[a. Dawn Bresnak commended Anne Bowen, Marina Concierge, for her exceptional ability to handle multiple tasks simultaneously and ensure customer satisfaction.]

PROCLAMATION ON BEHALF OF OUR CHAPTER.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU.

>> OKAY. WE RECEIVED A LETTER FROM DON RESNICK CONGRATULATING

[8. ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS TO AGENDA AND APPROVAL OF AGENDA]

ANNE BOWEN, THE MARINA CONCIERGE, FOR HER EXCEPTIONAL ABILITY TO HANDLE MULTIPLE TASKS SIMULTANEOUSLY AND ENSURE CUSTOMER SATISFACTION. AND WE HAVE ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS TO THE AGENDA AND APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA. MATTA MAYER, COMMISSIONERS. REGARDING ITEM 12 H, THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE RECEIVED A REQUEST TO CONTINUE THE QUASIJUDICIAL HEARING FROM THE APPLICANT. SHE ALSO COMMUNICATED WITH THE INTERVENER IN THIS CASE, WHO IS OBJECTING TO ANY SORT OF CONTINUANCE AND REQUESTING THAT IT GO FORWARD TONIGHT. THE ISSUE PRESENTED BY THE APPLICANT IN THE REQUEST FOR THE CONTINUANCE IS RELATED TO THE INTERVENER FILING PAPERWORK AND IT BEING RECEIVED AT THE END OF LAST WEEK. THEIR ISSUE IS A DUE PROCESS ISSUE RELATED TO THE ABILITY TO REVIEW AND PREPARE ADEQUATELY FOR THIS HEARING. IT IS A STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION THAT WE DO CONTINUE THIS ITEM TO A DATE CERTAIN AND COMMUNICATIONS WITH THE CLERK, THE APRIL 15TH AGENDA. WE HAVE ADEQUATE TIME TO SEND OUT COPPER NOTICES BEFORE THAT MEETING. HOWEVER, IT IS UP TO THE COMMISSION THAT WE WOULD NEED A VOTE TO SET IT TO THAT DATE AND CONTINUE IT FROM TONIGHT'S HEARING. COMMISSIONERS? COMMISSIONER

BRODERICK? >> THANK YOU, MS. HEDGES. IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT SOME OF THE INFORMATION WAS RECEIVED THURSDAY, SUBSEQUENT INFORMATION WAS RECEIVED FRIDAY. BASICALLY, ONE BUSINESS DAY BEFORE TONIGHT'S HEARING.

IT IS A QUESTION OF COMMENT THAT I UNDERSTAND THE APPLICANT'S POSITION TO HAVE THIS ITEM EXTENDED TO ANOTHER MEETING. IN LIKE KIND, IF THE OPPOSITE WERE TO HAPPEN PRIOR TO THAT MEETING AND THE APPLICANT SUBMITS ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, WITH THE INTERVENER THAN HAVE THE SAME

RIGHTS TO CONTEST THAT? >> IT WOULD BE BASED ON THE

CIRCUMSTANCES. >> IDENTICAL, REVERSED

SCENARIO. >> I WOULD NEED TO SEE WHAT WE RECEIVED AND WHEN WE RECEIVED IT, THAT TYPE OF THING.

>> UNDERSTANDABLE. THIS IS NOT PIGEONHOLED TO SAY THAT IT IS FAST AT THIS HEARING NEEDS TO TAKE PLACE. THE ONLY REASON I AM BRINGING IT UP IS FOR THE FAIRPLAY, I GUESS, FOR LACK OF BETTER DESCRIPTION. IF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION COMES FORWARD THAT IS RELEVANT TO THIS MATTER, THAT IT IS TIMELY CONSUMED BY THE OTHER SIDE OF THIS DISCUSSION TO GIVE A FAIR OPPORTUNITY FOR THEM TO GET THE INFORMATION AS WELL. SO THAT IS AN UNDERSTANDING, BASED ON CIRCUMSTANCES AS PRESENTED,

THAT IS THEORETICAL. >> YES, SIR. THE OVERALL ISSUE IS FAIRNESS. THAT IS THE OVERALL ISSUE.

>> THAT IS EXACTLY THE POINT I AM GETTING AT. WHAT IS GOOD FOR ONE IS GOOD FOR THE OTHER. WHAT I DO NOT WANT TO SEE IS A SUBMISSION IN THE SECOND TO TRY TO, YOU KNOW, NOT HAVE PROPER REPRESENTATION IN RESPONSE TO THE OTHER SIDE. I WANT TO HEAR

ALL PARTIES. >> I UNDERSTAND, SIR.

>> MADAME ATTORNEY, SO YOU ARE IN CONTACT WITH BOTH SIDES OF THIS , THIS QUASIJUDICIAL HEARING MEETING , THE INTERVENER AS WELL AS THE APPLICANT. CORRECT?

>> MATTA MAYER AND COMMISSIONERS, I MYSELF HAVE NOT BEEN. MADAME CLERK HAS BEEN.

>> MADAME CLERK, OKAY. I GUESS I WILL TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE THIS COMMENT BECAUSE A QUASIJUDICIAL HEARING IS SOMEWHAT DIFFERENT THAN A LEGISLATIVE HEARING, MEANING THAT THE CIRCUMSTANCE OF EVIDENCE, YOU ARE TESTIFYING WHEN YOU COME BEFORE, SO WHEN WE WAY THAT, YOU KNOW, THE SERIOUSNESS OF THAT IS DIFFERENT THAN JUST HEARING ANY OTHER RESOLUTION OR ORDINANCE. IT IS A JUDICIAL BODY WE ARE HEARING. SO THE PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE IS CRITICAL. IT SOUNDS TO ME THAT WE RECEIVED SOMETHING THAT THE OTHER SIDE WAS NOT ABLE TO MAYBE REVIEW AND TIME. IS THAT CORRECT?

>> YES, SIR. THEY DID COMPLY WITH THE RULES. THE RULES STATE THAT THEY HAVE TO BE RECEIVED THREE CALENDAR DAYS PRIOR TO

THE HEARING. >> COMMISSIONER GAINS?

>> JUST SO THAT I AM CLEAR, THE INTERVENER COMPILED OUR RECORDS THREE DAYS PRIOR TO OUR HAND, CORRECT?

>> I BELIEVE IT WAS RECEIVED THURSDAY.

[00:10:02]

>> I BELIEVE IT WAS RECEIVED PRIOR. THEY ARE REQUIRED TO BE RECEIVED, THE FRIDAY PRIOR TO THE MONDAY HEARING. AND THEY WERE RECEIVED, I THINK ON WEDNESDAY WHEN THE AGENDA WAS PUBLISHED, AND THEN THERE WAS A SUBSEQUENT EXHIBIT THAT WAS ADDED THE NEXT DAY, I BELIEVE.

>> SO THE SUBSEQUENT EVIDENCE IS WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT TODAY? BECAUSE IT CAME AFTER THE RETIRED -- THE REQUIRED

TIME? >> NO. ALL EVIDENCE CAN PRIOR TO THE TIMEFRAME BY WHICH TO APPLY TO BE IN INTERVENER. THEY DID SUBMIT EVERYTHING WITHIN THAT THREE DAY PERIOD THAT OUR RULES REQUIRE FOR THAT. THE APPLICANT IS THE ONE, AFTER RECEIVING THAT, THAT HAS SAID THEY NEED ADDITIONAL TIME TO REVIEW THE EVIDENCE AND EXHIBITS THAT THE INTERVENER

PROVIDED. >> WHAT ARE OUR POLICIES AND PROCEDURES, IF THERE IS AN INTERVENER IN ONE OF OUR QUASIJUDICIAL HEARINGS, RIGHT? AND WE GET AN INTERVENER , THE APPLICANT, WHAT DOES THE RULES SAY WHEN THE APPLICANT HAS TO

BE NOTIFIED? >> I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT IS SPECIFICALLY IN OUR RULE. BUT I BELIEVE MADAME CLERK COMMUNICATED THAT TO THEM ALMOST IMMEDIATELY. BUT I WILL

LET HER SPEAK TO THAT. >> WHAT I AM TRYING TO FIGURE OUT, I AM TRYING TO FOLLOW UP ON COMMISSIONER BRODERICK'S QUESTION. WE HAD A SET HEARING, WE HAD AN INTERVENER, AND.

BASED ON WHATEVER THE INTERVENER PRODUCED, WE HAVE AN APPLICANT WHO NOW WANTS TO POOL BECAUSE THEY NEED MORE TIME TO RESPOND TO WHAT THE INTERVENER HAS PUT INTO EVIDENCE. CORRECT?

