSE IT WAS BURDENSOME TO THE CITY STAFF. WE DO NOT SHIFTED DIRECTLY TO THE DEVELOPER. WE DID USED TO PRODUCE THIS A SIX BY FOUR OR FOUR BY EIGHT SHEET.

I THINK IT'S A SIX BY EIGHT IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN. THERE IS A MA SIZE THAT YOU CAN USE. BUT EITHER WAY I THINK IT IS A LITTLE OBNOXIOUS. BUT IT IS ALL ABOUT MARKETING WE A BEAUTIFUL

[00:45:02]

BECAUSE IT IS NEAR A PARCEL OF LAND THAT I WANT TO PAY ATTENTION TO. AND IT IS SMALL BUT IT DOES GIVE YOU THE RELEVANT DETAILS YOU HAVE TO PA ATTENTION TO WHAT YOU ARE LOOKING FOR. BY SOME MARKETING MEANS WE CAN CREATE SOME OTHER NOXIOUS:THIS IS LOOK AT ME. AND EVERY TIME YOU SEE ONE OF THESE I THINK THE CITY OF STEWART OR MARTIN COUNTY IT IS YELLOW. AN I THINK WE SHOULD ADD A QR CODE THAT WAY IN THE DIGITAL AGE IT CAN GO DIRECTLY TO THAT APPLICATION.

>> MR. FREEMAN IS THAT SOMETHIN YOU CAN DO?

>> THERE ARE SOME CONSIDERATIONS. BUT I THINK THESE ARE GOOD PARAMETERS AND I THINK WE CAN COME BACK WITH

SOMETHING ELSE. >> ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD?

>> WHAT IS A QR CODE? >> I'M JUST KIDDING.

>> MR. GAINES? >> MADAME MAYOR AND COMMISSIONERS I AM FINE WITH EVERYTHING THAT HAS BEEN SAID THIS MORNING. BUT I DO NEED TO BACK UP TO SOMETHING THAT THE COMMISSIONER HAS SAID. IN DISTRICT 1, WE HAVE ABOUT 90% O SO IN THAT AREA OF PEOPLE THAT ARE RENTERS. AND NOT JUST RENTERS FOR LIKE A YEAR BUT IN THAT PROPERTY FOR YEARS. AND WE HAVE TO SOMEHOW GET THOSE RESIDENTS IN THIS EQUATION FOR NOTIFICATIONS. BECAUSE THE UNIT THEY ARE NOT PROPERTY OWNERS THAT ARE CONTRIBUTING TO THIS PROPERTY AND THEY WILL BE AFFECTED BY WHATEVER IS GOING THERE. AND I THINK THEY DO HAVE A RIGHT TO KNOW AND VOICE THEIR CONCERNS TO US. I DON'T KNOW HOW WE GET NOTIFICATIONS TO THESE INDIVIDUALS. I'M NOT GOING TO CALL ANY PARTICULAR ARGUMENTS FORWARD BUT THE PLACEMENT IS FINE AND THE COLOR IS FINE AND THE SIZE IS FINE.

BUT YOU KNOW WHERE I'M GOING WITH THIS. IF IT'S ON SOME ARE OR PLACED WITHIN AN AREA OR PAR OF THE PROPERTY, THE LESS YOU HAVE TO WALK UP AND SEE IT ALMOST DEFEATS THE PURPOSE. I DON'T CARE HOW BIG OF A SIGN IT IS. OR WHAT COLOR IT IS OR IF IT'S FLASHING LIGHTS. I LOVE TH IDEA OF A PDF OR CODE BECAUSE PEOPLE CAN GET A CODE AND PUT I OUT HERE FASTER THAN ANYTHING ELSE. BUT, THESE TENANTS WE HAV TO GET NOTICE TO THEM BECAUSE THE EASIEST WAY TO GET SOMETHIN TO THE OWNER BECAUSE MOST OF THEM HAVE A MIDDLEMAN DEALING WITH THIS PROPERTY MANAGERS OR MIDDLEMEN IS GOING ON BECAUSE OF NOTICES TO THESE OWNERS IS T GO THROUGH THESE TENANTS THAT ARE LIVING THERE AND THE CITY DID YOU KNOW THIS WAS GOING ON NEXT YOUR PROPERTY? IT IS JUST ANOTHER WAY TO GET A NOTICE OUT AND I UNDERSTAND THIS SHOULD NO BE ON YOUR DEPARTMENT. BUT IT'S ALMOST TO ME TO SAY JUST BECAUS YOU ARE A RENTER WERE NOT GOING TO GIVE YOU NOTICE. AND I KNOW THAT IS NOT EXACTLY WHAT WE ARE SAYING BUT THAT IS HOW IT COMES ACROSS. I KNOW PEOPLE THAT HAVE BEEN IN HOUSES FOR 20S 25 YEARS LUKE COMMISSIONER JOHNSON SAID IT WENT IT WAS GRANDMOTHER'S

[00:50:03]

I'VE BEEN HERE FOR 20 YEARS AND THIS IS WHAT IS GOING ON. AT TH END OF THE DAY THE PROPERTY OWNER HAS THE RIGHTS. I DO UNDERSTAND THAT. BUT SOME OF OU RESIDENTS ARE LIFELONG TENANTS.

AND WE ARE TRYING TO WORK WITH THAT. GOING FROM TENANT SHIP T OWNERSHIP. BUT LET'S NOT FORGET THAT THAT IS WHERE WE ARE RIGHT NOW. I KNOW I'M RAMBLING BUT IF THAT MAKES SENSE AND JUST TRYIN TO GET NOTIFICATIONS TO EVERYONE.

>> COMMISSIONER YOU ARE RIGHT O THE SIGN PLACEMENT. I PICKED UP ON THAT WHEN YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT IT BUT WHEN WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THAT PREVIOUSLY ON THE DEVELOPER APPLICANT TO D THAT AND TAKE THE SIGN OUT OF HER HANDS AND PUT IT INTO THEIR HANDS STAFF WAS PROVIDING THE LOCATION AND THAT MAKES SENSE.

THEY ARE THE MOST INTIMATE WITH THE WHOLE PROJECT OUTSIDE OF TH OWNER. THEY WOULD USE THE SAME PDF DOCUMENT GIVEN THE LAYOUT AND THEN PROVIDE A LITTLE MAP T SAY THIS IS THE SPOT. IN WHICH

WEIGHT SHOULD FACE. >> OKAY. YOU HAVE WHAT YOU NEED

MR. FREEMAN? >> YES. OKAY. THE NEXT ITEM

[c. Discussion pertaining to the funding of affordable housing.]

>> YES. THERE WAS A QUESTION FROM THE CITY COMMISSION REGARDING THE POTENTIAL OF LOOKING AT METHODOLOGY FOR ESTABLISHING A FUND OR CONTRIBUTION. WHICH WOULD BE COLLECTED WITH THE AIM OF USING THAT FUND TO INCREASE THE SUPPL OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING WITHIN TH CITY. I CONSULTED WITH A NUMBER OF PEOPLE WITHIN THE INDUSTRY SPECIFICALLY IN TERMS OF THE IMPACT FEE AND WHETHER OR NOT I WOULD BE LEVIED TO DO THIS. AS YOU MAY SUSPECT THERE IS STATE LEGISLATION WHICH DOES ALLOW TH CITY TO DO CERTAIN THINGS. THER ARE DESCRIPTIONS HERE ONE IS INCLUSIONARY HOUSING AND THE OTHER IS THE LINKAGE FEE. THE CITY WITH ITS COMPREHENSIVE PLA DOES LOOK AT INCLUSIONARY HOUSING. THE INCLUSIONARY HOUSING ORDINANCE WHICH I BELIEVE WE HAVE PIECES OF THIS WITHIN THE ZONING AND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, MAY REQUIRE THE DEVELOPER TO PROVIDE SPECIFIED PERCENTAGE BUT WE DO ALLOW DENSITY BONUSES. AND THAT IS PART OF THE STATE STATUTE THAT WE MAKE UP THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE MARKET RATE OF A UNIT IN RETURN FOR HAVING THE AFFORDABLE HOME IN ITS STEAD. S THE COST ON THE DEVELOPERS THER IN THE STATE RECOGNIZES THE INCOME OR RENTAL REVENUE IS MAD UP SOME WAY BY THE CITY IN TERM OF BONUSES OR DENSITY INCREASES THAT ARE ALLOWED. THE LINKAGE FEE CAN ACTUALLY LOOK AT THIS NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS AND THEN THERE IS A FURTHER FEE PUT ON HERE. BUT THEN THAT ALSO HAS TO BE RESOLVED BY A CONTRIBUTIO OR ADDITIONAL PLANNING BENEFITS FOR A DEVELOPER TO RECEIVE IF THEY DID THIS. AND THAT IS WHA I'M TALKING ABOUT HERE. THE OFFSET IS A BENEFIT THAT GOES TO THE DEVELOPER. AND THAT WOUL

[00:55:05]

WITHOUT AFFECTING THE DENSITY O THAT PROPERTY. AND YOU CAN USE UP TO 40 FOR THIS. IT'S NOT BEE PUBLICIZED ENOUGH. IT'S NOT OU THERE IT IS A SURPRISE TO PEOPL AND THEY SEEM TO BE QUITE INTERESTING WHEN THEY TALK TO THIS. BUT SOMETIMES WE ARE REACHING PEOPLE AFTER THEY HAVE ALREADY MADE ADDITIONAL SITE PLANS OR PRO FORMS. THERE IS A MATTER TO GET THESE OUT TO DEVELOPERS AND OBVIOUSLY THE STATE STATUTE THAT LOOKS AT THE PROPERTY WITH COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL USE OR ZONING THAT YOU CAN DO THE BENEFIT OF THE MIX TO CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS.

THAT HAS HAD MORE PUBLICITY BECAUSE IT IS STATEWIDE AND PEOPLE ARE ALREADY LOOKING AT IT. BUT OUR OWN CITY POLICIES DID GO A LONG WAY AND STILL GO LONG WAY TO ENABLING PEOPLE TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THIS. AND I THINK WE ARE DOING WHATEVER WE CAN TO PUBLICIZE THIS SO I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT WE SHOULD BE DOING AT THE MOMENT. THERE ARE THINGS OUT THERE THAT WE CAN USE BUT I THINK THE NEXT STEP TO LOOK FORWARD TO REGARDING HOW WE MEASURE DENSITY SHOWS THE BEDROOMS PER ACRE WHICH THEN INCORPORATES THE ABILITY TO HAV SMALLER LOTS AND THE POLICIES ARE THERE AND SHOULD BE ENCOURAGING THE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS THROUGHOUT THE CITY. WE SHOULD ALWAYS USE THI TO PROMOTE THE ABILITY OF DEVELOPERS COME IN WITH AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND WE HAVE OTHER THINGS COMING ONLINE THAT WILL ALSO BE HERE THROUGH PUBLI HEARINGS AND NOTIFICATIONS. I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ANYTHING MORE THAT WE COULD DO AT THE MOMENT THAN WHAT WE ARE ALREADY DOING. JUST GETTING THAT MESSAG OUT THERE AND WHATEVER WE CAN W

ARE DOING THAT. >> MET AMIR AS A PLANNING BOARD MEMBER BACK WHEN WE DID THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REWRITE, WE HAD A LOT OF DISCUSSION ON THIS I KNOW THE CITY PLANNING STAFF WAS EXCITED TO BE ABLE TO INCLUDE THE SYDNEY PLAN UPDATE.

IN ADDITION ONE THING WE DO NOT TALK ABOUT IS THE IMPACT FEE WAIVER BECAUSE TO ME THAT IS TH AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMPONENT THAT JUST DOES NOT GET TALKED ABOUT ENOUGH IN THAT LIGHT BUT

[01:00:04]

YOU. >> REALLY QUICKLY HERE IT APPEARS TO ME THAT A LOT OF YOU ARE ON INITIATIVES THAT ARE MATURING. AND I THINK THAT EVERYTHING YOU'VE OUTLINED IS A MOVE IN THE CORRECT DIRECTION T ATTEMPT TO WRESTLE WITH THIS MASSIVE ISSUE. I ADVOCATE ALL OF THESE INITIATIVES TO SEE WHA WILL STICK AND WHERE WE WILL GE TRACTION. MAJORITY THE IMPACT THESE ARE COUNTY DRIVEN AND NOT CITY DRIVEN. INCREASING DENSIT DRIVING TOWARD HIM OG LEVELS I DON'T KNOW WHAT IS CONSIDERED AFFORDABLE HOUSING ANYMORE. TH QUOTE WAS THAT WAS AFFORDABLE HOUSING. MARKET-DRIVEN WITH IMPACT FEES ADDING TO THIS ISSUE. THIS IS A MULTILEVEL PROBLEM THAT NEEDS ANALYSIS AND AM VERY INTERESTED TO GET FURTHER INFORMATION AS YOU MOVE ALONG. YOU SIMPLY CANNOT GET I OFF THE GROUND FOR LESS THAN THAT AND OF COURSE THEY WILL PU PROFIT ON TOP OF IT. AND THAT I WHERE I SEE THE MARKET DRIVING ITSELF NOW. AFFORDABLE HOUSING WAS 7 1/2% IS NOT FEASIBLE WHER NOT THE FEDERAL RESERVE'S WE CANNOT FIGURE THIS OUT. I THINK YOU ARE SPOT HONEST WHICH DIRECTIONS WE NEED TO GO IN AND TO SEE WHAT YOU THINK LATER WIT WHAT WILL HAVE THE BEST TRACTION.

>> I LOOKED AT THIS AGENDA AND CELL FOR HOUSING, THERE'S MIGHT HAVE BEEN A LITTLE MORE IMPORTANT HERE BUT COMMISSIONE BRADDOCK WE ACTUALLY TALKED ABOUT THIS. MR. FREEMAN I LIKE WHAT WE HAVE. JUST IN CASE EVERYONE FORGOT HERE'S A POLICY FOR DEVELOPERS TO COME TO FORT PIERCE. I THINK THEY DO TWO THINGS HERE, I THINK IT GIVES THE DEVELOPERS THE IDEA THAT WE ARE LOOKING TO TRY TO FIX THIS PROBLEM BUT ALSO I THINK IT PUT US ON NOTICE TO SAY LOOK AT FOR PIERCE REALLY TRYING OUT HERE.

[01:05:06]

IT'S FOR OUR TEACHERS. IT'S FOR OUR YOUNG PARENTS ARE OUT HERE WORKING NOT 40 HOURS A WEEK PUT 70 HOURS A WEEK TO TRY TO MAKE ENDS MEET TO HAVE SOMEWHERE TO COME HOME AND LIVE. NOT PAYING $1600 FOR A STUDIO APARTMENT. THAT'S WHAT AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS SO LET'S NOT PUT IT TOGETHER AND THEN GO FROM HERE. I WOULD SAY A MAJOR MEDIA BLAST HERE WE HAVE THIS POLICY FOR DEVELOPERS BEFORE YOU SIT DOWN AND MAKE YOUR PLANS COME TALK TO US AND SEE WHAT WE CAN WORK WITH AND I THINK THIS WILL BE THE START AS COMMISSIONER BRODERICK SAID. THROW IT ONTO THE WALL TO SEE WHAT STICKS. YOU NEVER KNOW BECAUSE YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT DEVELOPER MIGHT COME IN AND SAY I'VE BEEN LOOKING FOR A CITY OR A POLICY LIKE THIS SO LET'S TAL AND I CAN SHOW YOU WHAT I CAN DO. SO THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS BACK TO MY ATTENTION NOW LET'S GET IT OUT TO THE PUBLIC.

>> MR. FREEMAN I AM ON A LAND-USE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT POLICY BOARD AND WE HAD A PRESENTATION FROM THE CIT OF DEBARY ABOUT SB 102 AND HOW IT WAS BEING APPLIED. THIS IS O A SUN RAIL STOP WHICH IS A VERY SMALL CITY BUT THE TRAIN STATIO IS SURROUNDED BY COMMERCIAL PROPERTY. DEVELOPERS ARE GOING TO COME IN AND BUILD THAT AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND GET THE TAX BREAK WHICH IS 75% AND THEN CHARGE A MARKET RATE AND GUESS WHO BENEFITS FROM ALL OF THAT? THE TAX BASE DOESN'T THE DEVELOPER DOES. I BELIEVE WE WILL HAVE ANOTHER YEAR OF SB 10 BECAUSE IT IS THE CENTERPIECE AND LEGISLATION THAT SHE DID WORK ON ALL YEAR THAT SHE CONSIDERS A GOOD FAITH EFFORT T DO THIS AND PROVIDE AFFORDABLE HOUSING. HER STAFF HAS SENT THE MESSAGE THAT WE ARE NOT CHANGIN IT AND DON'T EVEN THINK ABOUT CHANGING IT. SO THAT IS PROBABL NOT GOING TO GO UNTOUCHED FOR ANOTHER YEAR AND WILL HAVE TO SEE WHAT HAPPENS IN TERMS OF WHETHER OR NOT SB 102 DOES DO WHAT IT'S SUPPOSED TO DO. THAT IS A PIECE OF THE PUZZLE THAT W CANNOT CONTROL. I THINK WHAT WE ARE DOING IS THE BEST WE CAN UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES.

>> BECAUSE WE HAVE THESE THINGS IN PLACE AND PEOPLE ARE LOOKING AT 102 THAT LIVE LOCAL I THINK THIS IS ALMOST AS IF NOT EXCEEDING WHAT 102 IS TRYING TO DO. IS THE SAME IDEA BEHIND IT.

I THINK THAT'S WHAT I LIKE GETTING THIS MESSAGE OUT MORE.

[01:10:02]

LOOKING WHAT WE HAVE IN THE CIT AT THE MOMENT IN TERMS OF ZONIN THERE IS A DISCONNECT BETWEEN THE ZONING WE HAVE IN CERTAIN AREAS AND WHAT THE NEED IN THAT AREA IS. AND THAT IS THE PREVENTION AND THE BREAKPOINT BETWEEN RENTAL AND OWNERSHIP. W CANNOT CREATE THE SMALLER LOTS THAT ALLOW OWNERSHIP. AFFORDABL OWNERSHIP. AND I THINK THAT IS THE BREAKPOINT THAT WE HAVE TO

FIGURE OUT HERE. >> GREAT INFORMATION MR. FREEMAN. SO IN ADDITION TO WHAT YOU'VE JUST SAID THERE IS A BREAKPOINT AND IS A UNIQUE BREAKPOINT. IT IS UNIQUE TO THE CITY BECAUSE OF HOW FAR WEST WE ARE GROWING. I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING THAT YOU JUST SAID I ADDITION TO PUTTING THE ACTION IN PLACE BUT ON TOP OF THAT I BELIEVE WE HAVE TO DIAL IN AND FOCUS ON THE URBAN CORE TO WHER THE OUTSKIRTS OF OUR COMMUNITY IS NOT NECESSARILY SET UP FOR THIS TO BE SUCCESSFUL. BECAUSE OF THE NEEDS AND WHETHER YOU HAVE TRANSPORTATION OR PEDESTRIAN ELEMENTS OR MAYBE EVEN PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ELEMENTS. BECAUSE WE ARE NOT THERE. AS WE CONTINUE TO ANNEX AND SEE THESE PLANS COME INTO FRUITION SUCH AS THE JENKINS ROAD COURT OR OR EVERYTHING WES OF 25TH STREET. AS WHAT YOU'VE JUST SAID I WOULD STRUGGLE WITH THIS BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THAT THE URBAN CORE SERVICES ARE THERE. THEY JUST AREN'T AVAILABLE. WHEN YOU SET UP FOR MORE DENSITY OR TIGHTER PARAMETERS THE OTHER SERVICES AND ELEMENTS CANNOT SUPPORT THIS. SOME JUST TRYING TO LOOK AT THE HOLISTIC APPROACH BUT I FULLY AGREE WITH YOU WONDERING HOW WE CAN TACKLE THAT IN A MOR DENSE AREA THAT IS PROVIDED WIT INTERCITY SERVICES AND PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION AND SIDEWALKS? WHAT ABOUT JUST STREETS AND HOW THEY ARE CONSTRUCTED? AND THE ELEMENTS OF EVERYTHING EASTER 25TH STREET WITH THE GUTTER AND SIDEWALKS IN OUR DESIGN CODE. A WE START TO ANNEX WEST AND GET INTO COUNTY PARCELS I'M NOT SO SURE OF WAS HERE WE ALREADY HAD THE DISCUSSION OF AG IN LARGER

[01:15:02]

>> DO YOU HAVE WHAT YOU NEED? >> I HAVE PLENTY. THANK YOU.

[d. Discussion of proposed amendments to Code Chapter 28 - Parks.]

>> AN HOUR AND 15 MINUTES WORTH OF STUFF. THANK YOU.

>>> THE NEXT ITEM IS THE DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE CHAPTER 28 FO PARTS CODE.

>> MATTA MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COMMISSION WE HAD THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY RESPONSE HERE THAT WILL GIVE US THE OVERVIEW OF A POSSIBLE AMENDMEN TO ORDINANCE CHAPTER 28 WITH REGARD TO THE OPERATION AND UTILIZATION OF THE CITY PARKS.

>> GOOD MORNING MATTA MAYOR AND COMMISSIONERS. I HAVE A LOT OF INFORMATION TO SHARE WITH YOU TODAY. I TRIED TO MAKE IT AS SHORT AS POSSIBLE BUT THAT IS KIND OF HARD TO DO WITH THE AMOUNT OF INFORMATION NEEDED. THE PARKS COMMITTEE WAS ASKED T REVIEW CHAPTER 28 IN SPECIFIC T THE PARKING SECTION BECAUSE WE DID HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT LATE-NIGHT PARKING AT SOME OF THE PARKS. WE DID TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SURVEY THE ENTIR HORNETS THAT HAS NOT BEEN REWRITTEN IN OVER 10 YEARS. WE TOOK THE OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK AT THESE ORDINANCES AND MAKE ANY CHANGES OR RECOMMENDED CHANGES TO THE ORDINANCE THAT WE COULD.

AS WE REVIEWED EACH OF THESE SECTIONS, WE DID LOOK AT TWO SPECIFIC ITEMS. THE FIRST QUESTION IS WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THE ORDINANCE DOES IT PROVID A BENEFIT AND IS IT A SAFETY MEASURE? WHY DO WE HAVE THAT ORDINANCE AND IS IT ENFORCEABLE IS IT THE BEST USE OF THE CITY RESOURCES? SO THEY WERE THE TWO MOST SPECIFIC THINGS WE COULD THINK ABOUT AS WE WENT THROUGH ALL THE ORDINANCES IN THE PARKS THE FIRST ONE IN ORDER OF CHAPTER 28 IS FISHING WITHIN TH CITY? THIS IS AN ISSUE THAT STAFF IS RUN INTO SEVERAL TIMES THERE ARE SIGNS THAT SAY NO FISHING ON THE PEERS IN THE DOC AT JC PARK AND WHAT HAVE YOU BU THERE IS NO ORDINANCE FOR US TO ENFORCE. THERE ARE SAFETY ISSUE THAT DO GO ALONG WITH FISHING WHEN YOU HAVE IT NEXT TO SWIMMING AREAS. THERE ARE OTHER SAFETY ISSUES THAT YOU GET INVOLVED FROM GETTING COOKED WITH SOMETHING THAT SWIMMERS DON'T WANT TO ENCOUNTER. SO STAFF IS RECOMMENDING WHAT WAS REVIEWED BY THE PARKS RECOMMENDATIONS. TO ADD TO THE PROHIBITED LIST INCLUDES ANY FISHING IN JC PARK AND THEN ANY FISHING FROM THE SHORELINE OR THE DOCKS. IT DOES ALLOW FISHING FROM THE EAST PIER SO I PROHIBITS THE FISHING FROM THE BEACH WHERE THE SWIMMERS ARE. I WILL STOP AFTER EACH CHAPTER FO ANY COMMENTS. SECTION 28 DASH FIVE WAS CLEANING OF THE BEACH DURING TURTLE NESTING SEASONS. THEY THINK THIS IS THE OBSOLETE ORDINANCE WAS PUT HERE A LONG TIME AGO BECAUSE WE DON'T DO BEACH CLEANING ANYMORE WE HAVE FLAG FOR THAT. WERE JUST DELETING THE WHOLE SECTION BECAUSE IT'S OBSOLETE. 2830 IS PARKS HOURS. THIS WAS ANOTHER TOPIC FOR DISCUSSION IS PARKS WERE ALWAYS SET TO CLOSE FROM SUNSET TO SUNRISE BUT IT'S VERY HARD TO DO A ONE-SIZE-FITS-ALL ORDINANCE WHEN IT COMES TO PARK BECAUSE WE DO HAVE PARKS THAT THE CITY SHOULD BE CLOSE THIS WAY AND THEN WE HAVE THE PARKS WHERE YOU HAVE 19 FISHING OR PARKS ADJACENT TO NIGHTTIME ESTABLISHMENTS. THE BOTTOM LIN IS THAT THE PARKS COMMITTEE AND STAFF ARE RECOMMENDING THAT WE JUST CHANGE IT TO SAY POSTED HOURS. BECAUSE YOU CAN'T HAVE A ONE SIZE FITS ALL WHEN YOU HAVE PARKS SCATTERED TO DIFFERENT AREAS OF THE CITY. ANY COMMENT ON THAT?

>> I HAVE A COMMENT. MY COMMENT IS THAT WE HAVE THIS PROPOSED AMENDMENT STATING DURING POSTED HOURS. THERE ARE SEVERAL PARKS THROUGHOUT THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE AND THEY HAVE HIGH

[01:20:02]

>> IS THERE A PLACE TO TELL US THAT MAY HAVE A LIST OF PARKS?

>> THERE IS NOT. THAT WOULD BE MORE ESTABLISHED BY RESOLUTION THAT WOULD FOLLOW. THIS IS THE ORDINANCE SAYS DURING THE POSTE HOURS AND THE ESTABLISHMENT WIL BE DONE BY RESOLUTION.

>> MAYBE WE COULD TALK ABOUT THAT WHEN WE GET THROUGH THIS WHOLE PRESENTATION ABOUT THE POSTED HOURS. ALTHOUGH I'M GONNA MAKE A DECISION WE COULD STILL DISCUSS THIS?

>> LET'S MAKE A LIST OF THE PARKS. THEY'LL BE ANOTHER DAY BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT THAT NEED TO BE DONE HERE. THE NEXT SECTION IS 20 8S 31 PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES IN THE ORDINANCE.