>> ALL RIGHT. MY QUESTION IS THIS. WHERE DO OUR RULES STATE, BECAUSE I DO NOT WANT TO HAPPEN, THE WEDNESDAY BEFORE WE RESET THIS HEARING, IF WE RESET THIS HEARING, BY THAT WEDNESDAY, SOMEONE COMES IN, AND APPLICANT COMES BACK IN AND PUTS SOMETHING IN THAT WEDNESDAY, RIGHT? WE GET IT, WE ARE NOTIFIED, THE INTERVENER IS NOTIFIED, AND INTERVENER IS SAYING, WELL, I DO NOT HAVE ENOUGH TIME TO RESPOND TO WHAT THE APPLICANT JUST TO PUT BACK IN. I DO NOT EVER SEE IT STOPPING BECAUSE THEY CAN SAY I PUT IT IN WEDNESDAY, PUT IT IN WEDNESDAY, PUT IT IN WEDNESDAY. SO MY QUESTION IS, IN THE RULES, WHEN WE HAVE JUDICIAL, IS THERE ANY TYPE OF TIMELINE THAT WE HAVE WHERE EVERYTHING IS SUPPOSED TO BE IN BEFORE HE

COMES TO US? >> MATTA MAYER, COMMISSIONERS, THAT DOES NOT EXIST IN OUR QUASIJUDICIAL RULES. IT GIVES A DEADLINE FOR RESUBMITTED EVIDENCE. THE RULE THAT EXISTS RELATED TO THE INTERVENORS SAYS THAT THEY HAVE TO SUBMIT THEIR APPLICATION AND THEIR EVIDENCE EXHIBITS THREE CALENDAR DAYS PRIOR TO THE QUASIJUDICIAL HEARING. RELATED TO THE APPLICANT THEN SUBMITTING ADDITIONAL PAPERWORK, THAT IS

NOT INCLUDED IN THAT RULE. >> IF I MAY? WHEN THE QUASIJUDICIAL HEARING IS SET FOR AN AGENDA, THE LEGAL ADVERTISEMENTS GO OUT, IS IT AT THAT TIME ADVISED THAT ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THAT THEY WOULD LIKE SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD IS REQUIRED TO BE IN MY OFFICE BY THE WEDNESDAY PRIOR TO THE SET HEARING? I THINK IT IS BY 3:00. SO THAT WAY, ALL OF THAT INFORMATION IS ATTACHED TO THE AGENDA AND IS PUBLISHED AS PART OF THE AGENDA PUBLICATION, IF AN INTERVENER COMES IN AND HAS ACCEPTED THEIR INFORMATION IS THEN ADDED TO THE AGENDA THAT FRIDAY PRIOR TOO. BUT I WOULD THINK THAT AT THIS POINT, THE AGENDA, ALL THE INFORMATION THAT WAS DUE IS NOW PART OF THE AGENDA. AND I DO NOT KNOW THAT WE ACCEPT ANYTHING DIFFERENT MOVING FORWARD.

>> THIS ISWHAT I AM ASKING. I HAVE HEARD WEDNESDAY THAT EVERYTHING IS DUE. THEN BY THAT FRIDAY, THAT FRIDAY BEFORE , THE FRIDAY BEFORE THE HEARING, SOMEONE CAN COME IN AND PUT INFORMATION IN, ENTER IT, COME IN AND PUT INFORMATION IN, BY

THAT FRIDAY. CORRECT? >> CORRECT. AS AN INTERVENER.

BECAUSE THEY WOULD NOT HAVE SEEN WHAT THE INFORMATION WAS .

RIGHT. SO NOW FRIDAY, ANY APPLICANT THAT COMES IN FRONT OF THIS JUDICIAL HEARING GETS NOTIFICATION FRIDAY. FRIDAY SOMETIMES BEFORE THE MONDAY ENTER. MY QUESTION IS, HOW DID THE APPLICANT GET THE INFORMATION PUT IN, IN THIS

PARTICULAR CASE? >> IN THIS CASE, I THINK THEY GOT IT, THEY GOT IT ON THURSDAY. IT MAY HAVE BEEN FRIDAY MORNING FOR JUST THE ADDITIONAL EXHIBIT. BUT AS SOON AS I GOT IT, I DID PROVIDED TO THE APPLICANT.

>> ALL RIGHT. SO WE ARE GIVING SOMEONE, WE ARE GIVING SOMEONE ONE TO 2 DAYS TO TRY TO RESPOND TO AN INTERVENER, OR ANYBODY

[00:15:02]

ELSE WITH ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. THAT IS WHAT THE

RULES ALLOW? >> MATTA MAYER, COMMISSIONERS, YES. IT IS A THREE CALENDAR DAY RULE FOR THE INTERVENER.

>> KNOW THIS IS MY QUESTION. IF WE POSTPONE THIS HEARING BASED ON THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST TO PULL IT BECAUSE THEY NEED ADDITIONAL TIME, RIGHT? CAN WE AS A BOARD, CAN WE STIPULATE SOME KIND OF TIMELINE THAT EVERYBODY HAS THE INFORMATION AND SO THAT WE WILL NOT BE IN THIS POSITION AGAIN, WE WILL NOT BE IN THIS POSITION AGAIN, SO IF THE APPLICANT WANTS TO RESPOND, MAKE THE APPLICANT RESPOND BY A CERTAIN DATE, THE INTERVENER RESPOND BY A CERTAIN DATE, SO I WILL NOT GET HERE ON A MONDAY NIGHT, MONDAY NIGHT AFTER READING EVERYTHING I HAVE READ IT, TO HEAR THAT NOW IT IS BEING PULLED BECAUSE I DO NOT HAVE TIME. SO THAT IS MY QUESTION TO YOU. I DO NOT KNOW THE LEGAL ANSWER AS FAR AS THE STATE STATUES, BUT AS A BOARD, CAN WE PUT SOME, ON THIS ISSUE HERE, CAN WE PUT SOME TIMELINES? BECAUSE WHAT I AM SICK SEEING IS GOING TO HAPPEN IS THE APPLICANT IS GOING TO ANSWER WHATEVER THE INTERVENER SAID. THE INTERVENER WILL COME BACK AND TRY TO COME BACK TO WHAT IS NEXT ON THE AGENDA. AND THEN WE WILL BE IN THE SAME SPOT AGAIN, ASKING FOR US TO COME BACK THAT FRIDAY BEFORE, YOU SAID APRIL 12, I THINK. THE FRIDAY BEFORE. SO THAT WOULD BE THE 15TH. APRIL 12TH. SO THAT WOULD BE APRIL 9TH? SOMEWHERE AROUND THERE. SO ANOTHER THREE-DAY NOTICE. OR A 1 1/2 DAY NOTICE BECAUSE YOU REALLY COUNT SATURDAY AND SUNDAY. SO, CAN WE DO THAT? CAN WE SAY, HEY, GUYS. EVERYBODY HAVE YOUR STUFF IN BY SUCH AND SUCH DATE SO THAT IT CAN BE ON THE AGENDA, EVERYBODY CAN READ IT, EVERYBODY HAS A SENSE OF WHAT IS GOING ON?

>> SORRY. COMMISSIONER, SORRY. THE MEETING DATE WE SUGGESTED WAS APRIL 15TH , WHICH IS A MONDAY EVENING. I DO THINK AS PART OF A MOTION, IF THERE IS A MOTION TO CONTINUE, YOU COULD BE PUTTING A DEADLINE FOR WHICH THERE HAVE TO BE ANY EXHIBITS.

>> MATTA MAYER, IF WE ARE GOING TO VOTE, AND I DO NOT KNOW HOW WE ARE GOING TO VOTE. BUT IF IT IS TO VOTE TO GIVE EVERYBODY PROPER TIME, I SAY THAT EVERYTHING NEEDS TO BE IN BY THE TIME THE NOTICE HAS TO GO OUT ON THE AGENDA SO THAT EVERYBODY CAN READ IT. AFTER THAT NOTICE GOES OUT, AFTER THAT NOTICE GOES OUT, EVERYBODY KNOWS THE BALL GAME, EVERYBODY KNOWS WHAT IS GOING TO BE DISCUSSED, AND THEN WE DO NOT HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT COMING IN ON THAT MONDAY, THE 15TH, AND

SAYING, I NEED MORE TIME. >> I KNOW WHERE YOU ARE GOING.

LOOK AT OUR CHAMBERS. THEY ARE FULL. PEOPLE ARE READY. PEOPLE GOT PREPARED FOR THIS. SO YOU DO NOT WANT THIS TO HAPPEN OVER AND OVER AGAIN. I THINK THAT IS WHAT YOU ARE SAYING. IS THAT CORRECT? AND IT IS NOT FAIR, IT IS NOT FAIR. RIGHT.

>> AND I APPRECIATE THE CHAMBER BEING FULL. BUT DUE PROCESS MATTERS TO ME AS AN ATTORNEY, IT MATTERS TO ME. AND IF THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING, IT IS HIS APPLICATION, OR THEIR APPLICATION. SO THEY ARE REQUESTING THE POSTPONEMENT. I

DO NOT KNOW HOW TO SAY YES. >> YES. WELL, DUE PROCESS SHOULD MATTER TO ALL OF US, NOT JUST ATTORNEYS.

>> I DID NOT MEAN IT THAT WAY. BUT IT IS SOMETHING. I DID NOT MEAN IT THAT WAY. IT HAS BEEN A LONG MONDAY ALREADY.

>> KNOW, I KNOW YOU DIDN'T. I WAS NOT CORRECTING YOU. I AM

JUST SAYING I SHARE THAT. >> I'M JUST TO FIGURE OUT. TO THE PUBLIC AND TO ALL THE ONES WHO HAVE SENT ALL OF THE EMAILS, I HAVE READ EVERY LAST ONE OF THE EMAILS.

>> ME TOO, ME TOO. >> I KNOW EVERYBODY WHO IS AGAINST, I KNOW EVERYBODY WHO IS FOR, I JUST DO NOT KNOW FACES. BUT I HAVE READ EVERYTHING. BUT THE LAST THING I WANT TO DO IN THIS ISSUE HERE IS TO HAVE ANY DOUBT AS TO WHAT WE ARE DISCUSSING AND WHAT WE ARE GOING TO PUT ON EVIDENCE AS A QUASIJUDICIAL. I WOULD SAY, HEY, LET'S DO IT, AND THEY COULD COME BACK HERE BUT THIS IS A QUASIJUDICIAL HEARING. AND WE'VE GOT TO RELY ON EVIDENCE. SO THAT IS MY CONCERN. SO I DO NOT KNOW, I DO NOT KNOW WHAT THE BOARD WANTS TO GO, BUT THAT

IS WHERE I AM COMING FROM. >> THANK YOU, SIR.

>> YES, A COUPLE THINGS. I ALWAYS, YOU KNOW, CONSCIOUSLY AND OPTIMISTICALLY IN GETTING THROUGH AN ITEM. WHEN APPLICANT ASKS FOR AN EXTENSION, YOU KNOW, I THINK THERE IS REASON FOR US TO COMPLINE TO PLATE -- CONTEMPLATE THAT REQUEST AND

[00:20:08]

WHITE IS BEING REQUESTED. AT THE SAME TIME, WHEN WE HAVE THIS QUASIJUDICIAL PROCESS, EVIDENCE, AND THERE IS AN INTERVENER, THE INTERVENER IS TRYING TO INTRODUCE EVIDENCE.

IN A VERY SIMPLISTIC FORM OF ME THINKING ABOUT IT, IS THAT THEY GET AN ADDITIONAL TIME PERIOD TO PRESENT THEIR EVIDENCE WITH, YOU KNOW, WITH OR WITHOUT SUBSTANTIATION OF WHY THEY ARE PRESENTING THAT EVIDENCE. THEY GET 20 MINUTES. THEY GET AN ADDITIONAL TIME FOR HIM TO SPEAK AND INTERVENE INTO THE APPLICATION. IT JUST MAKES SENSE TO ME. IT IS COMMON SENSE AND IT IS VERY PRACTICAL. NOT BEING AN ATTORNEY, NOT BEING OVER THERE AT THE COURT COMPLEX, I TRY TO LIMIT MYSELF WHEN I WALK THROUGH THOSE DOORS, COMMISSIONER. I KNOW YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH THEM ALL THE TIME. YOU KNOW, I AM NOT AS FAMILIAR WITH YOU AS IS PROCESSES. BUT WHAT I DO CONTEMPLATE , AND IT IS COMMON SENSE, AGAIN, TO ME, EVIDENCE IS INTRODUCED, AND YOU HAVE TO DISCUSS THAT EVIDENCE. AND THAT IS WHAT WE ARE GOING TO DO. WHETHER IT IS INTRODUCED AT THE 11TH HOUR, THE 12TH HOUR, OR RIGHT ON THE SPOT. RIGHT? SOMETIMES THAT HAPPENS, I WOULD IMAGINE. SO WE HAVE TO EVALUATE THE EVIDENCE. BUT WHEN AN APPLICANT ASKS FOR A CONTINUANCE, YOU KNOW, TYPICALLY, WITHOUT GOING INTO REASONS OR WHATNOT, THERE COULD BE OTHER OUTSTANDING REASONS.

THERE IS AN INTERVENER IN THIS CASE, THEY HAVE ASKED FOR AN EXTENSION. IT DOESN'T HAPPEN VERY OFTEN. I APOLOGIZE THAT ALL OF YOU ARE PREPARED, YOU ARE HERE, AND YOU HAVE FILLED THE CHAMBERS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR BEING HERE. SO IT IS ALWAYS, IT IS NOT ALWAYS, IT IS JUST MY CONSIDERATION TO HONOR THAT REQUEST. FOR WHATEVER REASON IT MIGHT BE. THERE MIGHT BE SOME OTHER OPPORTUNITY. BUT WHAT I DO CONSIDER IS THE PUBLIC'S TIME, WHAT I DO CONSIDER IS THE TIME OF STAFF.

IT IS VERY IMPORTANT FOR THESE CHAMBERS. THIS IS A BUSINESS MEETING. AND IN ADDITION TO THAT, TO ME, YOU KNOW , THE FACTS ARE THE FACTS. YOU MAKE APPLICATION, AND THIS IS A SITE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION. THERE ARE A LOT OF OTHER THINGS THAT ARE GOING TO BE TALKED ABOUT, I AM SURE. LIKE YOU, I HAVE READ A LOT OF EMAILS, ALL OF THE EMAILS. THERE IS A LOT OF INFORMATION OUT THERE. BUT IT IS A SITE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION. SO WE HAVE TO TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION ALSO.

SO I WILL TELL YOU, COMMISSIONERS, I AM OKAY LISTENING TO THE APPLICATION TONIGHT. I AM OKAY WITH THE POSTPONEMENT TO THE DATE THAT WAS RECOMMENDED. I AM NOT SAYING I'M PUTTING ALL THE PRESSURE ON YOU, I AM JUST SAYING, I AM READY TO LISTEN, I AM ALSO READY TO MOVE TO THE NEXT MEETING SO THAT IF THERE IS OF OTHER EVIDENCE THAT NEEDS TO BE BROUGHT, LET IT BE BROUGHT. SO THAT IS WHERE I AM.

WE TRY TO BE FAIR TO BOTH SIDES. IN THIS PARTICULAR INSTANCE, IT GRIEVES ME THAT BOTH SIDES ARE ALL FROM THE SAME AREA. BECAUSE I LOVE OCEAN VILLAGE AND I LOVE THE PEOPLE THERE, I THINK IT IS A GREAT, GREAT PLACE TO LIVE. A HIDDEN GEM, REALLY. SO I AM SO TORN ABOUT THIS BECAUSE I HAVE READ EVERY SINGLE EMAIL , AND I CAN SEE THE PASSION THAT PEOPLE HAVE ON BOTH SIDES OF THIS ISSUE. AND I CAN SEE, I FEEL YOUR PAIN. I THINK I KNOW WHAT YOU ARE GOING THROUGH IN YOUR OWN NEIGHBORHOOD. AND SO I REALLY, I MEAN, I CAN RESPECT THE REQUEST FOR A CONTINUANCE, BUT I HAVE HAD A NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE ASKED IT NOT TO BE CONTINUED BECAUSE, SO FAR, EVERYBODY HAS FOLLOWED OUR RULES, AS FAR AS I KNOW, AND THEY TURN THINGS IN AT THE RIGHT TIME. SO I AM TORN ABOUT THIS. BUT I ALSO WANT TO BE FAIR. I KNOW THIS IS NOT A JUDICIAL HEARING, BUT IT IS A QUASIJUDICIAL HEARING. AND THAT REQUIRES US TO BE A LITTLE BIT MORE , TO BEND OVER BACKWARDS TO BE FAIR FOR BOTH SIDES. THAT IS WHAT IT REQUIRES OF US. SO I THINK IT IS UNFORTUNATE THAT WE ARE IN THIS SITUATION AND THAT THERE IS A CONTINUANCE REQUESTED. BECAIT TONIGHT. AND ENTERTAIN A MOTION EITHER WAY.

[00:25:14]

>> WELL, WE HAVE HAD SOME DIFFERENT OPINIONS THAT I ACTUALLY THOUGHT I WOULD HEAR TONIGHT. AND I TAKE THAT TO HEART, AS I ALWAYS DO, FROM THE MAYOR AND OTHER COMMISSIONERS.

FIRST OFF, I COMPLETELY RESPECT FOLKS TIME. YOU ALL CAME OUT TONIGHT BECAUSE YOU CARE ABOUT THIS ISSUE, YOU CARE ABOUT YOUR COMMUNITY. AND I THANK YOU FOR THAT. I ALSO FEEL A CERTAIN LEVEL OF RESPONSIBILITY, BECAUSE THERE IS A TON OF INFORMATION RELATIVE TO THIS ISSUE. AND THAT IS A BACK STORY WITH THIS AS WELL THAT NEEDS TO BE EXPLAINED. AND I THINK THAT I AM LEANING TOWARDS COMMISSIONER GAINES' RECOMMENDATION, I HATE TO HAVE YOU DRIVE BACK OVER HERE AGAIN,

BUT WE CAN ALL GO TO DINNER. % >> SEND SOME BACK TO US, BECAUSE WE WILL BE HERE A LONG TIME TONIGHT. COMMISSIONER GAINES HAD A VALID POINT IN THAT IF WE WERE TO GRANT AN EXTENSION ON THIS, COMMISSIONER GAINES, ARE YOU SAYING DATE PACIFIC, YOUR STUFF IS IN THE DOOR, AND IF IT COMES IN AFTER THE FACT, IT IS IRRELEVANT AT THAT POINT IN TIME, HERE IS THE DATE THE INFORMATION NEEDS TO BE IN, HERE'S THE SPECIFIC DATE OF THE HEARING, NO FURTHER EXTENSIONS.

>> YOU ARE RIGHT. WHAT I WANT TO DO, I AM READY TO HEAR IT.

DO NOT GET ME WRONG. >> RIGHT. I WANT TO BE FAIR.