THERE IS A LONG LIST OF PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES. THE FIRS SECTION ALLOWS FOR EXEMPTIONS FOR CITY ACTIVITIES AND ANYTHING AUTHORIZED BY THE CITY MANAGER. I HIGHLIGHT THIS BECAUSE A LOT OF MY AMENDMENTS SAY EXCEPT AS AUTHORIZED BY THE CITY MANAGER. IT'S ALREADY IN THE ORDINANCES SEVERAL TIMES OF CROSS THIS LINEUP BECAUSE IT WA REPETITIVE AND THERE WAS NO NEE FOR IT. SECTIONS 1 THROUGH 3527 10 TO 1215 TO 25 AND 27 TO 30 EITHER HAVE NO RECOMMENDED CHANGES ARE ONLY HAVE THAT LINE CROSSED OUT EXCEPT AS AUTHORIZE BY THE CITY MANAGER. WE DO HAVE SEVERAL SECTIONS TO DISCUSS FOR INPUT NUMBER FOUR IS ABOUT GRILLING EIGHT IS ABOUT SHELTER AND TENTS DISTURBING THE ENVIRONMENT ANIMALS IN THE PARK AND THEN STUFF IN THE PARKING COMMITTEE ARE MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS FOR NEW ORDINANCES AND AGAIN THESE ARE THE PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES. SO THE FIRST ONE IS ABOUT GRILLS. TO GROW OR NOT TO GROW THIS IS THE NUMBER ONE ISSUE THAT MY STUFF IS DEALING WITH EVERY WEEKEND. IT IS A PROBLEM OF COURSE BECAUSE PEOPLE COME TO THE PARK FOR THE DAY AND THE PAVILIONS ARE ALL TAKEN. YOU CAN'T GET IN YOUR CAR AND GO SOMEWHERE BECAUSE YOU NEVER GOING TO GET A PARKING SPOT AGAIN. AND THEN WE COME ACROSS SOMEONE THAT IS ALREADY GRILLIN AND THEY SAY CAN I JUST FINISH THIS? AND THEN WE SAY OKAY YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES AND IN THE MEANTIME HERE COMES FAMILY MEMBER BE WITH THEIR GRILL AND WE SEE CAN'T GRILL AND THEY LOO AT FAMILY AND THEY SAY YOU KNOW THERE GRILLING. SO IT IS A PROBLEM. STAFF MADE THE RECOMMENDATION AND WE DISCUSSED AND AGREED WITH THEM THAT PROHIBITING CHARCOAL GRILLS IS 100% AGREED BECAUSE CHARCOAL YO DUMP IT ON THE GROUND AND SOMEONE GETS BURNED. BUT WITHOU THE USE OF PROPANE GRILLS WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE. BUT THIS IS JUST A RECOMMENDATION AND IT IS UP T THE COMMISSION. AGAIN WE APPLY THOSE QUESTIONS WHY AND WHAT I THE PURPOSE OF THE PROHIBITION AND IN THE ENFORCEABLE PART OF IT. IS IT BEST USE? THESE ARE THE TWO ITEMS EITHER MAINTAININ IT AS IT IS WHICH JUST SAYS NO GRILLING EXCEPT FOR CITY GRILLS OR ALLOW LIMITED USE THROUGH

PROPANE GRILLS. >> SO THE CHALLENGE, IS GOING TO BE FIRE PREVENTION. A VERY BASIC TOOL THAT'S VERY COMMON FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH FAMILIES. AM OKAY WITH IT I JUST THINK I DISAGREE WITH SOME OF THE THING HERE THAT THE BOARD MEMBERS ARE SITTING AND TALKING ABOUT WITH THE FIRE DISTRICT SPECIFYING TO FOOD STRUCTS THAT THERE IS ADDITIONAL PERMITS AND INSPECTIONS GOING ON WHEN THEY SET UP IN PUBLIC EVENTS SO THEY DO MORE FIRE PREVENTION SUCH AS FRIDAY FEST FOR EXAMPLE. I'M NO SURE I AGREE WITH THAT BUT I'M JUST THINKING ALONG THOSE

[01:25:01]

ANOTHER STEP AFTER THAT. >> YOU'RE SAYING THAT'S

HAPPENING IT LIKE FRIDAY FEST? >> UNFORTUNATELY. THAT'S A DIFFERENT DISCUSSION POINT HOWEVER. IT DEALS WITH FOOD TRUCKS AND THOSE PROVIDING FOOD SERVICES. ALL THE SUDDEN WHERE ALLOWING GRILLS IN A PARK AND THEN ANOTHER PHASE OF THIS PERMIT TO HAVE ANOTHER GRILL OR TO RENT THE PAVILION MEANS AN

INSPECTION. >> THERE ARE ALREADY CHARCOAL GRILLS PROVIDED PAVILIONS. AND THEY ARE BEING USED.

>> BUT WERE TALKING ABOUT NOT BRINGING IN ANOTHER CHARCOAL GRILL. BOTH STAFF AND THE PARKS COMMITTEE SAID WHAT HAPPENS IS YOU COULD BE COMING WITH YOUR OWN HIBACHI OF CHARCOAL YOU'RE DONE YOU'RE GOING TO DUMPYOUR CHARCOAL COVERED WITH SAND IN SOME OF YOU STEP ON IT. THAT IS A PROBLEM EVERYONE WAS IN FULL AGREEMENT THAT CHARCOAL GRILLS WERE DEFINITELY REJECTED THOUGHT. THERE WAS A LOT OF DISCUSSION. BUT AGAIN THE PROPOSAL IS IN FRONT OF THE COMMISSION FOR YOUR FEEDBACK. A COUPLE OF CLARIFYING QUESTIONS MS. REYES. WE HAVE CHARCOAL GRILLS ON THE PAVILIONS RIGHT NOW. DO WE PROVIDE SOME KIND O REPOSITORY TO CLEAN THIS OR DO PEOPLE JUST LEAVE THEM? HOW DO THEY DISPOSE OF WHAT'S THERE CURRENTLY? IT JUST BURNS OUT? SO, THAT WAS MY CONCERN. I THINK ALSO THERE ARE LARGER EVENTS THAT TAKE PLACE IN THE CIVILIANS OR PEOPLE DRAGON BRIN THEIR OWN GRILLS BECAUSE THEY FEED A LOT OF PEOPLE. BIG ORGANIZATIONS WITH THEIR ANNUAL EVENTS AND IF WE SAY NO CHARCOA THEN YOU MAY BE LIMITING SOME O THE LARGER EVENTS. I THINK SPECIAL PERMIT HE NEEDS TO COME INTO EFFECT. LIKE WE HAVE PICNICS ON THE BEACH AND WE BRING OUR CHARCOAL BACK WITH US I THINK WE NEED TO BE CAREFUL WITH THAT. THAT EXEMPTION IS ALREADY THERE BUT THEN AGAIN WE DON'T PROVIDE ANY DISPOSABLE MEANS OF HER OWN CURRENT GRILLS AND I THINK WE NEED TO CONSIDER THAT. BECAUSE IF I'M DONE AT 12 AND SOMEONE IS COMING AFTER ME MIGHT WANT TO CLEAN UP WHAT I D WITH THAT? SO I THINK THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO LOOK AT. BUT AT THE END I THINK WE HAVE A BIT OF A CONUNDRUM WHEN IT COMES TO THIS. AND EVENTUALL WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO CHANGE THE BEHAVIORS AND I THINK THOS THAT BRING THEIR OWN PORTABL GRILLS WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO ADDRESS THAT. BECAUSE IT IS DANGEROUS. AND FURTHERMORE PROPANE COULD PROVIDE SOME ISSUES AS WELL.

>> I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER JOHNSON. OF ARTIE HAD THIS DISCUSSION AND I UNDERSTAND THE PRESSURES OF THE COMMUNITY PERSONALLY I DO NOT SUPPORT BRINGING ANY ADDITIONAL GRILLS OTHER THAN THOSE ASSOCIATED WITH A SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT ANY CITY PARK TO INCLUDE PROPANE OR CHARCOAL.

>> EXCEPT WITH A SPECIAL PERMIT OKAY. SO PROPANE COULD PROVIDE PROBLEM BUT AT SOME POINT THERE COULD BE A LOT OF DIFFERENT THINGS AND WE HAVE TO TAKE SOME HEAT FROM SOME OF OUR COMMUNITIES AND SISTER CITIES T SEE WHAT THEY ARE DOING ALONG OCEAN AND BEACH SIDE TO SEE WHA THEY ARE DOING HERE BECAUSE WER ONLY GOING TO GET MORE PEOPLE. PROPANE NEXT TO SOMEONE ELSE MA NOT MIX WELL. AND WHO KNOWS WHAT THEY COULD BE COOKING. IT COULD BE A PROPANE OR A HIBACHI GRILL OR BLACKSTONE FLATTOP WHERE THEY COULD BE FRYING THINGS. ALL OF THAT IS PROPANE DRIVEN. WE ARE GOING TO RUN INT A BUNCH OF ISSUES AND I THINK W

[01:30:03]

THAT. >> COMMISSIONER GAMES?

>> SO THIS PROBLEM IS NOT GOING TO GO AWAY BECAUSE PEOPLE WILL TRY TO GET THEM OUT HERE AND COOK BEFORE WE CAN GET OUT THERE. I JUST KNOW WHAT I CAN SEE. HAVE WE EVER THOUGHT ABOUT JUST HAVING A DESIGNATED SPOT SOMEWHERE WHERE IF YOU'RE TRYIN TO GRILL FOR YOUR DAY AT THE BEACH, YOU GO TO THE SPOT. BUT JUST LIKE A DESIGNATED SPOT SNO YOU TAKE AWAY AND KNOW WHERE IT IS. YOU KNOW WHERE THE DANGERS ARE JUST TRYING TO SAY MAYBE A DESIGNATED SPOT WHERE IF YOU'RE COMING TO ONE OF OUR PARKS OR CERTAIN AREAS WE KNOW EVERYONE GOES TO GRILL JC PARK THAT'S WHAT WERE TALKING ABOUT HERE SPECIFICALLY IN CAUSEWAY. THOSE OF THE NUMBER TWO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE REALLY TALKING ABOUT THES OF THE TWO PARKS WHERE FRIDAY THROUGH SUNDAY IT'S CROWDED YOU GET YOUR SPOT IN YOUR LITTLE GIRL AND YOU LOOK FOR THE CITY TRUCK TO COME BY YOU STAND IN FRONT OF THE GRILL HOPING THEY

DON'T SEE YOU. >> IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU'VE DONE

THIS A FEW TIMES. >> I'M JUST LETTING YOU KNOW HO IT WORKS. YOU SIT UP AND THEN YOU CONTINUE GRILLING. I'M JUST THINKING. AND THE ANSWER OF COURSE COULD BE NO. BUT, IS THERE AN AREA WHERE YOU CAN SAY GRILL HERE AND TAKE IT BACK OVE

THERE? >> JC PARK DOES HAVE A DESIGNATED GRILL AREA. IT IS QUITE REMOVED FROM THE BEACH AN THERE'S NOT ONE AT CAUSEWAY. I DON'T KNOW IF MAYBE THERE'S AN

AREA THAT WE CAN MAKE. >> YOU SAY TO DESIGNATED AREA FOR PEOPLE TO BRING THEIR OWN GRILLS?

>> YES. IT IS REMOVED FROM THE BEACH AND SEPARATED BUT IT IS A

JC PARK. >> I DON'T THINK THERE ANY

REGULATIONS. >> IS THERE MAYBE SOME SIGNAGE COMMISSIONERS. THE AREA DESIGNATED FOR GRILLS A JC PARK I BELIEVE WAS INTENDED FOR LARGER TRAILER TYPE SMOKERS.

RIGHT NOW THERE ARE NO RESTRICTIONS ON TYPES OF GRILL

USED. >> THANK YOU.

>> IS VERY SELDOM USED BECAUSE PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO WALK. THEY DON'T WANT TO USE IT BECAUSE IT IS A LONG WALK.

>> BUT IT IS THE DESIGNATED AREA.

>> IF WE SAY LOOK YES BUT KNOW THIS IS WHERE YOU HAVE TO GO, THEY STILL HAVE THE OPTION BECAUSE WITH COMMISSIONER JOHNSON TALKING ABOUT THE LARGE GROUPS, ONE OF MY GROUPS A COUPLE YEARS AGO HELD A LARGE PARTY THERE BUT WE WENT THROUGH THE SPECIAL PERMIT AND GOT EVERYTHING REQUIRED. WE HAD THREE OR 400 PEOPLE THAT WE TRIED TO SERVE AND YOU DON'T WANT TO STOP THAT BECAUSE WE DI BRING PEOPLE THAT STAYED OVERNIGHT INTO THE CITY. WE GOT THAT EXTRA REVENUE COMING IN. I KNEW ABOUT THE WANTED JC AND I' TRYING TO THINK BUT I DON'T EVE KNOW YOU PUT ONE IN THE CAUSEWAY. YOU'RE TAKING SOMEONE ELSE'S SPOT THERE. SO THAT'S WHAT I'M THINKING. I DO UNDERSTAND PEOPLE WANT TO COME TO OUR PARKS AND HAVE A GOOD TIME. I AM ADAMANT WITH THE COMMISSIONER JOHNSON ABOUT PROPANE AND STAYING AWAY FROM IT. BECAUSE A LOT OF PEOPLE

[01:35:03]

>> INCREDIBLE LIABILITY. >> AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE SAYING. HE MAY NOT BE TERRIBLY FAR OFF BECAUSE WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT HOW THE CAUSEWA PARK IS LAID OUT WHAT WE ARE ENVISIONING IS THAT THERE ARE PEOPLE HERE AND RIGHT NEXT YOU CAN BE SOMEONE TRYING TO DO A SMALL BOCCE GRILL OR KID TIPS OVER TRYING TO CATCH A BALL AND NEXT THING YOU KNOW WE HAVE A MAJOR ACCIDENT. BUT I STILL THINK TO THE WESTERN FLANK OF THE CAUSEWAY, WE MAY BE ABLE TO CARVE OUT AN SMALL AREA OUT THERE. JUST AS YOU COME IN NEA WHERE THE STAGING IS GOING ON FOR CONCERTS. SOMEWHERE OVER THERE IT WOULD ALLOW FOR THIS AND I WOULD BE A LITTLE MORE COMFORTABLE WITH THAT BECAUSE I SEE THEM ALL THE TIME. AND THEN THE NEXT PERSON OVER HERE HAS T BE CAREFUL WITH THAT. BECAUSE O HOW TIGHT IT IS THEY HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE IN THERE. WE VEHICLE TRAFFICKING KIDS RUNNING EVERYWHERE. YOU'VE BOATS AND FISHING AND IT'S JUST A NIGHTMARE WAITING TO HAPPEN. I THINK IF WE ARE GOING TO LIMITE OR RESTRICTED WE NEED TO FIND THE AREA TO PUT THEM OVER THERE AND REQUIRE THEY BE WITH THE GRILL AND LEAVE THE GRILL OVER THERE. BUT ALSO MAYBE PROVIDE A CHARCOAL DUMPING STATION.