>> BUT WHAT I DO NOT WANT IS THAT WE HEAR THIS TONIGHT KNEW IT IS GOING TO HAPPEN, YOU KNOW IT IS GOING TO HAPPEN. WE SIT HERE AND HEAR THIS TONIGHT, HOWEVER IT COMES OUT, THE PERSON, ESPECIALLY IF IT COMES OUT THE WAY SOMEBODY DON'T WANT IT TO COME OUT, THEY ARE GOING TO SAY, I ASKED FOR A CONTINUANCE. I COULD HAVE HAD THAT EVIDENCE THAT YOU SAID WAS NOT PRESENT. I UNDERSTAND. I UNDERSTAND, COMMISSIONERS. THE EVIDENCE YOU ARE LOOKING FOR, IT WAS NOT THERE. ONE OF US WILL SAY, I DO NOT SEE THE EVIDENCE. AND WE WILL BE BACK IN THIS AGAIN. I WOULD RATHER SAY EVERYBODY TAKE AND EXHALE, GO GET SOMETHING TO EAT, THINK ABOUT US BECAUSE WE WILL BE HERE ALL NIGHT. AND WHENEVER THIS GOES BACK ON THE AGENDA, ALL THE INFORMATION WILL BE ON THE AGENDA FOR THE PUBLIC TO READ. EVERYBODY WILL KNOW WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT. EVERYONE WILL SEE WHAT WE ARE SEEING. EVERYBODY WILL BE ON THE SAME PAGE. IT WILL NOT BE ANY DISCUSSIONS OF, WHERE DID THIS EVIDENCE COME FROM? WHEN DO THEY GET THIS EVIDENCE? EVERYBODY WILL KNOW, AND I THINK IT WILL BE A BETTER HEARING FOR EVERYBODY, EVERYBODY WALKS OUT OF HERE KNOWING THAT EVERYTHING WE KNEW, YOU GUYS KNEW. THE APPLICANT'S NEW, EVERYBODY KNEW, AND IT IS JUST A BETTER THING. AGAIN, IF THE COMMISSIONER SAYS, YOU KNOW WHAT, GAINES, WE HEAR YOU, BUT WE WANT TO HEAR THIS TONIGHT, I WILL SIT RIGHT HERE AND HERE IT TONIGHT, AND I WILL LISTEN TO EVERY EVIDENCE I HAVE. MY CONCERN IS THAT WHATEVER DECISION WE MAKE BASED ON THIS APPLICATION REQUEST BEING POSTPONED , WE NEED TO LISTEN TO IT. THAT IS THE ONLY THING I'M TRYING TO SAY. I AM READY TO GO WHEREVER YOU GUYS GO.

>> IF YOU WANT TO BRING THE MOTION, I WILL SECOND IT. BUT YOU UNDERSTAND PRESIDENT, RIGHT, YOU ARE A LAWYER. WE HAVE ALWAYS COME BACK WHEN THE APPLICANT HAS COME TO US. AND THIS IS NOT THE FIRST TIME WE HAVE BEEN IN A SITUATION WHERE THE APPLICANT HAS, AND REQUESTED A CONTINUANCE, AND WE HAVE GRANTED THAT. I APPRECIATE ALL OF THE CONCERN, THE EMAILS, PEOPLE BEING HERE. BUT I THINK WITH YOU BEING A LEGAL MIND AND MOST OF US ARE FOLLOWING THE LEGAL LAW, WE UNDERSTAND PRECEDENCE. AND THAT PRECEDENT HAS BEEN SET WHEN THE APPLICANT HAS COME BEFORE US. WE HAVE ALWAYS GRANTED THAT. AND I THINK VALID REASONS. SOME EVIDENCE, PEOPLE HAVE GOTTEN SICK, BUT I THINK WHAT GOING FORWARD NOW, I THINK I LIKE WHAT YOU ARE SAYING, AT A CERTAIN DATE, ALL OF THE EVIDENCE MUST BE IN, THIS IS THE DATE WE WILL GO. APRIL 15TH WILL BE THAT DAY. SO I AM READY TO MOVE FORWARD.

>> META-MAYOR AND COMMISSIONERS, I WAS JUST GOING TO POINT OUT BRIEFLY, IF YOU ARE TO GO WITH THE APRIL 14TH DATE, SORRY, THE 15TH. I APOLOGIZE. APRIL 15TH, APRIL 1ST IS ESSENTIALLY TWO WEEKS TO PROVIDE ANYTHING, AND TWO WEEKS TO REVIEW ANYTHING. SO THAT IS YOUR MIDDLE OF THE MARKET, IT WOULD BE APRIL 1ST.

>> I AM FINE WITH THAT. WHAT I DO NOT WANT ON AN ISSUE LIKE THIS AGAIN IS SOMEONE TO SAY THEY WAS IN THE DARK. IT HAS BEEN PRECEDENT AND WE HAVE GRANTED IT. BUT I DO NOT WANT TO GO DOWN THAT ROUTE TONIGHT, COMMISSIONER, JUST BECAUSE I WANT EVERYBODY TO UNDERSTAND WHAT I AM THINKING. BECAUSE ONE THING ABOUT THESE HEARINGS, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WHEN THAT

[00:30:03]

AGENDA IS PUBLISHED ON THAT WEDNESDAY AT 5:00, EVERYTHING IS THERE. EVERYTHING IS THERE. I DO NOT HAVE TO GO TELL YOU GUYS WHERE IT IS, IT IS RIGHT THERE. SO YOU WILL KNOW, I WILL KNOW, WE WILL ALL KNOW, WE WILL ALL READ IT AND WE WILL ALL BE ON THE SAME PAGE. TO ME, THAT WOULD BE A BETTER HEARING THAN THIS. WHAT COMMISSONER JOHNSON SAID WITH PRECEDENT, I AGREE 100%. EVERYONE HAS COME APPEAR, WE DO NOT EVEN HAVE THE SON OF A DISCUSSION. WE SAID OKAY AND MOVED ON.

>> THE THING TOO, COMMISSIONER, I AM SURE THE EMAILS WILL CONTINUE. IN THE GROCERY STORE STOPPING WILL CONTINUE. WE WILL CONTINUE, WE WILL CONTINUE READING. WE APPRECIATE THE

INPUT, THANK YOU ALL. >> COMMISSIONER GAINES, WILL

YOU MAKE EMOTION? >> WELL, I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO CONTINUE THIS, WITH A DATE CERTAIN TIME FOR ALL EVIDENCE, REGARDLESS THAT NEEDS TO BE IN.

APRIL 1ST, THAT GIVES US TWO WEEKS PRIOR TO THE HEARING ON

APRIL 15TH. >> I SECOND THAT MOTION.

>> META-MAYOR, SORRY, IF I CAN CLARIFY, THE DATE CERTAIN

HEARING WOULD BE APRIL 15TH? >> IT WILL BE APRIL 15TH, DATE CERTAIN. ALL EVIDENCE BY APRIL 1ST.

>> I WOULD LIKE ALL THE EVIDENCE SUBMITTED TO MY OFFICE. AND THEN I WILL GET IT OUT TO WHEREVER IT NEEDS TO GO.

THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE BY APRIL 1ST, WHAT TIME?

>> 5:00. >> THAT IS A MONDAY.

>> BY 5:00. >> I SECOND THAT.

>> I HAVE A QUESTION. IS THAT EVIDENCE FROM THE INTERVENER

ALSO? >> EVERYBODY.

>> YES, THAT IS HOW I UNDERSTOOD IT.

>> EVERYBODY, EVERYBODY. >> NO ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

AFTER APRIL 1ST. ALL RIGHT. >> THAT IS FAIR PLAY.

>> OKAY. CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE.

>> COMMISSIONER BRODERICK? >> MISSION OR GAINES? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON? MAYOR HUDSON?

>> THANK YOU ALL, VERY MUCH. SEE YOU IN A MONTH.

>> I LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING FROM YOU.

>> THANK YOU. YOU ARE WELCOME TO STAY.

>> I GUESS WE WILL TAKE A LITTLE RECESS HERE, MADAME.

OKAY, OKAY. >> THOSE EMAILS WILL BE FLYING NOW. BOY, YOU WILL GET SOME EMAILS NOW.

>> IF YOU COULD MOVED OUT OF THE CHAMBERS, WE COULD GET ON

WITH OUR MEETING. >> THANK YOU.

>> I DID. IF YOU WILL TAKE HER CONVERSATIONS OUTSIDE, WE WILL BE ABLE TO GET ON WITH OUR MEETING. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> CITY MANAGER, DO WE HAVE TIME TO EXPAND THE COMMISSION CHAMBERS BEFORE THE NEXT MEETING? TO ADD AN EXTRA 100 SEATS? ALWAYS GOOD TO SEE THE CITIZENS OF FORT PIERCE TO SHOW

UP. >> YES. THANK YOU.

>> IT IS A UNIQUE ISSUE. >> MAYOR, WE NEED TO VOTE ON

THE AGENDA NOW, RIGHT? >> THANK YOU. I WAS ABOUT READY TO MOVE ON. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. RIGHT, RIGHT. OKAY.

>> I GOT IT, MADAME MAYOR. >> I DO BELIEVE WE NEED A MOTION TO ALSO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS AMENDED.

>> I GOT IT. >> SINCE IT WAS I THAT MADE THE CONVERSATION GO LONG, I WILL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THE AGENDA WITH THE SUBTRACTION OF 12 H.

>> THERE IS A MOTION IN A SECOND. CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE.

[9. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC ON AGENDA ITEMS NOT REQUIRING PUBLIC HEARINGS Any person who wishes to comment on an agenda item which is not under Public Hearings on the Agenda may be heard at this time and must sign up to speak in advance. 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.]

THE PUBLIC. >> WE HAVE TWO PEOPLE WHO SIGNED UP. YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS. THIS COX WILL GIVE YOU A THREE SECOND

WARNING. MICHELLE GARZA. >> I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION. CAN

[00:35:10]

I ASK YOU, REALLY QUICK? THIS IS JUST FOR THE CONSENT AGENDA? AM DOING THE RIGHT THING. ALL RIGHT. CAN I GET MY GLASSES REALLY QUICK? OKAY. HERE WE ARE. MICHELLE GARZA. I DID REVIEW SOME OF THESE, THESE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS. AND I JUST, I HAVE A LITTLE BIT, YOU GUYS ARE GIVING ALL THESE GRANTS. I DO APPRECIATE THAT YOU GUYS HAVE GRANTS OUT THERE AVAILABLE. BUT HERE IS WHERE MY WISH IS FOR THE GRANT. I REALLY WISH THAT YOU GUYS COULD COME UP, THIS IS THE LINCOLN PARK MAINSTAY AREA. MY HOPE IS THAT YOU GUYS OPEN UP RAMPS FOR THE PEOPLE THAT ARE TRYING TO RUN REAL FEEL BUSINESSES HERE.

OKAY, BECAUSE I AM REALLY SAD TO SAY THAT ANOTHER PERSON IS GOING OUT OF BUSINESS. I HAVE COME TODAY TO SHOW MY SUPPORT, BECAUSE WE DO PROMOTE THE RETAIL BUSINESSES IN THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL COMMUNITY. I AM WEARING ALL DIFFERENT ITEMS FROM DIFFERENT PLACES. YOU KNOW, AND I JUST WOULD LIKE TO SEE YOU GUYS MAYBE OPEN UP SOME MORE GRANTS TO HELP THESE PEOPLE GET GOING IN ON THEIR FEET. BECAUSE WE NEED THE RETAIL SPACES. AND WE NEED AS MUCH HELP FOR THESE PEOPLE AS POSSIBLE, SO THAT THEY DO NOT HAVE TO CLOSE THEIR DOORS. YOU KNOW, YOU'VE GOT ANOTHER ONE THAT IS CLOSING. I KNOW TWO THAT ARE CLOSING BEFORE MAY. YOU KNOW, WE NEED THESE PEOPLE TO STAY OPEN. SO THAT IS MY HOPE. THANK YOU.

>> CHRIS EINSTEIN. CHRIS EINSTEIN 207 ORANGE AVENUE.

>> I'M ALSO SPEAKING ABOUT THE GRANT. I MAY NOT UNDERSTAND THIS FULLY, BUT I WAS A LITTLE CONCERNED WITH THE ATTORNEYS MEMO ABOUT THE LINCOLN PARK AND MAIN STREET GRANT, SAYING THAT THE NATIONAL OBJECTIVE LISTED DOES NOT MATCH ONE OF THE THREE OPTIONS FOR THE FUNDS. SO I AM CURIOUS ON WHAT EXACTLY MATCHES , OR THE FUNDS NOT SO MUCH WITH MAIN STREET, BECAUSE I KNOW ALL THE WORK THAT THEY DO, BUT IF FUNDS ARE BEING MISAPPROPRIATED , IT IS BECAUSE IT IS THINK IT IS SUPPOSED TO BE FOR CERTAIN ASPECTS FOR THE DOWNTOWN. NOT FOR THE DOWNTOWN, FOR THE BUSINESSES AND SUCH, AND EVERYTHING ON HERE FOR THE RENTS IN THE AGREEMENT JUST GOES INTO A LOT OF TECHNICAL TERMS. I HOPE YOU ASK EXACTLY WHAT THE FUNDS ARE BEING UED FOR, TO SEE HOW THEY ARE BEING APPROPRIATED. AND TO HELP KEEP THESE BUSINESSES TOGETHER. BECAUSE I AM CONFUSED ON WHERE THE MONEY IS GOING. THAT IS IT.

>> THANK YOU, MA'AM. >> ALREADY. MISS COX, THAT IS

[11. CONSENT AGENDA]

IT FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. >> NEXT, WE HAVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. ANY COMMISSION WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS AN ITEM ON THE

CONSENT AGENDA? >> I WOULD LIKE TO PULL 11 D,

PLEASE. >> ALL RIGHT.

>> I NEED TO PULL 11 , I JUST HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT 11 C.

>> ALL RIGHT. ANYTHING ELSE? IF NOT, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE CONSENT AGENDA.

>> MOVE FOR APPROVAL. >> A

]SECOND. >> CALL ROLE, PLEASE?

[c. Approval of CDBG Grant Agreement with Lincoln Park Mainstreet, Inc.in the amount of $50,000.00.]

>> 11 C IS APPROVA OF CBD G GRANT IN THE AMOUNT OF $50,000.

COMMISSIONER GAINES? >> MADAME MAYOR, I PULLED THIS BECAUSE WE JUST HEARD TWO QUESTIONS FROM TWO RESIDENTS REGARDING THIS GRANT. SO CAN WE ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT WERE ASKED IN THE PUBLIC COMMENTS? DO WE KNOW WHAT THE GRANT IS FOR? DO WE KNOW HOW THE MONEY IS BEING USED?

>> MISS HEDGES? >> MADAME MAYOR,

[00:40:07]

COMMISSIONERS, I WOULD HAVE TO REFER THAT BACK TO GRANDSTAFF.

I SAW THEM EARLIER HERE I THOUGHT, BUTTHIS IS THE GRANTS DEPARTMENT, PROCESSING THE GRANTS. IT IS THEIR JOB TO

REVIEW THOSE. >> GOOD EVENING MAYOR AND COMMISSIONERS. THE QUESTION, YOU WANTED TO KNOW WHAT IS IT?

>> THE QUESTIONS THAT JUST CAME FROM THE RESIDENCE WAS, YOU KNOW, BASICALLY, WHAT IS THE GRANT GOING FOR, OR YOU KNOW, WHAT ARE THEY GOING TO USE IT FOR, IF YOU KNOW?

>> THE GRANT IS TO BE USED FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SPECIFIC AREA. COMMUNITY INITIATIVE AND PROJECTS. SAME AS THE DOWNTOWN MAIN STREET. IT IS FOR THE DOWNTOWN AREA. THAT IS FOR THE LINCOLN PARK AREA AS WELL. THAT IS WHAT IT IS TO BE USED FOR. IT HAS BEEN FUNDED THROUGH CBD G WELL BEFORE MY EXISTENCE. AND THAT IS, YOU KNOW, THE EXPENDITURES ARE REIMBRSABLE. SO ONCE THEY ARE, THE AGENCY EXPENDS THOSE FUNDS ON THE ALLOWABLE EXPENSES, THEY ARE REIMBURSED THAT AMOUNT FOR

THOSE ALLOWABLE EXPENSES. >> OKAY. THAT IS WHAT I WANTED TO MAKE SURE FOR EVERYBODY HERE. IT IS NOT THAT THE CITY IS GIVING OUT $50,000. THE LINCOLN PARK MAINSTREET, THE PEOPLE GETTING THIS MONEY, THEY HAVE TO GO OUT AND SPEND AN AMOUNT ON SOMETHING THAT IS IN THIS AREA THAT HELPS THAT

AREA. >> RIGHT.

>> THAT IS A PROCESS, IT IS A PROCESS THAT GOES THROUGH YOUR EYES, OUR EYES, EVERYBODY'S EYES, TO SAY, HEY, THIS IS WHAT THE MONEY IS USED FOR. AND I JUST PUT UP A SIGN TO SAY, SEND

US A CHECK FOR $50,000. >> CORRECT. THEY HAVE TO PROVIDE INVOICES FOR THOSE EXPENSES ON A QUARTERLY BASIS,

THE PROVIDERS INVOICES. >> RIGHT. AND LIKE YOU SAID EARLIER, THERE IS SOMETHING CALLED MAIN STREET. IF THERE ARE OTHER GRANTS FOR MAIN STREET.

>> EXACTLY, THE SAME AMOUNT IS GIVEN TO EACH.

>> IT IS GIVEN TO EACH AGENCY. THANK YOU.

>> MADAME MAYOR, I WANT TO MAKE A COMMENT ON HERE. THANK YOU FOR THAT LINE OF QUESTIONING, COMMISSIONER GAINES. I THINK THE OTHER THING TOO, THIS IS A FEDERAL PROCESS. THIS IS A FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. THERE ARE RULES THAT THEY REQUIRE CERTAIN INFORMATION TO BE REIMBURSABLE, MEANING WHATEVER THE CRITERIA IS, IT HAS TO BE MET. AND WE WILL HAVE A REPORT HERE A LITTLE BIT LATER FROM OUR FINANCE DEPARTMENT, AND I WILL HAVE SOME QUESTIONS AT THAT TIME AS TO THE CASPER REPORT.