>> COMMISSIONER MR. JOHNSON JUS SUMMARIZE MY ENTIRE POSITION.

THE CHARCOAL IS CLEARLY AN ISSU AND YOU ARE OPTIMISTIC THINKING THEY WILL BURY IT IN THE SAND. THINK IT WILL ACTUALLY JUST BE DUMPED ON THE SAND. I DO AGREE THAT WE SHOULD DESIGNATE THE AREA APPROPRIATELY AND PUT THIS HERE AND MAKE THOSE CINDER BUCKETS THAT YOU CAN DOWN PART CHARCOAL IN AND IT'S DESIGNED FOR THAT. PERSONALLY I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM AT ALL BECAUSE I'M JUST GOING TO GO TO COMMISSIONER GAINES AS PAVILION AND USE HIS GRILL AS HE IS HIDING IT FROM CODE ENFORCEMENT BUT SERIOUSLY, I AGREE WITH THE SAFETY ISSUE. IT'S JUST A PROBLEM WAITING TO HAPPEN. BUT THE DESIGNATED AREAS ARE THERE AND IF WE HAVE WANTED JC PARK NOW THAN WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO INCORPORATE THE CAUSEWAY CODE I KNOW THAT THE BILLIONS ARE PACKED EVERY WEEKEND. THAT IS REALLY TRULY DESIRE TERRITORY AND THEY PUT THE STUFF THERE AN THEIR TENTS AND AWNINGS ARTIE THERE BUT THERE'S NOBODY THERE. SO I DO AGREE WITH THE

COMMISSIONER ON THIS. >> I THINK WE ARE GOOD EXCEPT I

THINK EVERYONE IS PROPANE? >> YES. THE ONLY WAY IS IF IT'S A DESIGNATED AREA. BUT I'M STIL NOT A FAN OF PROPANE QUITE

FRANKLY. >> SO THAT YOU ARE AWARE I ALREADY PLANNED ON HAVING TWO AMENDMENTS COME BEFORE THE CITY COMMISSION. THE ONES THAT ARE EASY WHICH WILL GET THEM QUICKL AND THEN WE CAN COME BACK WITH SOME MORE AFTER. BUT WHAT I'M HEARING IS TO LEAVE THEM AS IS WORK WITH MIKE AND WHOEVER TO GET THE DESIGNATED AREA BECAUSE THERE WILL HAVE TO BE RULES THA GO WITH THAT. SO THE AMENDMENT WILL COME AFTER THE FACT. AND THEN IN THE SECOND ROUND IT MAY COME BACK WITH SOME MORE CHANGE REGARDING THE DESIGNATED AREA. IS EVERYBODY GOOD? OKAY. SO THE NEXT ONE IS THE TENT. IN THE SHADE. AGAIN I WILL EXPLAIN THE REASON WHY THE PARKS COMMITTEE HAD THIS RECOMMENDATION. THE TENT ISSUE IS ANOTHER THING THA TAKES UP A LOT OF TIME. IT IS THE 10 BY 10 RULE THAT IS BEING ADDRESSED. THEY ALSO SALT 12 BY

[01:40:02]

>> THERE WAS PROBABLY A TIME WHERE IT WAS ONLY A 10 BY 10.

>> THIS WAS THE ISSUE WE WERE BRINGING. DO I HAVE TO BE OUT THERE MEASURING THE 12 BY 12 VERSUS A 10 BY 10? AND THAT WAS THE REASON WHY THIS WAS PRESENTED TO THE PARKS COMMITTE AND THIS IS WHAT THEY CAME UP WITH. IF YOU TAKE AWAY THE 10 B 10 REQUIREMENT BUT PUT REQUIREMENT SOMEWHERE CAN BE.

IT CANNOT BE LOCATED WITHIN 15 FEET OF SHORELINE SWIMMING AREA AND SOME OTHER ISSUES THAT ARE ALREADY IN THERE HAS TO BE FREESTANDING AND NOT ATTACHED T ANYTHING LIKE A TREE ASSIGN HER PERMANENT STRUCTURE. AND IN THE RECOMMENDATION THEY CAME UP WITH, WAS THAT ONE OR MORE UNIT CANNOT EXCEED WHAT IS ALLOWED B THE FLORIDA BUILDING CODE. SO I YOU GO TO THE SPECIAL EVENT SECTION AS WELL AS THOSE ALLOWE FOR THINGS LIKE THE FLOWER VENDORS AND STUFF LIKE THAT THERE'S 30 FOOT BUILDING CODE REQUIREMENT ONCE YOU REACH A CERTAIN NUMBER THAN YOU HAVE TO HAVE INSPECTION FROM THE FIRE DEPARTMENT ETC. THAT IS WHERE THE PARKS COMMITTEE CAME UP WIT THE 30 FOOT RULE. STAFF DOES NOT ACTUALLY HAVE OPINIONS ON THIS IT'S 10 BY 10 VERSUS 12 BY 1210 BY 15 THAT YOU GET IS TAKING UP SO MUCH OF OUR TIME AND IT JUST DOES NOT SEEM LIKE THE BEST USE OF OUR RESOURCES.

AND AGAIN PRESENTING THIS TO TH COMMISSION TO CHANGE OR NOT TO

CHANGE IS HERE. >> YOU HAVE TO HAVE A PERMIT FO

A TENT? >> KNOW. UNLESS YOU REACH 30 FOOT THERE ARE NO PERMITS REQUIRED. AND AGAIN IT SAYS APPARATUS OVER HERE LESS THAN 3 FEET IN SIZE MAY NOT BE JOINED TOGETHER TO EXCEED THIS. SO YOU CAN'T TAKE 510 BY TENS AND STIC NEXT TO EACH OTHER. I THINK I'L LET THE COMMISSION DISCUSS IT A

THIS POINT. >> COMMISSIONER BRODERICK?

>> I AGREE IT IS A WASTE OF STAFF TIME TO BE OUT THERE MEASURING TENTS. WERE REALLY DOING THAT? CRAZY.

>> META-MAYOR? THE OTHER QUESTION I HAVE, PART OF THE CODE WAS OBVIOUSLY IN THERE BEFORE AND CANNOT BE LOCATED WITHIN 15 FEET. SO I HAVE A SMALL UMBRELLA AND WATCHING MY KID SITTING BY THE SHORE AND GETTING MY FEET WET AND

VIOLATING THE CODE? NO. >> THAT WAS THE SUNSHADE APPARATUS IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT?

>> IT'S A TWO FOOT THAT IS A TEMPORARY SHOULD SUNSHADE APPARATUS. IT IS ALSO AN UMBRELLA.

>> WHY WAS THAT? >> I'M NOT SURE. THE ONE ON THE BOTTOM IS WHAT THE CODE READS RIGHT NOW. IT SAYS UP TO 10 FEET BUT IT ALSO HAS CANNOT BE WITHIN 15 FEET.

>> IT'S OBVIOUS THAT WERE NOT ENFORCING THIS. THEY WOULD CALL YOU CRAZY. SOMETIMES WE OVER REGULATE THINGS. CLEARLY.

>> I AM SHOCKED. >> EVEN IF I'M AT THE PLAYGROUN WATCHING MY KID GOOD ON THE SLIDE I'M GOING TO HOLD SOMETHING THAT COVERS MY HEAD. THAT SHOULD GO AWAY BUT I DO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE INTENT WAS. YOU'RE TRYING TO SAY DON'T SET UP YOUR 10 BY 10 IN THE PLAY YARD. DON'T SET IT UP IN THE WATER. COMMON SENSE GETS THROWN WANT TO CHALLENGE COMMON SENSE.

SOMETHING LIKE THAT. THEY DON'T CARE THAT'S WHAT IT IS.

>> THEN PERHAPS I NEED TO REDO THIS ONE AGAIN. THE APPARATUS I FREESTANDING DON'T ATTACH IT TO A TREE ASSIGN OR STRUCTURE. AND

[01:45:02]

TO JUST REWORK THAT. >> WE DON'T WANT A TENT IN THE WATER OR IN THE MIDDLE OF THE PLAYGROUND. THE PICKLE BALL PEOPLE WILL TAKE CARE OF YOU PRETTY QUICKLY.

>> REALLY QUICKLY I'M SURPRISED WITH HIS BACKGROUND THAT COMMISSIONER JOHNSON DIDN'T POINT THIS OUT. THEY HAVE A SPORTS FIELD. ALL OF THE PARENTS THAT ARE OUT THERE WATCHING THE FIREFOX OR THEY PLAY ALL THIS MONEY TO BE IN OU PARKS THEY WOULD BE RIGHT BEHIN HOME PLATE SO NOW ARE SAYING

THAT THEY CAN DO THIS? >> COMMISSIONER, I DON'T HONESTLY BELIEVE THAT WHEN WE WERE DISCUSSING THIS WERE MORE FOCUSED ON THE BEACH. BUT IT DOES NEED TO BE EXPANDED IT IS PARKS RULE SO IT DOES NEED TO INCLUDE ALL PARKS THAT HAVE

PLAYGROUNDS AND ALL OF THAT. >> THE ONLY REASON IT'S BEING BROUGHT OUT AT ALL, IS BECAUSE AM PART OF THE CIRCLE OF THESE TRAVEL BALL LEAGUES LIKE FOOTBALL AND SOFTBALL AND BASEBALL. AND SOMEONE LIKE COMMISSIONER JEREMIAH JOHNSON DOES UNDERSTAND HOW BIG BUSINES THIS IS AND I'M TRYING TO FOOT FORT PIERCE ON THE MAP TO SAY HOST YOUR TOURNAMENTS HERE. IF YOU GO BACK EVERY OTHER WEEKEND BY LONGWOOD STADIUM YOU CAN SEE HOW MANY TEAMS ARE HERE. I DON' WANT PEOPLE TO COME HERE AND THEN THEY GET HERE WITH THEIR LITTLE FIREHOUSE TENT AND THEN WE COME BACK AND SAY YOU KNOW TAKE THAT ONE AWAY. I'M NOT SAYING THAT WE WOULD AND PLEASE DON'T HAVE ANYONE GOING OUT WIT MEASURING STICKS THERE THAT IS SUCH A WASTE OF TIME. IT IS SOMETHING WE SHOULD EVEN BE CONSIDERING BUT THINK ABOUT THI BEFORE WE DO IT BECAUSE WE DO HAVE A LOT OF PARKS AND SPORTS FIELDS. THE CITY MANAGER KNOWS WITH THE FIREFOX AND WITH WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO BUILD WITHIN OUR SPORTS PROGRAMS YOU KNOW THAT YOU WERE THERE AT THE BASEBALL FIELD SO LET'S JUST

THINK ABOUT THIS. >> IT WOULD BE BETTER WORDED TO SAY CANNOT BE LOCATED SO IT IMPEDES THE USE OF THE BASEBALL

COURT? >> YES.

>> WE CAN DO SOME REWORDING ON THAT. DEPENDING ON THE SPORTING EVENT THEY WOULD SAY CLOSER OR FURTHER AWAY. DON'T IMPEDE IN THE USE OF THIS. WE CAN WORK ON THAT WORDING. DO YOU HAVE WHAT

YOU NEED ON THAT? >> YOU KNOW THAT I'M TELLING TH

TRUTH. >>> OKAY. NUMBER NINE WE DISCUSSED THIS AT THE PARKS COMMITTEE AND THEY DID AGREE THAT THEY RECEIVED THE SAME COMPLAINTS THAT I HAVE RECEIVED ABOUT PEOPLE DIGGING HOLES AND NOT FILLING THEM BACK IN AND MAKING IT A SAFETY HAZARD. THE RULE DOESN'T EVEN ALLOW YOU TO DIG IN THE BEACH WHICH I THINK IS NOT PRACTICAL. DON'T DISTURB THE NATURAL SURFACE IN ANY MATTER THAT'S THE ACTUAL RULE THING YOU CANNOT DIG A HOLE. AND WE DON'T WANT TO RULE ON TH BOOKS THAT WE WON'T BE ABLE TO ENFORCE A REASON NEED TO ELIMINATE IT IN ITS ENTIRETY OR EXCLUDE THE BEACHES AREA IN SOM WAY. IT DOES MAKE SENSE INSIDE OF A PARK BECAUSE YOU DON'T WAN SOMEONE DIGGING HOLES IN A PARK BUT AGAIN IT TAKING THAT VIEW A BIT WIDE AND SAYING THAT WE DON'T WANT SOMEONE DIGGING A HOLE IN THE MIDLE THE PARK FOR NO REASON. BUT WE DO HAVE TO MAKE THIS MORE PRACTICAL. AS FO FILLING HOLES AFTER THEY LEAVE, AGAIN THIS IS RESPONSE TO COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC THAT W RECEIVED SOME COMPLAINTS. HOW D YOU ENFORCE THAT? IT IS ON THE

[01:50:01]

>> CORRECT. I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH MY STAFF SAYING BEFORE YOU'RE DONE DON'T FORGET TO FIL THAT IN. BUT I DO BELIEVE EXCEP FOR THE SANDY AND BEACHY AREAS NEEDS TO BE INCLUDED SO THAT WE ARE EXCLUDING THAT FROM THE RULE. HOLES BEING DUG TO BE REFILLED IS JUST NOT ENFORCEABLE. WE WILL BE HERE I FIVE YEARS TALKING ABOUT IT AGAIN.