I THINK THAT WILL BE A GREAT OPPORTUNITY, AGAIN, FOR THE COMMUNITY TO UNDERSTAND HOW THESE THINGS WORK. BUT OFTEN TIMES, IT IS NOT US, IT IS THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT THAT PUTS STIPULATIONS ON HOW AND WHERE THIS MONEY CAN GO INTO THOSE COMMUNITIES AND WHAT IS ALLOWABLE. AND I THINK THAT IS SOMETHING I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE COMMUNITY UNDERSTANDS.

THESE ARE FEDERAL DOLLARS. AND WE WILL NOT JEOPARDIZE THE CITY'S GOOD STANDING WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OVER $50,000

OR $100,000. THANK YOU. >> COMMISSIONER JOHNSON, THANK YOU FOR THAT. I WANTED TO PULL IT BECAUSE THEY SIGNED IN TO TALK ABOUT IT. WE HAVE A CHANCE TO TALK ABOUT HERE, AND THEN I KNOW THE OTHER REPORT IS COMING UP. MADAME MAYOR, BASED ON THE ANSWERS THAT I HAVE, AND KNOWING WHAT IS COMING ON THE AGENDA, I MOVE THAT WE WILL ACCEPT 11 C OF THE CONSENT.

>> EMOTION IN A SECOND. CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE.

[d. Approval of the union contract between the City of Fort Pierce and the Teamsters Local Union Number 769 regarding wages and D.R.O.P. adoption.]

CALLED ] >> THE APPROVAL OF THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE AND LOCAL TEAMSTERS UNION NUMBER 769 IN WAGES AND D.R.O.P. ADOPTION.

>> I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU TO STEPH FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD AND GETTING IT EXPEDITED, GETTING THE NEGOTIATION PROCESS COMPLETED ON BEHALF OF OUR EMPLOYEES. THAT HAVE NOT HAD THE INCREASES THAT WE HAVE PREVIOUSLY TALKED ABOUT , BECAUSE OF THIS, IT WAS AN UNCHECKED BOX. NOW WE ARE CHECKING A BOX. I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION FOR MISS HEDGES THOUGH THAT I PROPOSE, I WILL ASK MR. MIMS TO WEIGH IN IN JUST A SECOND. UNLESS YOU NEED TO WEIGH IN FIRST. IN ARTICLE 15 IN THE CONTRACT , IF YOU LOOK AT THE CONTRACT, THE CITY AGREES TO DEDUCT MONTHLY THE EARNINGS. NOW THAT CURRENTLY HAS BEEN SUPERSEDED BY THE LEGISLATURE IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA, MAYBE SIGNED BY THE GOVERNOR AT THIS POINT. SO COULD YOU PROVIDE AN UPDATE TO ME AS FAR AS LEADING US INTO THIS CONTRACT, I FEEL LIKE IT SHOULD BE REMOVED BECAUSE OF

[00:45:08]

THAT. BUT CAN YOU WEIGH IN ON THAT?

>> META-MAYOR AND COMMISSIONERS, THAT IS CORRECT.

STATE LAW CHANGED. DUES ARE NO LONGER ALLOWED TO BE DEDUCTED FROM THEIR PAYCHECKS. THEY HAVE TO PAY THOSE SUBSEQUENTLY. MR. JOHNSON, I DO NOT BELIEVE HE IS HERE. HE COMMUNICATED WITH THE TEAMSTERS UNION REP, ESSENTIALLY ASKING THAT BE REMOVED. THE EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE I RECEIVED BACK, BECAUSE I PERSONALLY AM NOT THE ONE ENGAGING IN THOSE NEGOTIATIONS, WAS AT THE TEAMSTERS ACKNOWLEDGED THAT IS THE STATE OF THE LAW, THAT DUES CANNOT BE DEDUCTED ANY LONGER.

HOWEVER, THEY HAVE REQUESTED, AND THEIR POSITION IS THAT IT REMAINS IN THE CONTRACT AS IT ALWAYS HAS BEEN, BECAUSE OF THE SECONDARY LINE IN THAT. IT SAYS SUCH AUTHORIZATION TO BE VALID SHOULD BE PERFORMED TO APPLICABLE STATE LAW. SO THEY HAVE ACKNOWLEDGED IN WRITING THAT THEY UNDERSTAND STATE LAW HAS CHANGED. THEY ARE REQUESTING THAT IT REMAIN AS IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN, IN CASE THE LAW CHANGES BACK, TO THEN ALLOW DUES TO BE DEDUCTED LATER ON. OF COURSE, IF YOU ALL DO NOT WISH TO APPROVE THE AGREEMENT WITH THE LANGUAGE AS IT CURRENTLY IS, WE WOULD GO BACK TO THE NEGOTIATING TABLE WITH THEM. BUT THAT IS THEIR POSITION ON WHY IT IS STILL IN THE CONTRACT AS IT WAS PREVIOUSLY.

>> THANK YOU FOR THAT. MR. MIMS, IN YOUR POSITION, WOULD YOU JUST ADVISE ME ON HOW LONG IT WOULD TAKE, IF WE WERE TO REMOVE THIS FROM THE CONTRACT, WE WOULD HAVE TO THEN GO BACK TO THE NEGOTIATING TABLE AND HAVE THEM, YOU KNOW, BASICALLY PING-PONG THE BALL BACK TO US, PROBABLY SAYING WE WOULD NOT LIKE TO DO THAT, BECAUSE I HAVE SEEN THE EMAIL AND I JUST HEARD FROM MISS HEDGES ON THE EMAIL. WOULD THAT BE A LENGTHY PROCESS? OR WHAT WOULD THAT BE, IN YOUR EXPERT OPINION?

>> I'M NOT GOING TO GUESS THAT I WILL NOT TELL YOU AT A SPECIFIC. BUT I DO BELIEVE THAT IT WOULD TAKE A MINIMUM OF 30 DAYS. SO WE WOULD BE LOOKING AT THE SECOND MEETING OF APRIL. I DO NOT KNOW THE POSITION OF THE TEAMSTERS WITH REGARD TO REMOVING THAT ARTICLE. BUT I DO KNOW THAT THEY UNDERSTAND THAT WE ARE NO LONGER DEDUCT THESE AMOUNTS FROM OUR EMPLOYEES SALARIES FOR THEIR PURPOSE. SO THEY ARE VERY WELL AWARE, THEY UNDERSTAND THAT. AND I HAVE SPECIFICALLY ASKED, JUST LIKE

HANNAH SAID, THAT IT REMAIN. >> THANK YOU FOR THAT, SIR.

COMMISSIONERS, I BRING THIS FORWARD BECAUSE , IN MY OBSERVATION AND UNDERSTANDING OF THIS, YOU KNOW, I HAVE ALWAYS DISAGREED WITH THIS ARTICLE BECAUSE I BELIEVE IT IS AN EXTRA BURDEN ON THE TAXPAYERS OF FORT PIERCE TO HAVE CITY STAFF PERFORMING THIS TASK. IT MIGHT BE VERY MINOR, IT MIGHT BE ADMINISTRATIVE, AND IT IS ADMINISTRATIVE, AND IT IS WITHIN OUR PAYROLL DEPARTMENT, I JUST DISAGREE THAT THE TAXPAYERS SHOULD BE PAYING FOR THAT SERVICE. SO I BELIEVE THAT THE STATE ALSO HAD THAT FEELING. AND THAT IS WHY IT IS WHERE IT IS TODAY. OBVIOUSLY THE BARGAINING UNIT EMPLOYEES THAT BELONG TO THE UNION NOW CONTINUE TO PARTICIPATE ON THEIR OWN ACTION, SO THAT THEY ARE PARTICIPATING THROUGH FINANCIAL MEANS OR PROVIDING A CHECK, WHATEVER THAT IS. THAT IS MY ISSUE WITH THIS. MY OTHER PROBLEM IS THAT IF WE HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE NEGOTIATING TABLE, WHICH IS REALLY NOT A NEGOTIATION, BECAUSE IT IS A LAW IN FLORIDA RIGHT NOW, I JUST BELIEVE THAT IF THEY WANT THIS BACK INO A UNION CONTRACT LATER ON, IT SHOULD BE A NEGOTIATING POINT THAT THEY SHOULD BRING FORWARD. I DO NOT JUST ARBITRARILY SIGN OFF ON IT TODAY BECAUSE I AM JUST SIGNING OFF ON IT, BECAUSE THERE IS A LINE AT THE END THAT SAYS, WELL, IF THE STATE SAYS IS THAT IT IS OKAY, YOU KNOW, WE WILL ABIDE BY THAT. JUST DELETE IT FROM THE CONTRACT. THAT IS MY PERSONAL VIEW OF THIS FROM ANALYZING IT IN MULTIPLE WAYS. BUT I ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT IT IS GOING TO BE POSSIBLY ANOTHER 30 DAY DELAY FOR, YOU KNOW, A MINIMUM, FOR THIS TO COME BACK IN FRONT OF US, BECAUSE THEY WOULD HAVE TO AGAIN RATIFY A CHANGE. BUT, YOU KNOW, I JUST WANT TO GET THAT OUT ON THE TABLE AND ASK YOUR POSITION ALSO, IF YOU HAD A CHANCE TO LOOK AT IT.

>> IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WE COULD, BECAUSE I WANT THEM TO GET THEIR RAISES. AND YOU DO TOO. I KNOW YOU DO TOO. AND I WANT US TO FOLLOW THE LAW TOO. SO IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WE COULD GIVE DIRECTION IN THE NEXT NEGOTIATION? THAT IT IS

SOMETHING TAKEN OUT? >> I WOULD BE OKAY WITH THAT.

THIS IS A YEAR-LONG, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN. ONE YEAR.

>> THE NEXT TIME, JUST FOR THE STAFF TO MAKE A NOTE THAT THE NEXT TIME THE COMMISSION, IF EVERYBODY AGREES WITH THAT, THAT NEEDS TO BE RENEGOTIATED AND RE-LOOKED AT. I THINK WHAT

[00:50:02]

YOU ARE SAYING IS THAT BEFORE WE GO BACK TO DOING IT, EVEN IF THE STATE LAW CHANGES, WE SHOULD HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT IT. ISN'T THAT WHAT YOU ARE SAYING?

>> YES, MA'AM. ONE FINAL QUESTION, IF I COULD. MR. MIMS. THERE IS A CERTIFICATION PROCESS, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN.

I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE TERM IS FOR THE UNIONS, SPECIFICALLY THE TEAMSTERS UNION. WHEN IS THAT HAPPENING? I MIGHT JUST BE

TALKING ABOUT A FEW MONTHS. >> I BELIEVE, BASED ON THE INFORMATION I RECEIVED, IN THE MONTH OF MAY.

>> THE MONTH OF MAY. SO WHY WE DO NOT NECESSARILY NEGOTIATE THE CONTRACT, BUT THERE IS A PROCESS CALLED, WHAT, THAT

HAPPENS IN MAY? >> I DO NOT KNOW OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, SIR. I CAN GET THAT INFORMATION TO YOU.

>> BUT IT IS A CERTIFICATION OF SHORT? USING MY LANGUAGE?

>> YES, IT IS. IT DOES NOT REVOLVE AROUND THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE. THAT IS WITH ANOTHER AGENCY. PRC. I DO NOT KNOW

EXACTLY WHAT THAT STANDS FOR. >> PUBLIC EMPLOYEE SOMETHING.

>> THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE, WE ARE NOT INVOLVED IN THAT PROCESS. BUT IF WE DO FEEL THAT SOMETHING IS NOT CORRECT, WE CAN ALWAYS CHALLENGE THE RESULTS OF THAT CERTIFICATION.

>> WRITES, OKAY. COMMISSIONERS, I JUST BRING THIS FORWARD BECAUSE I JUST HAVE AN INTEGRAL -- ISSUE WITH THAT ARTICLE. I

TRULY DO. >> I DO. JUST A QUICK QUESTION.

I DO NOT WANT TO POSTPONE ANY RAISES. THESE EMPLOYEES WORK HARD. THEY NEED THEIR RAISES. MY QUESTION IS THIS. HOW CAN WE SIGN A CONTRACT WITH LANGUAGE IN IT THAT WE KNOW THAT THE LAW HAS CHANGED? THAT IS MY QUESTION. THE LAW HAS CHANGED, THE GOVERNMENT HAS SIGNED IT. THE GOVERNOR SIGNED INTO LAW.

THAT IS ONE THING THAT HE DID SIGN. SO MY QUESTION IS, HOW CAN WE SAY, OKAY, WE CAN LEAVE IT IN A THIS TIME. IT IS A LAW.

AND I THAT WE HAD TO, YOU KNOW, HE SIGNED IT INTO LAW.

DESIGNING OUR DATE ON THIS CONTRACT WILL BE AFTER THE DATE

OF HIS SIGNATURE INTO LAW. >> WHAT DATE IS IT THOUGH THAT

IT GOES INTO EFFECT? >> IT WAS BEFORE THIS IS THE SESSION. RIGHT, RIGHT. BEFORE. MR. MIMS ?

>> I BELIEVE THIS CONTRACT, THIS ONE YEAR, SHORT-TERM ARRANGEMENT HAS BEEN NEGOTIATED. OUR CITY ATTORNEY HAS REVIEWED THIS. THE PROVISIONS OF THE ARTICLE HAVE A COUPLE POWERFUL WORDS. IT SAYS, IF APPLICABLE. IT IS NO LONGER APPLICABLE. SO WE ARE NOT COLLECTING THE DUES FOR THE EMPLOYEES. BASICALY, WE ARE FOLLOWING THE LAW.

>> I'M HAVING A DISCUSSION WITH MR. MIMS. I AGREE WITH YOU. I READ THOSE TWO WORDS TOO. BUT SINCE COMMISSIONER JOHNSON BROUGHT IT UP, THERE IS A LAW SIGNED BY THE GOVERNMENT OR IN TALLAHASSEE THAT SAYS, DO NOT DO THIS. EVEN THOUGH IT HAD THEM LAST TWO WORDS IN THEIR, AND THEN HE WON THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE TO SIGN OFF ON IT? I HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THAT. BUT IF EVERYBODY IS GOOD, EVERYBODY SAYS --

>> YOU KNOW THE WAY TO SOLVE THE ISSUE? WE KNOW WE WANT

THEM TO GET THEIR RAISES. >> I WANT THEM TO GET THEI RAISES. I WANT THEM TO GET THEIR RAISES. ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE LISTENING TO THIS, I WANT YOU TO GET YOUR RAISES.

WHAT I DO NOT WANT IS A CARD FROM TALLAHASSEE SAYING, WHY

DID YOU LEAVE THAT IN THERE. >> WE ARE NOT BREAKING THE LAW.

THAT WOULD BE OUR ANSWER TO THAT CALL. TO THAT CALL. BUT I DO NOT EVEN WANT THE CALL. EVERY TIME YOU GET A CALL, THE NEXT QUESTION IS GOING HERE AND THERE.

>> YOU SOME OF YOU HAVE EXPERIENCE.

>> I MAY HAVE HAD PAST CALLS FROM TALLAHASSEE. I DO NOT WANT ANYMORE. BUT IF MADAME ATTORNEY, NOW I AM PUTTING THIS ON YOU, MADAME ATTORNEY. IF YOU ARE GOOD WITH IT IN A CITY MANAGER, YOU GUYS ARE GOOD WITH IT, I VOICED MY OPINION. I DO NOT WANT ANY MORE DELAYS WITH OUR EMPLOYEES GETTING THEIR RAISES AND THEIR MONEY. I DEFER TO YOU, MADAME ATTORNEY, ON THIS ONE. IF APPLICABLE AND EVERYTHING ELSE THAT GOES ON WITH THAT PART, WHAT THE GOVERNOR DID. IF YOU ARE GOOD

TO GO, I AM GOOD TO. >> MADAME MAYOR, BEFORE YOU

SPEAK? >> YES, GO AHEAD.

[00:55:06]

>> SHE AND I HAD A CONVERSATION ABOUT THIS, COMMISSIONER. I HAVE THE EXACT SAME CERTAIN CONCERNS. THAT IS WHAT I BROUGHT UP TONIGHT. SHE SAID IT TONIGHT ON RECORD ABOUT THE LAST STATEMENT THAT SAYS AUTHORIZATION TO BE VALID ONLY UNTIL, YOU KNOW. RIGHT? SO THE LEGALESE IS GOOD. HOWEVER, MY CONCERN IS THAT IF WE APPROVE THIS TONIGHT, WE HAVE ELIMINATED A NEGOTIATING TOOL LATER ON. THERE IS ALSO THE PART OF THE CITY BEING ON THE HOOK IF SOMETHING WERE TO HAPPEN THROUGH, YOU KNOW, A LAWSUIT FROM, YOU KNOW, THE TEAMSTERS INTO TALLAHASSEE, AND THAT IT GETS CHALLENGED, IT GETS OVERTURNED. NOW WE JUST VOTED SOMETHING AND THAT IS AUTOMATICALLY INTO THE CONTRACT. DID I INTERPRET THAT

CORRECTLY? >> YES. I BELIEVE YOU ARE CORRECT IN YOUR UNDERSTANDING. IF THE LAW DOES CHANGE, BASED ON HOW THIS WAS WRITTEN, IT WOULD GO BACK TO US DEDUCTING

FOR THE EMPLOYEES. >> CAN WE APPROVE THE CONTRACT BASED ON THAT, AND WE WANT THE RAISES APPROVED TONIGHT AND THIS IS THE CNTRACT, BUT WE WANT THAT PARAGRAPH TAKEN OUT? THAT SAYS THIS ONLY APPLIES IF IT IS PERMITTED, ESSENTIALLY, UNDER THE LAW. THE LAW DOES NOT ALLOW IT CURRENTLY. HOWEVER, IF THE LAW CHANGES TO ALLOW IT, IT WOULD GO BACK TO THE DEDUCTIONS OCCURRING. I DO THINK THE COMMISSION HAS BEEN PRETTY CLEAR ON THE ISSUES MOVING FORWARD. AND MR. JOHNSON, THE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIRECTOR, IS NOW IN CHAMBERS AND I THINK HE CAN HEAR ALL OF YOUR POSITIONS. AND IF HE HAS ANYTHING TO ADD, IF WE HAVE SAID ANYTHING INCORRECTLY, I THINK HE CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS WE MAY HAVE.