>> BELIEVE ME THE WAY PEOPLE US PARKS YOU HAVE TO DEPEND ON THE PEOPLE LIVE GOOD MANNERS AND GOOD SENSE AND THEN YOU HAVE TH

REST OF THEM. >> OKAY. NUMBER 13 YOU WILL SEE HERE HAS NO RED WRITTEN IN IT. SO WE BROUGHT IT TO THE PARKS COMMITTEE AND THEY BELIEVE IT O NOT CAME TO ME FIRST AND SAY CA WE PLEASE REEVALUATE YOUR DISCUSS RULE THAT PROHIBITS ANIMALS IN THE PARKS. DOESN'T NEED TO BE LOOSENED? THEY DISCUSSED IN LENGTH AND ULTIMATELY DECIDED TO LEAVE IT ALONE. DO NOT ALLOW ANIMALS EXCEPT FOR SERVICE ANIMALS INSIDE THE PARKS. DOES THE COMMISSION WANT TO SEE ANY CHANGES? DO YOU WANT TO SEE CHANGES TO THE RULES THAT PROHIBIT ANIMALS IN THE PARKS?

>> DOG OWNERS SAY MY DOG IS WEL BEHAVED I DON'T KNOW I CAN'T GO ON THE BEACH OR IN THE PARK AND NON-DOG OWNERS SAY THIS IS NOT GOOD SO WE HAVE TO DECIDE WHAT' BEST FOR THE CITY IN TERMS OF

LIABILITY AND MANAGEABILITY. >> I PREFER TO KEEP IT AS IT IS FROM A LIABILITY PERSPECTIVE AN NEEDS TO BE KEPT AWAY IT IS. IF THERE'S AN ISSUE THAT COMES BAC ON THE CITY WE DON'T HAVE SOMEONE THERE 24 SEVEN ENFORCIN A DOG RULE. THAT JUST DOESN'T HAPPEN. WE ALL KNOW IT'S VIOLATED BUT WERE NOT IN THE

SANCTION THAT. >> AND WHEN SOMEONE DOES EITHER CODE OR POLICE OFFICER SAY TO SOMEONE THAT DOGS ARE NOT ALLOWED IN THE PARK I DON'T KNO IF YOU DO BUT I GET AN EMAIL SELF-RIGHTEOUS INDIGNATION AND IT'S JUST NOT SOMETHING THAT WE CAN HAVE A WINNABLE SITUATION HERE. IF YOU ALLOW DOGS HERE AN FOR DIFFERENT PROBLEMS. DOES ANYONE ELSE WANT TO WEIGH IN ON

THIS? >> MY ONLY THOUGHT WITH THIS AT ALL FROM A PUBLIC PERSPECTIVE I SOMEHOW WE NEED TO REMIND PEOPL TO ATTEND AFTER THEIR DOGS. YOUR USE LETTING THEM USE THE RESTROOM IN A PUBLIC PLACE AND DON'T THINK THERE'S ENOUGH SIGNAGE TO REMIND PEOPLE TO PIC UP AFTER THEIR ANIMALS. I KNOW IN THE PUBLIC PARKS I THINK WE DO NEED TO BEGIN TO THINK ABOUT THIS BECAUSE THERE ARE PEOPLE THAT WANT TO COME AND WALK OR PLAY IN THE GRASS AND THEY STEP IN SOMETHING ON THAT LEVEL.

>> OF ANIMALS ARE NOT ALLOWED I THE PARK THEN WE SHOULDN'T PROVIDE FOR ANY KIND OF EQUIPMENT TO PROVIDE ANIMALS IN THE PARK. IF YOU DO THAT THAN WAY SAY WHY DO YOU HAVE THE DOGGIE PICKUP STATION A FROM NO BRINGING MY DOG?

>> BUT WERE SAYING WE'RE GOING TO LEAVE THIS WE DO ALLOW IT?

>> NO SIR. THEY ARE PROHIBITED RIGHT NOW.

>> OKAY. I'M GOOD THEN. THAT CHANGED 14 IS VERY SIMILAR BECAUSE THE WAY IT IS WRITTEN T ALLOW PRIVATELY OWNED ANIMALS I ALMOST IMPLIES THAT THEY ARE ALLOWED. SO WERE JUST CHANGING THAT WORD TO CONTINUE THE RULE OF 13 WHICH SAYS IF IT IS A SERVICE ANIMAL MAKE SURE YOU PICK UP AFTER. OKAY. IS EVERYONE GOOD WITH THAT? OKAY NOW ARE GOING TO GET INTO THE FEW ONES THAT STAFF RECOMMENDED TO THE PARKS COMMITTEE TO CONSIDER AND THOSE REVISIONS. NUMBER 26 THE SECTION THAT IS CROSSED OUT I WANT TO START WIT THAT ENGAGING IN THE RENTAL DEMONSTRATION WAS MOVED TO ITS OWN SECTION SOME TIME AGO BUT WAS NEVER DELETED FROM THE SECTIONS WHICH IS TAKING THIS AND FILLING IT IN WITH A RULE T JUMP FROM OR SWIM WITHIN 25 FEE

[01:55:02]

SWIMMING IN THE AREA WERE BOTH ARE IS JUST BAD. IT JUST SHOULDN'T HAPPEN. BUT WE HAVE NO RULE. WE HAVE SIGNAGE BUT NO RULES TO ENFORCE. SO THIS PROVIDES A MECHANISM TO ADDRESS

THIS. >> SO IF I'M JUMPING OFF A DOCK

WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO? >> FOR SOMEONE TO FIND YOUR PARENTS BECAUSE IT'S USUALLY THE CHILDREN. AND WILL GIVE THE A WRITTEN WARNING AND IF YOU DON'T DO IT THEN WE HAVE A CITATION. THEY WERE GETTING AIRLIFTED TO ST. MARY'S.

>> YOU CAN'T REALLY ENFORCE THIS. YOU'RE JUST GOING TO END UP WITH FRIENDLY WORDS AND WHEN TO LAUGH AT YOU AND WALK AWAY.

YOU'RE DEALING WITH LIABILITY THE SIGN UP SAYING IT'S

PROHIBITED? >> CORRECT. IF THE SIGN IS OFTE UNPROTECTED LIABILITY WEIGHT RISE YOU'VE TOLD HIM NOT TO DO

IT. >> I WAS JUST MAKING SURE THAT' QUITE THE CHALLENGE. I'M TELLING YOU THAT YOU'RE NOT CAN YOU GET IT OUT OF ME. BUT EVEN THOUGH THEY DON'T HAVE THE ENFORCEMENT RULE EITHER. WHAT ARE WE TRYING TO ENFORCE THAT

THE AMBULANCE MIGHT COME? >> THAT YOU'RE NOT THE BRIGHTES

GUY AROUND. >> WHEN YOU SAY YOU HAVE ASSIGNED NOTHING TO BACK IT UP. LET ME ASK YOU DOES THAT COVER US WITH LIABILITY? THAT ATTORNEY?

>> THERE'S A SIGN WITHOUT AN ORDINANCE TO BACK IT UP DOES THAT COVER US WITH LIABILITY WITH HAVING A SINUSES DO NOT

JUMP OR SWIM WITHIN 25 FEET? >> IT MAY COVER US BUT IT WILL DEPEND ON THE CIRCUMSTANCES THA OCCURRED. I DON'T THINK THE ORDINANCE WILL MAKE A DIFFERENCE. IF THERE IS SOMETHING THAT PROHIBITS DUMPIN STANDING OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT IT WILL HELP US SAYING YOU TOOK ON THE RISK OF YOURSELF. BUT A THE END OF THE DAY WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT LIABILITY YOU'RE STILL GOING TO GET INTO WHETHER NOT WE CREATED A RISK OR THEY

CREATED THE RISK. >> SO AT A PUBLIC PARK THINGS HAPPEN. KIDS ARE GONNA RUN FALL AND CRACKED HER HEAD. IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO SUE US THEY'R GOING TO DO IT. SO I DON'T THIN WE SHOULD BE WORRIED ABOUT IT. MEAN ARE WE GOING TO LEGISLATE STUPIDITY NOW? WE COULD SIT HER ALL DAY LONG AND SAY YOU CAN'T BE WITHIN SIX FEET OF A PARKING STALL BUT IF THEY'RE GOING TO B STUPID AND THEY'RE GOING TO BE STUPID. WE CAN'T LEGISLATE EVERYTHING UNDER THE SUN. I LIK THE IDEA OF THE SIGNAGE BECAUSE AT LEAST YOU SHOULDN'T BE DOING THIS. BUT TO TRY TO BACK ALL TH SEPARATE LANGUAGE IN THE ORDINANCE THAT THEY ARE THAN TRYING TO ENFORCE IT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT IS ENFORCEABLE.

LIKE MEASURING A 12 BY 12 TENT.

>> OKAY. SO WERE SAYING TO TAKE THIS ONE OUT? ARE YOU OKAY WITH THIS COMMISSIONER GAINES? OKAY. THE NEXT RECOMMENDATION COMES AS RESULT OF THE STATE STATUTE BEING CHANGED THAT ALLOWS FIREWORKS ON FOURTH OF JULY, NE YEAR'S EVE AND NEW YEAR'S DAY.

WE HAVE INDIVIDUALS COMING IN T THE PARK TO SET OFF FIREWORKS.

>> WE HAVE FIREWORKS ALL OVER THE ISLAND NOW.

>> BUT AGAIN WE HAVE NO RULE THAT SAYS THAT YOU CANNOT HAVE THEM IN THE PARKS IN THE STATUT SAYS THEY CAN SET THEM OFF. SO WE RECOMMENDED PUTTING IN THIS ORDINANCE TO SAY YOU CAN SET THEM OFF AT YOUR HOUSE BUT NOT IN OUR PARK.

>> I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH THAT

>> OKAY. AND THE NEXT ONE AGAIN CAME FROM COMPLAINTS SPECIFICALLY AT JC PARK. THERE IS A LIMITED SWIM AREA THAT HAV

[02:00:03]

FLOTATION DEVICE THE FLOAT. >> IT SAID LARGER THAN THE SIZE FOR A SINGLE USER. I DISAGREE. WE ALREADY DID THIS REMARRY A THING I HAVE HEARTBURN WITH THA STILL TODAY AND I DON'T LIKE THIS. I LIKE THIS ONE AREA I WANT TO BE CLEAR ABOUT THAT BUT I JUST THINK THAT THIS IS OVERREACHING. INSTEAD OF MEASURING TENTS FOR GOOD MEASUR FLOTATION DEVICES? ONCE AGAIN THE BURDEN HAS SHIFTED TO SOMEONE TRYING TO ENFORCE THIS AND IT JUST NEEDS TO BE GOTTEN RID OF. IT'S NOT ENFORCEABLE.

>> OKAY. MY STAFF KEEPS ASKING ME ABOUT WATERCRAFT. OKAY. IT TRULY DID COME FROM THE USERS O GC PARK.

>> OKAY. MOVING ON THE NEXT ONE IS SIGNAGE THAT WE HAVE ALREADY IN PLACE WITH NO RULE TO ENFORC IT. AT JC PARK THERE IS A KAYAK LAUNCH AREA BETWEEN THE BOAT DOCKS IN THE SAILBOAT AREA WHIC IS ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE SWI AREA TO MARINER BAY. THE SIGN SAYS NO DOCKING OR PARKING OF JET SKIS OR WAVE RUNNERS TO LEAVE THE AREA FOR NONMOTORIZED WATERCRAFT. THIS IS THE RULE THAT WOULD ALLOW US TO ENFORCE THAT SIGNAGE BECAUSE IN THAT KAYAK LAUNCH AREA THE JET SKIS JUST COME IN. WE WILL HAVE 20 O THEM PARKED THERE AND IT STOPS THE ACCESS FOR THE KAYAKS. THE SIGNAGE WAS PLACED WHEN NO RUL THERE TO ENFORCE IT.

>> OKAY. I WAS YOUNG MAN DOING SOMETHING AT JC PARK WHEN THE SIGNS WERE PUT UP FOR KAYAK LAUNCH. BUT THEN IT MORPHED INT A SWIM AREA AND A SAILBOAT LUNC AND NOW THERE'S NOTHING LEFT FO INDIVIDUALS THAT WANT TO PULL U A BOAT OR JETSKI OR OTHERWISE.

SO I HAVE LOTS OF DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THIS. A LOT OF HISTORY WITH THIS. I CHALLENGE THE PEOPLE THE INDIVIDUALS AND I'VE DONE THIS PERSONALLY WHERE THE SAY THEY CANNOT LAUNCH THEIR KAYAK. A JETSKI WRITER WAS ABLE TO GO THROUGH AND WALK UP TO TH BEACH THERE STILL A MECHANISM T COME FORWARD INTO THE WATER.

MORE IMPORTANTLY THE SPACE IS BEING ELIMINATED. WITH THE OTHE USERS OF GC PARK. I'M LIVING IN THE PAST I'VE BEEN ACCUSED OF THAT. BUT THIS IS WHAT IT IS TODAY. ANCHOR YOUR BOAT AND SWI IN. I APPRECIATE THAT AND THANK YOU FOR THINKING ABOUT THAT PROCESS. I DO UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU ARE ASKING FOR BUT I THINK IT IS A CHALLENGE BECAUSE IT'S PROBABLY 50 TO 1 JETSKI VERSUS MOTORIZED CRAFT TO KAYAK OR CANOE. SO THERE IS ALSO A CHALLENGE. MANY FOLKS AND MANY USES. I JUST FEEL LIKE WE ARE ELIMINATING A SEGMENT OF THE POPULATION BY CREATING PROHIBITIONS ACROSS THE BEACH. AND I DO NOT KNOW HOW WE SOLVE

THAT. >> IS IT CONSIDERED DANGEROUS? OR ARE WE TALKING ABOUT CONVENIENCE?

>> MADAM MAYOR, I AM NOT REALLY SURE. I DON'T KNOW THE HISTORY BEHIND THE KAYAK LAUNCH AREA BU I KNOW THAT WE HAVE STRUGGLED

[02:05:04]

THERE ARE SAFETY ISSUES HERE. >> I THINK ALSO JET SKIS MAKE NOISE AND SOMETIMES DISTURBED MARINER BAY AND THOSE THAT LIVE ON THE OTHER SIDE. AND KAYAKS DON'T MAKE NOISE SO MAYBE THAT WOULD BE ONE WAY OF THIS LEVEL. WE DO HAVE THE NO WAKE ZONE.

>> BUT HE'S TALKING ABOUT COMIN UP ON THE BEACH.

>> IT'S COMING BETWEEN THE BOAT AREA AND THE RAMP. THAT IS THE ISSUE. I HAVE NO HISTORY ON HO OR WHY THIS WAS DEVELOPED. BUT KNOW THAT THERE IS A SIGN THAT WE CANNOT ENFORCE. SO RULE OR NO RULE I WOULD GO EITHER WAY. BUT THIS IS SOMETHING WE NEED T HAVE AS ONE OF THOSE ENFORCEABL ISSUES. IT IS VERY SIMILAR I

CAN'T WIN HERE. >> STORY OF YOUR LIFE.

>> I AM WITH COMMISSIONER JOHNSON ON THIS. FOR ALL OF THE KAYAKERS OUT THERE DON'T GET MA AT ME FOR THIS. I AM NOT A KAYAKER. YOU PICK YOUR KAYAK UP YOU WALK TO THE WATER YOU GET I YOUR KAYAK ANY PUDDLE OFF. IS THAT NOT HOW YOU LAUNCH A KAYAK IT'S THE SAME PATH THAT COMMISSIONER JOHNSON JUST SAID.

IF IT IS A JETSKI PARK HERE AND THAT PERSON GETS OFF THE JETSKI WALKS UP TO THE BEACH CAN'T YOU TAKE YOUR KAYAK THE SAME BATH? OR ARE WE TALKING ABOUT AS I AM PUTTING MY KAYAK IN ORDER THE JETSKI IS COMING UP? OR ARE WE TALKING ABOUT A PARKED JETSKI I THE WAY I MEAN THAT'S WHEN TRYING TO FIGURE OUT. IF IS A PARKED JETSKI ARE THEY SAYING THEY DON'T WANT THOSE THERE BECAUSE THEY WANT TO BE ABLE TO ZIGZAG ON THE BEACH GET THE WATER? I MEAN I'M SO CONFUSED. BECAUSE THOSE ARE BIG ISSUES

HERE. >> WE HAVE RECEIVED BOTH COMPLAINTS. WE'VE ALSO GOTTEN COMPLAINTS THAT AS THEY ARE GOING THE JET SKIS ARE COMING THROUGH AND PASSING EACH OTHER.

MOTORIZED CRAFT. >> BOATS OR JET SKIS THAT IS TH RULE. WE HAVE NOT EXPERIENCED A MOTORIZED BOAT COMING ONTO THE BEACH. THEY ALWAYS USE THE DOCKS. JET SKIS HAVE HISTORICALLY BEEN A PROBLEM IN THIS PARK AND THEY'VE BEEN ADDRESSED AND REDUCED GREATLY WITH THE HELP OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT. WE ARE TALKING ABOU A LITTLE SQUARE OF AREA BETWEEN THE BEACH THE SWIM AREA AND THE

BOAT DOCK. >> SO WHAT COMMISSIONER JOHNSON SAYS THERE'S NO PLACE FOR BOATS TO COME IN OR JETSKI?

>> JUST THE DOCK. >> COMMISSIONER IF I COULD, I'V HEARD BOTH COMPLAINTS NOW THAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. THE UNDERLYING THEME IS SPECIFIC TO THE FACT THAT THERE JET SEES PARKED ON THE BEACH I'M PULLING UP TAKING MY KAYAK OFF THE VEHICLE WALKING BACK AND NOW I WANT TO LAUNCH MY KAYAK. WITH THERE FIVE OR 10 OR WHATEVER IT IS VESSELS ON THE BEACH. HERE IS MY ARGUMENT AND I AM BEING TRUTHFUL ABOUT IT IT WAS A REA CONVERSATION WITH THOSE THAT AR INTERESTED IN THE CANOE AND KAYAK WORLD. THIS SHOULD BE RESERVED FOR OUR VESSELS. AND THAT'S WHERE I HAD THE ISSUE. I DON'T BELIEVE THAT ANYONE GROUP SHOULD BE EXCLUSIVE OR HAVE EXCLUSIVE RIGHTS BECAUSE IF I MINUTE KAYAK I COULD STILL USE THE BOAT DOCK. NOBODY SAYS I

[02:10:02]

CHALLENGE. >> THANK YOU FOR THAT.

>> WHAT COMMISSIONER JOHNSON ESSAY MAKES PERFECT SENSE. WERE NOT GONNA START CARVING UP 10 FEET OF ACCESS HERE AND 10 FEET OF ACCESS THERE. CAN'T THEY JUS COOPERATE? AND IF THEY CATS, SO BE IT. WE CAN'T REGULATE WHO IS 10 FEET OF THE SHORELINE. I'M JUST GONNA LEAVE IT AT THAT. IT'S FRUSTRATING. THEY COME TO THE CITY COMMISSION TO REGULATE WHO CAN HAVE 10 FEET OF FRONTAG TO LAUNCH INTO THE WATER AND THAT JUST MAKES NO SENSE TO ME WHATSOEVER. USE YOUR COMMON SENSE. THERE IS NO REGULATION O WHO CAN USE WHAT. AND I GUESS EVERYONE FEELS AS IF THEY HAVE THE HIGH GROUND BECAUSE THEY AR ON JET SKIS OR PURISTS ON

CANOES. GIVE ME A BREAK. >> ONCE AGAIN JC PARK IS USED

FOR SO MANY THINGS. >> WITH A LITTLE HISTORY I COUL SAY THE KAYAK AND CANOE LAUNCH AREA WAS CREATED BECAUSE THE BOAT RAMPS WERE CREATED AND THERE WAS A MOVEMENT. I WAS YOUNG AND I REMEMBER SAYING THA WAS COOL. BUT JC PARK DO NOT HAVE THE ALL-ENCOMPASSING SWIM AREA. THEY DID NOT HAVE THE SAILBOAT AGREEMENT IN THE CENTE THAT IS THERE NOW. IT IS DYNAMI AND I HAD A PADDLEBOARD I LAUNCHED AT THAT LOCATION. SO I

DO GET IT. >> DID YOU GET A CITATION?

>> OKAY LET'S COME TO GRIPS WIT WHAT WE WANT IN THE SECTION OR DON'T WANT. ARE WE SCRAPPING I OR WHAT?

>> FOR THE CONSENSUS THAT I AM HEARING WE WANT TO SCRAP IT WHICH MEANS THAT THE SIGNAGE TO COME DOWN. IF YOU'RE GOING TO LUNCH KAYAKS AGAIN THAT'S WHAT IT SAYS. AND THE SAME GOES FORWARD WITH THE SAILBOAT LUNCH AREA IT WAS A COOPERATIVE AND COMMON SENSE USAGE TO BE COURTEOUS AND SAFE. YOU LET TH WATER CRAFT USERS REGULATE THEMSELVES. WE DO HAVE A LOT OF ISSUES THAT WE ARE DEALING WITH AND I AM ALL FOR IT. THEY CAN JUST CHANGE THE SIGN TO SAY THE KAYAK LAUNCH?

>> DO YOU HAVE A PICTURE OF THE SIGN? I SHOULD'VE BROUGHT THAT.

I APOLOGIZE. >> MAYBE IS ON GOOGLE MAPS?

>> I MIGHT ACTUALLY HAVE IT THOUGH. WE HAD TO LET THE PUBLIC WORK TOGETHER ON THE KAYAKERS PLEASE WORK WITH THE

JETSKI YEARS. >> I MEAN IT JUST ENJOY THE

[02:15:10]

WATER. >> WE DON'T NEED TO KNOW WHAT THE SIGN ACTUALLY SAYS. JUST DEAL WITH IT. THAT SOUNDS GOOD TO ME. OKAY. NOW LET'S ACTUALL GET INTO THE TOPIC THAT THE COMMISSIONER ACTUALLY ASKED FOR WHICH WAS ADDRESSING THE PARKING. THE FIRST THING IS TO TAKE THIS OUT WITHIN THE PARKS.

THIS WAS THE FIRST PART. IT WOULD COME BACK WITH A RESOLUTION WITH THE LIST OF THE PARK AND THE PARKING HOURS. BUT THEN HE HAS SOMETHING WE RUN INTO WHICH IS CODE ENFORCEMENT.

YOU HAVE THE TRAVEL VANS THAT ARE VERY POPULAR RIGHT NOW. YOU HAVE A PERSONAL VEHICLE AND AN RV. SAYS YOU CAN HAVE THEM AS LONG AS THEY ARE NOT IN EXCESS OF THOSE FEET. ANYTHING LARGER THAN THAT IS PROHIBITED. THERE IS SIGNAGE NOW THAT SAYS NO TRAILERS. THERE IS NO RULE OF COURSE WE HAVE TO RULE TO ENFORCE THAT SIGN. IT'S NOT A TRAILER BUT IT'S AN RV. OKAY WE GET ALL OF THOSE DIFFERENT LEVELS. WHAT THE RECOMMENDATIO IS TO ALLOW THE CAMPER VANS THA CAN FIT INTO REGULAR SPACE TO B THERE AND THEN TRAVEL TRAILERS OR SEMI TRAILERS OR OTHER VEHICLES IN EXCESS OF 19 FEET WITH THE EXCEPTION OF BUSES AND TRAILERS DESIGNED TO CARRY BOAT OR WATERCRAFT PARKED IN SPACES THAT IS NEEDED FOR THE USE THAT ARE PROHIBITED. WE HAVE A LOT O CAMPS THAT COME TO THE PARKS IN THE SUMMER. OBVIOUSLY BOAT TRAILERS ARE HERE WITHIN THAT PARKING. ANOTHER MAJOR ISSUE THAT WE DEAL WITH PRETTY ROUTINELY. THAT'S RIGHT BEFORE

YOU BEFORE THIS DISCUSSION. >> JUST BE CAREFUL ON CLASSIFYING THE CAMPER VANS. THEY HAVE RVS LARGER THAN 19 FOOT MAYBE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT BECAUSE THERE ARE CLASSES AB AND C THAT WOULD FIT WITHIN THAT CATEGORY I BELIEVE. CLASS

PROBABLY NOT. >> IS EVERYBODY GOOD? OKAY. HO

MANY MORE OF THESE DO YOU HAVE? >> THIS IS THE LAST ONE. I'M NOT QUITE SURE HOW OR WHY THIS CAME ABOUT BUT THERE'S AN ENTIR SECTION IN SURFSIDE PARK WITH N SURF FISHING OR BOATS PERMITTED WITHIN 100 YARDS OF SHORE OR VEHICLES ON THE BEACH. NO PICNICKING ON THE BEACH. OUR JURISDICTION EXPENDS TO THE DUN LINE SO WE ARE HERE I'M NOT EVE SURE HOW THIS CAME ABOUT TO START. BUT WE DON'T GO INTO THE BEACH AND WE ARE DEFINITELY NOT GOING TO ADDRESS BOATS THERE 50 FEET PARKED FROM THE BEACH.

>> I'M OKAY WITH DELETING THAT ENTIRE SECTION.

>> PLEASE ACCEPT MY APOLOGY WHE I SAY THIS, BUT THERE'S PROBABL A REASON THIS WAS DONE. I FEEL LIKE MAYBE WE SHOULD RESEARCH THE INTENT OF THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THIS ORDINANCE. AND THEN MAK DETERMINATION FOR THE REMOVAL O DELETION OF IT. THAT IS MY

RECOMMENDATION. >> THERE IS NO HARM IN THAT IN

FINDING OUT. >> NOBODY WAS REALLY ABLE TO FIGURE THAT OUT. ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING THAT IT HAS THE PROPERTY LINE REVIEW THAT IT ENDS AT THE HIGH WATERMARK. SO HOW THE RULES ABOUT USING THE BEACH BEYOND THAT WE ARE NOT SURE HOW THAT EVERYTHING CAME ABOUT. SO WE DID LOOK AT THE PROPERTY LINE AND IT SHOWS THAT WE END HERE. SO HOW ARE WE DOIN COMPETITIVE SWIMMING OR BOATING EVENTS WITHOUT SCHEDULING WITH

THE CITY MANAGER? >> SO WAS THE CODE 1983 IS THAT

WHAT THIS MEANS? >> IT WAS 2012. IT ORIGINALLY

[02:20:08]

LOOK THAT UP. >> LET'S JUST LOOK AT IT. WE DON'T HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO ENFORCE RULES ON THE OCEANSIDE BEACH. IT'S COUNTY JURISDICTION THE LAST PROPOSAL WE HAD THE LAST COMMISSION MEETING SHORE PROPERTY LINE WAS NOT THE TOP O THE DUNE. AND YOU JUST SAID THE HIGH WATERMARK. I'M NOT SURE WHEN THEY DID THE SURVEY WENT ALL THE WAY TO THE WATER THERE COULD BE SOMETHING HERE FROM 1983 WHICH IS WHAT YOU'RE REFERENCING THAT SAYS THE CITY OWNS UP TO THE WATER MAYBE AND WE DON'T KNOW THAT. NOT FOR SURE.

>> THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THA PARK SAYS THE HIGH WATERMARK.

THAT IS DIFFERENT THAN THE DUNE LINE. JUST LIKE JETTY PARK ACTUALLY SAYS THE LOW TIDE WATERMARK. WE DID DO SOME RESEARCH. WHERE THIS ONE SAYS THE HIGH TIDE WATERMARK WHICH I ALWAYS BEEN ROUGHLY SAID THE DUNE LINE. SO THAT WAS THE FIRST ROUND. WE ADDED THE WORD DESIGNEE AND THERE WAS ADDITIONAL CONVERSATIONS THAT W HAD TO HAVE WITH THE CITY MANAGER ABOUT SOME OF THESE THINGS. THAT WAS THE BIG TUNES ON THIS ONE WITH SOME LEVELS HERE.

>> YOU SAID THIS IS THE FIRST ROUNDS WERE GOING TO GET ALL

THIS AGAIN? >> WITH THE THINGS THEY RECEIVE THE FULL CONSENSUS ON THE WALL, AS THE AMENDMENT FOR YOU.

ANYTHING THAT REQUIRES ADDITIONAL WORK AND RESEARCH WE WILL COME BACK FOR ROUND TWO. THEY COME THROUGH WITH MORE IN THE SECOND HALF. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> THAT WAS A LOT OF HARD WORK.

[e. Art in Public Places Fund]

>>> OKAY. THE NEXT ITEM IS THE ART IN PUBLIC PLACES FUND.

>> THE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE IS NOT PRESENT HOWEVER I WANT TO JUST GIVE THE INTRODUCTION TO THIS ITEM THAT WAS REQUESTED BY MEMBER THE CITY COMMISSION. I WANT TO HIGHLIGHT WHAT WAS PROVIDED TO ALL OF YOU PREVIOUSLY. AND IN THAT WAS THE SIMPLE EMAIL FOR ME TO YOU DESCRIBING THE ATTACHED SPREADSHEET WITH THAT PUBLIC PLACES AND FUND. THEY'RE REQUIRED TO CONTRIBUTE 1% OF CITY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUNDING. PREVIOUS TO THAT THE FUNDING WAS EXPENDED IN THE LAST LARGE PROJECT WAS THE VETERANS PARK IMPROVEMENT DURIN WHICH WE DID A BEAUTIFICATION THE ARCH AND THE OTHER AESTHETI ELEMENTS OF VETERANS PARK. SO W HAD ROUGHLY $200,000 IN THAT

[02:25:07]

INSTALLING ART IN PUBLIC PLACES SO THAT IS REALLY WHERE I FIND THIS. AND I AM NO EXPERT IN AN OF THIS BUT I'M SUGGESTING THAT WE SHOULD LEAN ON FOLKS THAT ACTUALLY HAVE SKILL SETS IN THI AREA TO MAKE SOME RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE

COMMISSION. >> IT SEEMS LIKE THE MAJORITY O

THE PROJECTS ARE NOT ART. >> THEY ARE PAID INTO THE FUND FOR THAT PURPOSE. IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT THE BASIS OF THAT PROJECT IS ITS DESIGNATED FUNDS IN COMMON AREAS. IT IS DESIGNE TO DRAW FROM A LARGE FUNNEL OF PROJECTS AND SAY WE CAN CARVE OUT THIS 1% AND DEDICATED SPECIFICALLY FOR THIS USE. IT I RELEVANT TO WHAT THIS FUND IS USED FOR. THEY HAD THIS AT THE MELANIE LANE IS THAT STILL AROUND? IS THAT RP STILL THERE SO THERE WAS A LOT OF ART IT' ALL IN THE EYES OF THE BEHOLDER I JUST THINK IT IS A GREAT OPPORTUNITY TO GET THAT KIND OF DIALOGUE GOING. IT'S A GOOD WA TO MOVE THIS FORWARD SO LET'S DEPLOY IT. IF THEY ARE GOING T BE THERE RECOMMENDING THAT AGENCY THEY WILL RECOMMEND THIS TO BE MOVE FORWARD. THANK YOU.

[02:30:01]

RECOMMENDATIONS IN. >> IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE IN THA ARTIST DISTRICT. AS A THE OTHE THING MET AMIR THAT I WANT TO INTERJECT IS I WAS APPROACHED B MEMBER OF THE COMMITTEE INTO ME THERE IS A QUORUM SO THIS DROP WITH THIS AND WITH A SENSE OF PURPOSE. AND THEY WANT TO BE ENGAGED.

>> MAYBE THEY WANT TO MEET SHOR JOINTLY WITH THE KEEP THE AREA BEAUTIFUL BOARD BECAUSE MAYBE BETWEEN THE TWO OF THEM THEY MIGHT HAVE THIS. THERE IS THE FORT PIERCE AREA LET'S MAKE SURE THEY HAVE ACCESS TO CREATING SOMETHING FOR THIS HOMETOWN. THERE IS A HOMETOWN THING HERE THAT WE WILL HAVE TO SHOWCASE THIS TALENT. THE THIR FRIDAY OF EVERY MONTH IS HERE.

[f. Discussion of the City of Fort Pierce Code of Ordinances Charter Article XII - Fort Pierce Utilities Authority ]

>>> THE NEXT ITEM IS DISCUSSION OF THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE CODE CHARTER. THIS ITEM AGAIN WAS ALSO BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION AN REQUEST THAT IT BE PLACED ON TH AGENDA BY THE MINUTE MEMBERS OF THE CITY COMMISSION. THIS WAS IN THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE CHARTER. I REQUEST THIS AGENDA ITEM AND I'VE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK ABOUT THIS SPECIFIC ISSUE WHEN WE WERE STUCK IN THE CAR FOR TWO AND HALF HOURS DRIVING TO ORLANDO.

THE FORT PIERCE CHARTER IS SPECIFIC. IT IS CLEAR AS MUD.

HISTORICALLY THERE'VE BEEN JOIN MEETINGS WITH THE BOARD THERE MINUTES WHERE THERE WAS MORE DISAGREEMENTS THAN AGREEMENTS.

FROM 2011 2012 I THINK THE FILE WERE ABOUT THIS THICK. HAVING SAID ALL THAT THE MAJORITY OF THE FOLKS ON THIS COMMISSION UNLESS STAFF AS WELL AS OUR CIT ATTORNEYS AND VARIOUS HOUSE COUNSEL NONE OF THEM WERE PRESENT WHEN THIS DISCUSSION WA TAKING PLACE. NOW THERE'S 6% O REVENUE AS DEFINED BY THE CITY CHARTER. WITH THE $58 MILLION ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET. THEY

[02:35:09]

AND IN THE CITY PERCENTAGES BASED ON THAT VERSUS THE 151.

YOU LOOK AT THE CITY CHARTER WA WHAT NUMBERS ARE DEDUCTED WITH SECTION C AND D AND SUBSECTION 1. AND THAT'S WHERE IT GIVES YO THIS DEFINITION. AND I MAY NOT BE THE BRIGHTEST GUY IN THE ROO BUT THE LANGUAGE IS CHALLENGING MY THOUGHT PROCESS DISCUSSED WITH THE DIRECTOR WAS THAT WE ARE ALL KIND OF NEW TO THE SCENARIO. WHEN WE GET THERE IN HOUSE COUNSEL TO GET WITH OUR ATTORNEY AND SEE WHAT IS THE LANGUAGE IN THE DISTRIBUTION LEVEL AGREES WITH THE LANGUAGE IN OUR CITY CHARTER. BASED ON THE GROSS REVENUE AND THEN THE DEDUCTIONS OFFER THAT REVENUE NUMBER FOR FULL DEDUCTIONS IS CLEARLY DELINEATED IN THE CITY CHARTER AS SOMETHING REMOVED FROM THAT ANALYSIS. AND THAT IS APPROXIMATELY THE $8 MILLION DEDUCTION. BUT THEN THERE IS A VARIETY OF OTHER LINE ITEMS IN THEIR CORRESPONDENCE THAT I AM CHALLENGED WITH FIGURING OUT WITH SOME OF THEM EVEN ARE BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY, IS THAT REFLECTED WITHIN THE CITY'S CHARTER? AT THE END OF THE DAY IS SET I'M NOT QUESTIONING THE VALIDITY. BUT WHAT I'M QUESTIONING IS WHEN A RESIDENT OF THE CITY COMES TO ME AND SAY THIS IS OBVIOUSLY A LARGE PORTION OF THE OPERATING BUDGET OF THE CITY. ARE YOU COMFORTABL WITH THE LANGUAGE AND DISTRIBUTION? AND HAS THAT BEEN CHECKED BY SOMEONE? AND I DO NO WANT THE ANSWER I DO NOT KNOW.

THAT'S NOT WHERE I WANT TO BE. SO IN THIS PARTICULAR CIRCUMSTANCE WE HAVE A CHANGING OF THE GUARD. WHY NOT TAKE A LOOK AT THIS AND DIRECTOR CISNEROS AGREED WITH ME AND SAI YES LET'S MAKE SURE WE ARE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE AND IN FULL AGREEMENT. AND THEN WE COULD COME TO A SECONDARY PHASE OF THAT DISCUSSION MOVING FORWARD. IF THE CITY ATTORNEY AND THE IN-HOUSE COUNSEL SAY THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT WE ARE SUPPOSED TO BE REFERENCING THE CITY CHARTER THEN GREAT. EVERYONE WALKS AWAY AND SAYS WE CHECKED IT AND IT I CONFIRMED. IF THERE IS A DIFFERENCE OF OPINION THEN CAN THAT BE RESOLVED? WORKING JOINTLY AND COOPERATIVELY TO BRING THIS TO A FULL ON CONCLUSION THAT WE WOULD ALL BE COMFORTABLE WITH. THEY WANT TO BE SURE THAT THEY'RE PAYING THE CORRECT AMOUNT AND THAT WE ARE BEING PAID THE CORRECT AMOUNT. WE WANT TO BE SURE THAT THAT INDICATES SPECIFICALLY WITH TH CITY CHARTER SAYS. AND IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE CITY CHARTER IS THE ONLY CONTROLLING DOCUMENT WITH RESOLUTIONS OR AGREEMENTS THAT ARE SECONDARY T WHAT THE CITY CHARTER STATES. I MY DISCUSSIONS WITH DIRECTOR CISNEROS HE SAID THAT'S A PRETT GOOD IDEA. WHY DO WE GET OUR TEAMS TOGETHER AND SEE IF WE CA HAVE A MEETING OF THE MINDS ON THIS AND LEAVE THE LAYPEOPLE OUT OF IT. AT LEAST FOR THE TIM BEING AND LET THE PROFESSIONALS DEAL WITH IT. THERE WAS A COMMENT MADE THAT IT WAS ALL REVIEWED BY AUDITORS. AND I DO GET THAT. WE USE THE SAME AUDITING FIRM. BUT THE JOB OF

[02:40:01]

>> I THINK THE STATE LEGISLATUR WOULD BE INTERESTED IN THIS INDIRECTLY BECAUSE OF THE BILLS THEY INTRODUCED WITHIN THE LAST SESSION THAT DID CHALLENGE THOS TRANSFERS. BEING ABLE TO JUSTIF THAT IT IS CORRECT AND NON-EXCESSIVE. THAT IT IS LEGITIMATE AND MAKES SENSE I BELIEVE IS A GOOD EXERCISE FOR ALL OF US. AND I THINK BECAUSE THE LEGISLATURE IS GOING TO GO BACK TO THIS AGAIN, THE LAST TIME WE WERE CONSIDERED THE MODEL BECAUSE WE HAD A SEPARATE UTILITY AUTHORITY AND A REASONABLE 6% TRANSFER WHERE IS GAINESVILLE HAD THE EXCESS OF 10% AND OTHERS HAD LARGER TRANSFERS THAT MAY OR MAY NOT B JUSTIFIABLE. WE NEED THE RIGHT AMOUNT OF THE CHARTER SAYS AND ALL OF US BE ABLE TO SAY THAT W DO UNDERSTAND HOW THEY ARE DERIVED FROM IT AND IT IS NOT EXCESSIVE. AND WE HAVE TO PROTECT OUR RATEPAYERS AS WELL AS HER TAXPAYERS. IT NEEDS TO B JUSTIFIABLE AND CORRECT. THE LANGUAGE IS COMPLICATED AND NEEDS THE LEGAL REVIEW. DIRECTO CISNEROS WAS THERE AND WE DID NOT GET INTO THAT DISCUSSION. HOWEVER I DO AGREE WITH YOUR ASSESSMENT AND I THINK IT'S GOO INFORMATION AT LEAST FROM A NEW PERSON'S PERSPECTIVE THE CHARTER SAYS THIS IN THE NUMBER REFLECT THE CHARTER AND THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR. DOES ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANYTHING TO SA HERE?

>> I THINK THIS IS A GREAT IDEA IF THE LEGISLATURE IS TALKING ABOUT IT THEN WE CAN HAVE A LEG TO STAND ON THIS AS WE HAVE REVIEWED IT AND LOOKED AT IT LEGALLY AND KNOW THAT YOU CAN G AWAY NOW. WHICH IS WHAT WE ARE HOPEFULLY GOING TO BE ABLE TO TELL THEM. BECAUSE THEY DON'T LIKE THIS.

>> THEY TOOK OVER GAINESVILLE. >> WE ARE LOOKING AT LARGE NUMBERS HERE. 13% OF THE OPERATING BUDGET DOES CATCH MY ATTENTION. AND THAT IS IMPORTANT.

>> WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST IS THE RESPONSES I'VE HAD FROM THOSE FOLKS HAVE BEEN ABSOLUTELY COOPERATIVE. LET'S GET EVERYONE ON THE SAME PAGE. THIS IS NOT NEGATIVE IN ANY CAPACITY. LET'S GO THROUGH THAT EXERCISE AND SE WHERE IT LEADS US.

>> THE BALL IS IN YOUR COURT MISS HEDGES?

>> YES. I AM HEARING A CONSENSU TO REVIEW THIS. THE ATTORNEY DI REACH OUT TO ME LAST WEEK SO WE WILL GET THAT SET UP AND START HAVING THOSE DISCUSSIONS AND START LOOKING THROUGH EVERYTHING. ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS?

[5. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Any person who wishes to comment on any subject may be heard at this time. Please limit your comments to three (3) minutes or less, as directed by the Mayor, as this section of the Agenda is limited to thirty minutes. The City Commission will not be able to take any official actions under Comments from the Public. Speakers will address the Mayor, Commissioners, and the Public with respect. Inappropriate language will not be tolerated.]

>> OKAY. WE WILL MOVE ON. >> THE NEXT ITEM IS COMMENTS

FROM THE PUBLIC. >> IF YOU ARE HERE AND WOULD

[02:45:01]

>> GOOD MORNING. I AM A REAL ESTATE DEVELOPER. I HAVE AN APPLICATION IN THE CITY FORCE PIERCE TO DOWNLOAD THE DEVELOPMENT HERE. MY APPLICATIO IS BEEN GOING ON FOR SEVERAL MONTHS AND HAS BEEN ON HOLD RIGHT NOW. I SPOKE WITH JEREMY JOHNSON ON THIS MATTER. I WENT PAST THE PLANNING BOARD LAST MONTH OF THE PROJECT HAS TO BE ON YOUR DESK RIGHT NOW.

SOMEWHERE BETWEEN THE PLANNING BOARD AND IN FRONT OF THE COMMISSIONER MEETINGS. THE LEGA DEPARTMENT MAY BE GIVING US SOM OF THE THOMAS. BUT THERE ARE TW OBJECTIONS. THE FIRST ONE IS TH DENSITY. WHICH I AM PROPOSING WITH LOCAL ORDINANCES. I DON'T EVEN HAVE ONE SINGLE UNIT EXTRA IN MY APPLICATION. I AM APPLYIN FOR 12 UNITS PER ACRE. I FIND THAT THE OBJECTION IS COMING FROM THE LAND WHICH MY PARTNER CAN SHOW YOU HE SIGNED THE CONTRACT FOR A MINIMUM OF 67 TOWNHOMES IN THAT PROJECT. AND AM PROPOSING 83 AND HE'S OBJECTING THAT I CANNOT BUILD MORE THAN 67. THE SECOND OBJECTION HE HAS IS THE ENTRANC AND EXIT DURING THE CONSTRUCTION. ACCORDING TO THE SITE PLAN APPROVAL IN 2007 WHIC SHOULD BE EXPIRED BY NOW IT'S 1 YEARS ON UNMAINTAINED SITE PLAN APPROVALS. THEY LEFT LIKE THIS FOR OVER 15 YEARS. I HAVE TO MAKE THE EXIT AND ENTRANCE TO MARKET STREET ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE GATE. WHICH I CAN DO THAT. BUT I HAVE TO USE THE CENTER PROPERTY TO REACH MY PROPERTY. AND THEY ARE ASKING FOR ADDITIONAL FOREIGNERS $67,000 FOR ME. I DON'T KNOW WHERE MY APPLICATION IS RIGHT NOW BUT I WOULD LIKE TO COME IN FRONT OF YOU AND I HAVE TO BUIL ACCORDING TO THE ALLOWANCES GIVEN TO MEBY LAW. I AM NOT ASKING FOR ANY EXTRA UNITS OR ANYTHING EXTRA THAT I'M NOT ENTITLED TO. I JUST WANT TO BUILD WHAT I AM ALLOWED TO JUST LIKE THE REST OF THE AREAS I'M NOT BUYING THE LAND JUST TO RESELL IT. EVERYTHING HAS ALREADY BEEN DONE MY BUILDING PERMITS AS WELL ARE ALMOST READY. I AM ALSO A GENERAL CONTRACTOR AND A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER WITH THIS DESIGN BUILD WITH US. THIS IS NOT DIALOGUES WE CANNOT RESPOND TO YOU RIGHT NOW. BUT I WANT TO SAY THANK YO AND I'M SURE SOMEONE FROM OUR STAFF WILL BE IN TOUCH. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE.

D. I HAVE SEVERAL THINGS BUT I' GOING TO WRITE A LETTER IN YOUR GONNA TAKE YOUR TIME AND ANSWER THEM. THE ONE THING THAT I WANT TO BE INVOLVED IN I AM PART OF THE EDUCATION FOUNDATION OF FLORIDA. WE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF REMODELING THAT HOUSE ON NINTH STREET WHERE HE DIED. WE GOT A $700,000 GRANTS TO DO THA REMODELING. I TRIED TO TELL THE THAT THEY HAD TO GO THROUGH AND GET SPECIAL PERMISSION BUT THEY DID NOT LISTEN TO ME. NOW THEY KNOW AND THEY ARE GOING TO THE PROCESS OF GETTING EVERYTHING.

WAS ON THAT COMMITTEE AT ONE TIME. WHAT I AM INTERESTED IN I THAT YOU TALK ABOUT TO THE ART PROJECT. I AM INTERESTED IN BEING PART OF THAT WE HAVE 10 ART PIECES IN THE LIBRARY ON

[02:50:05]

BE PART OF THIS. >> YES. THANK YOU.

>> AND YOU DID A GOOD WORKSHOP.

>> THANK YOU. >> I'M NOT SURE IF IT'S MORNING OR AFTERNOON AT THIS POINT. BU MY NAME IS JULIE POOLEY OTT.

I'VE BEEN A MEMBER OF THE ARTS AND CULTURE BOARD SINCE 2018 WHEN IT WAS CONCEIVED. I WOULD LIKE TO THANK THE COMMISSION FO OFFERING A VENUE FOR US TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THE PARAMETERS OF THE FUND FOR ART IN PUBLIC PLACES IS. THANK YOU TO COMMISSIONER BRODRICK FOR BRINGING IT TO EVERYONE'S ATTENION. I'VE BEEN ON THAT BOARD FOR A LONG TIME AND MOST OF THAT TIME WHEN WE ARE APPROACHED WITH IDEAS OR ITEMS THAT MAY BE CONSIDERED WE ARE OFTEN MET WITH THERE BEING NO FUNDING. SO I AM VERY PLEASED T SEE THAT THERE IS FUNDING AVAILABLE. AT THIS POINT IN TIME AND THROUGHOUT THE COURSE OF THOSE YEARS I'VE BEEN ON THE BOARD AND WE HAVE BEEN APPROACHED A FEW TIMES BY MR. MIMS. FOR PROJECTS WITHIN THE CITY THAT WOULD INVOLVE PUBLIC ART. HOWEVER THEY WERE NOT WITHIN THE PEACOCK ARTS DISTRIC SO OFTEN WE HAVE TO TABLE THEM.

IN ADDITION TO NOT HAVING FUNDING FOR THEM. I CAN MENTION THREE SPECIFIC INSTANCES RIGHT NOW. ONE OF WHICH WAS BROUGHT T OUR ATTENTION BUT I'M NOT SURE THE NAME OF THE FRATERNITY. IT IS A FREESTANDING FRATERNITY THAT APPROACHED US FOR A MONUMENT OR SCULPTURAL ASPECT AT JAELYN PARK SO THAT IT CAN B A VENUE FOR MEETINGS AND COMMEMORATIVE GATHERINGS FOR MARTIN LUTHER KING DAY. ANOTHER PROJECT ARE THE TWO SCULPTURAL PATHS IN THE FRONT OF CITY HALL WE ARE ABLE TO MOVE WITH THE HELP OF PUBLIC WORKS THE SCULPTURES THAT WE HAVE WITHIN THE CITY. YOU HAVE BLIND DATE WHICH IS THE BURDEN THE SNAKE OUT FRONT AND MADAME MAYOR IN ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF TRYING TO GATHER ALL OF THE SCULPTURES IN THE CITY THERE IS A LIST THAT DOES INCLUDE ALL SCULPTURES WIT THE NAMES AND THE ARTISTS WHO CREATED THEM. I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE BUT WE HAVE THOUGHT OF HAVING INTERACTIVE MAPS SO THE PEOPLE CAN SEE THE SCULPTURES. THE THIRD ITEM WAS ON THE WALL BETWEEN THE COURTHOUSE AND THE SCHOOL. IT SHOULD REALLY BE PART OF THE MURAL PROGRAM ON TH CITY WHICH IS NOT IN THE PEACOC ARTS DISTRICT. THESE ARE THE PROJECTS THAT WE HOPE WE CAN BRING TO YOU IN ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF COMMISSIONER JOHNSON'S COMMENT. WE'VE NOT BEEN ABLE TO MEET SINCE APRIL. WE DO HAVE

SOME ISSUES. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR BEING HERE.

[6. City Commission Boards and Committees Updates]

WOULD LIKE TO START? >> I HAVE THREE QUICK ONES. WE HAVE THE AMAZING FYTER FEST BUT THE GHOST WALK IS COMING UP WHICH IS ACTUALLY THE FORT PIERCE HISTORICAL TORS AND THE FORT PIERCE PAST. THAT IS OCTOBER 25TH AND 26TH IN THE AFTERNOON. TDC TRUEST DEVELOPMENT COUNSEL FOR THOSE THAT ARE LISTENING WE HAVE A MEETING THIS WEEK BUT I DO HAVE A REPORT ON A FINANCIAL UPDATE THAT REVENUES ARE UP 27% YEAR T DATE. IT IS PRETTY PHENOMENAL W HAD A RECORD YEAR WITH OVER 27% ABOVE WHAT WE FORECASTED FOR THIS YEAR WHICH IS ALSO

[02:55:01]

IT IS A PHENOMENAL PROJECT AND THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE.

>> I WILL MAKE IT QUICK. THERE COMMITTEE'S MEETING THIS WEEK WITH THE ACTION-PACKED PARKING AGENDA THAT IS VERY EXCITING.

JUST LIKE SEWER LINES. THE SUNRISE THEATER VISOR HE IS MEETING TOMORROW IN THIS PARTICULAR AGENDA HAS A LOT OF SUBSTANCE TO IT. SOME LOOKING FORWARD TO THAT MEETING.

>> COMMISSIONER GAINS? >> NOT TOO MUCH HERE I COULD START WITH THE RETIREMENT BOARD I DID COMPLETE AND PASS THE IMMEDIATE CERTIFICATION SO I HAVE ONE LEFT TO DO IF COMMISSIONER PRONENESS IS LISTENING I KEPT MY PROMISE THA I HAVE THAT CERTIFICATION FOR THE RETIREMENT BOARD. WE DID HAVE THE RETIREMENT BOARD HERE AND DISCUSSED MORE RETIREMENTS HOW WE WERE GOING TO DEAL WITH THE ADVISERS AND THE BOARD TO MAKE SURE WHAT WERE DOING HERE. COMING BACK FROM TESTING AND HEARING THE STORIES OF THE OTHE BOARDS AND THE NUMBERS THAT THE ARE CURRENTLY LOOKING AT, WE AR DOING EXTREMELY WELL. SO THEY ARE IN GOOD HANDS. I KNOW WITH LINCOLN PARK MAIN STREET THEY HAVEN'T HAD ANY MEETINGS BUT WE DID SWITCH SO I WILL BE GOING T THAT ROUNDTABLE MEETING THAT IS COMING UP. THE CITY COUNCIL OF AGING DID NOT HAVE QUORUM SO WE DID HAVE A MEETING AND I DID ATTEND THE LAST CONFERENCE OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT.

>> I WENT FOR YOU THIS PAST WEDNESDAY.

>> CORRECT. AND THAT'S ALL I HAVE.

>> RIGHT. I WAS GOING TO REPORT THAT DR. MOORE WAS THE SPEAKER.

AND OF COURSE HE HAS SO MUCH TO REPORT ON ALL OF WHAT I RSC IS DOING WHICH IS INCREDIBLE. I CANNOT EVEN REMEMBER ALL OF WHA

THEY ARE DOING. >> THE LAST THING CITY COMMISSIONER IF YOU COULD PROVIDE HERE EVEN WHILE I WAS STUDYING FOR THAT MONDAY NIGHT AND THE EXAM, I WAS FOLLOWING YOU GUYS. I WAS TEXTING THE CIT MANAGER.

>> WE WISH YOU HAD BEEN HERE. >> I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THE MOTION FROM WHERE I WAS AT. SO DID FOLLOW YOU. AND THAT IS MY

REPORT. >> QUICKLY FMI T HAD A MEETING AND THEY ARE NOW ENSURING 62% O ALL FLORIDA CITIES. THEY REPORTED HURRICANE NATALIA LOSSES WERE SOMEWHERE NEAR 8.5 THAT IS COMPARED TO HURRICANE - IAN LOSSES AT 62 MILLION. AND THAT IS ALL BECAUSE OF WHERE IT HIT. AND THE VALUE OF THE PROPERTY AND NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT WERE THERE. THEY TOLD A STORY ABOUT HORSESHOE BEND FLORIDA. IT WAS ALMOST GROUND ZERO. THEY RENTED TWO U-HAUL TRUCKS AND TOOK EVERYTHING OUT

[03:00:05]

AND I WENT TO THE POLICY COMMITTEE ON LAND-USE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. OUR PRIORITIES ARE SOVEREIGN MOBILITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. THERE WAS ANOTHER COMMITTEE THAT CHOSE THE PACE PROGRAM AS ONE OF ITS PRIORITIES. THIS IS THE PROGRAM THAT HAS BEEN OF CONSIDERABLE INTEREST BECAUSE IT IS A PROGRA FROM ANOTHER COUNTY THAT HAS DECIDED IT CAN OPERATE STATEWID AND IS TRYING TO GO AND ALL COUNTIES WITHIN THE STATE AND CHARGE VERY HIGH LENDING RATES AND PEOPLE ARE VERY EXCITED AND UPSET ABOUT THIS. THEY'RE GOING TO TRY TO DO SOMETHING LEGISLATIVELY. THE FIRE DISTRIC PAST ITS BUDGET WHICH INCLUDED UNION CONTRACT SO WE ARE PAST THAT NOW. AND I THINK THAT IS ALL THAT IS ON MY LIST.

>> MADAME MAYOR I WANTED TO ASK A QUESTION ABOUT THE FIRE DISTRICT. I WANT TO GET THAT INFORMATION OUT HERE I'M NOT SURE EXACTLY HOW THIS IS WORKIN BUT IS AFFECTING NONPROFITS SPECIFICALLY MAIN STREET AND DOWNTOWN EVENTS?

>> I HAD NO KNOWLEDGE OF THAT. >> THE RUMOR IS THAT IS BECAUSE OF THE FOOD TRUCK FIRE WITH THE PROPANE TANK THE CURRENT FIRE?

THAT'S JUST WHAT I'M HEARING? >> YES. THERE WAS ONE THAT DID

THAT SOMEWHERE ELSE. >> I JUST WANT TO GET

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.