>> MADAME MAYOR, MY LAST QUESTION IS, DID THIS ADMINISTRATION BECOME BIGGEST ADVOCATES OF EMPLOYEES IN FORT PIERCE? WE ARE THE BIGGEST ADVOCATES FOR THE EMPLOYEES OF THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE. WHETHER YOU ARE PART OF THE UNION OR NOT. THIS COMMISSION HAS ALWAYS TAKEN IT UPON OURSELVES TO MAKE SURE THAT WE TAKE CARE OF THE EMPLOYEES THAT WE APPRECIATE THE EMPLOYEES. I DO NOT WANT THAT TO BE SWEPT UNDER THE RUG. THAT IS NOT WHY I AM BRINGING THIS FORWARD. I AM BRINGING THIS FORWARD BECAUSE IN A YEAR FROM NOW OR SIX MONTHS FROM NOW, OR SOME OTHER TIMEFRAME, I WANT TO GIVE OTHERS THAT ARE HERE IN THE CITY OR THE PUBLIC, OR THIS COMMISSION, THIS BODY, WHOMEVER IS SITTING IN THESE CHAIRS, THE RENEGOTIATE, AND WORK THESE ISSUES, WITHOUT ME HAVING AN INFLUENCE TODAY ON THAT. SO TO ME, I HAVE AN INFLUENCE ON IT IF I VOTE IN FAVOR OF THIS CONTRACT WITH THIS ARTICLE AND IT. AND I HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THAT. I DO NOT LIKE THAT

ARTICLE. >> MADAME MAYOR, A QUESTION. I KNOW MY MEMORY IS FADING WITH TIME. BUT I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT WE HAD RATIFIED THEIR INCREASE IN PAY PRIOR TO THIS CONTRACT BEING WRAPPED UP, SEVERAL MONTHS AGO.

>> WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IT. >> WE WERE NOT ABLE TO DO IT BECAUSE OF THE COMPLICATIONS? OKAY. I JUST HAD A FLASHBACK. I NOW REMEMBER WHY. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON AND GAINES , THE LANGUAGE IN THE CONTRACT THAT IS IRRELEVANT TO THE CONTRACT THAT POTENTIALLY CAN BECOME PROBLEMATIC DOWN THE LINE, I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH YOUR POSITION. BUT IF WE ARE NOT IN A ROLE CAPABLE OF GETTING THESE RAISES IN PLACE IMMEDIATELY, I WILL DEFAULT TO SAY, AND I KNOW YOU ARE AS WELL, I WANT THE RAISES IN PLACE NOW. WE WILL CLEAN THIS UP AT THE NEXT GO

ROUND. >> MADAME MAYOR AND NUMBERS OF THE CITY COMMISSION, A COUPLE MEETINGS AGO, YOU ALL DIRECTED STAFF TO MOVE FORWARD AND TAKE CARE OF OUR EMPLOYEES. THE TEAMSTERS BARGAINING UNIT REPRESENTING EMPLOYEES ARE THE LOWEST PAID GROUP OF EMPLOYEES AT THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE.

THIS CONTRACT NEGOTIATION HAS GONE ON FAR TOO LONG. THERE WERE COMPLICATIONS, THERE WERE LINES DRAWN IN THE SAND.

BECAUSE OF MR. JOHNSON, BECAUSE OF HIS EFFORTS AND HIS TEAM'S EFFORT , WE WERE ABLE TO GET THIS DONE AS A STOPGAP MEASURE TO GET OUR EMPLOYEES HOPEFULLY PAID AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.

MOVING FORWARD, WE WILL IMMEDIATELY REOPEN NEGOTIATIONS FOR THE ENTIRE CONTRACT. IN THAT WAY, WE CAN HAVE A CONTRACT THAT YOU ALL ARE APPROVING OF, AND STAFF IS DEFINITELY RECOMMENDING WITH CONFIDENCE.

>> ALL RIGHT. MADAME MAYOR. THAT IS THE ISSUE I HAVE. WE CANNOT MOVE FORWARD WITH WHAT TO DO WHEN WE HAVE AN ARTICLE THAT I JUST DO NOT AGREE WITH. EVEN THOUGH THERE IS LANGUAGE

[01:00:06]

THAT SAYS HOWEVER AND AUTHORIZATION TO BE VALID ONLY IF, AND IT SAYS THAT, IT IS LEGAL AND IT IS OKAY. BUT I JUST BELIEVE THAT IT SHOULD BE A THING THAT IS OFF THE TABLE AT THE SAME TIME. I AM SORRY WE ARE CAUGHT IN THIS ROCK AND HARD PLACE HERE. BUT WE ARE. WE ASKED THEM TO BRING IT FORWARD, THANK YOU MR. JOHNSON FOR WORKING HARD AND DOING THIS. I MEAN, I DID NOT HEAR ANY OTHER OUTSTANDING, YOU KNOW, GLARING THINGS IN THE CONTRACT THAT I NEED TO WORRY ABOUT, OR THAT THIS COMMISSION NEEDS TO WORRY ABOUT, IF NO ONE ELSE HAS ANYTHING. I ASSUME THAT THE NEXT NEGOTIATION, STAFF WILL ALSO CONSIDER IT. YOU WILL BE AT THE TABLE WITH NEGOTIATIONS.

IT IS A YEAR LONG. IF SOMETHING HAPPENED IN THE INTERIM, I GUESS WE WILL GET IT THERE AND NEGOTIATE WHEN IT IS TIME TO RENEGOTIATE THE CONTRACT. THIS MIGHT NOT BE AN ISSUE LATER ON

ANYWAY. >> FUTURE CONTRACTS, WE WANT THAT OUT OF THERE, AND WE WANT FUTURE COMMISSIONS TO SAY IF THEY WANTED BACK IN IF IT EVER BECOMES LEGAL?

>> 100%. >> I SAID THAT RIGHT?

>> YES. >> IS THERE A MOTION TO BE MADE

NEXT >> I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE

THE UNION CONTRACT. >> IS THERE A SECOND?

>> SECOND. >> CALLED THE ROLL, PLEASE.

[a. Presentation and Public Hearing on the 2022-23 Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER)]

ROLL BEING CALLED ] >> OKAY, NEXT WE HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING AND PRESENTATION ON THE 2022-2023 CONSOLIDATED ANNUAL PERFORMANCE CONSOLIDATED REPORT.

>> MADAME MAYOR AND NUMBERS OF THE CITY COMMISSION, YOU ARE JUST TALKING ABOUT GRANTS. LOOK AT HERE. WE HAVE OUR DIRECTOR OF FINANCE AND OUR BRAND-NEW GRANTS ADMINISTRATION DIVISION MANAGER. SO, SOME INTRODUCTIONS ARE NEEDED.

>> SOME INTRODUCTIONS ARE NECESSARY.

>> GOOD EVENING. I AM HERE TONIGHT TO ASSIST OUR NEW GRANTS ADMINISTRATION DIVISION MANAGER, MISS DANIELA CLARK, WHO IS VERY, VERY NEW. ACTUALLY, SHE IS NOT THE PERSON WHO WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PAPER. SHE COULD NOT MAKE IT TONIGHT. SO SHE IS STEPPING IN AND I WILL ASSIST HER.

>> WELCOME, MS. CLARK.

GOOD EVENING. HELLO TO THE PUBLIC AS WELL.

>> CAN YOU PULL YOUR MICROPHONE CLOSER? I CANNOT HEAR YOU.

>> THANK YOU. >> AS MS. MORRIS INDICATED, I AM DANIELA CLARK. I AM THE NEW GRANTS MANAGER FOR THE GRANTS TEAM. LOVELY TO BE HERE. THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME. I AM HERE TONIGHT TO PRESENT THE CONSOLIDATED ANNUAL PERFORMANCE AND EVALUATION REPORT FOR FISCAL YEAR OF 2022, WHICH WE ENDEARINGLY REFERRED TO AS THE C.A.P.E.R.. SO THE CONSOLIDATED ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REPORT IS PART OF THE ANNUAL ACTION PLAN. IT IS YEAR TWO. WE ARE DISCUSSING MANY OF THE ACTIVITIES THAT THE CITIES GRANTS ADMINISTRATION DIVISION HAS BROUGHT FORWARD THROUGH FEDERAL FUNDING. SO I WILL BE PRESENTING YEAR TWO, AS I SAID. BASED ON THE PRIORITY NEEDS THAT WERE ILLUSTRATED BY THE CB DIGI GRANT, THE COMMUNITY ALLOTMENT GRANT, WE PERFORMED AND PROVIDED MANY OF OUR RESIDENTS HERE LOTS OF SERVICES THROUGH THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, WE WERE ABLE TO SERVE 35 SMALL BUSINESSES . OUR PUBLIC SERVICES GRANT, WE WERE ABLE TO SERVE 856 OF OUR LOW INCOME RESIDENTS THROUGH FOUR PROJECT. THOSE FOUR PROJECTS INCLUDE -- SORRY. MY NOTES ARE A LITTLE SCRAMBLED. THERE. SO THAT WOULD BE THE LINCOLN PARK MAINSTREET. SORRY, THAT WOULD BE THE MARINE CLEANUP , THE TESTING, AND ALSO THE PUBLIC SERVICE ADMINISTRATIVE GRANT OPPORTUNITIES, WHERE WE WERE ABLE TO COORDINATE WITH SEVERAL OF OUR OTHER AREAS. SO THE

[01:05:06]

PUBLIC FACILITIES INFRASTRUCTURE IS SHOWING NONE.

IN YEAR THREE, SOME OF THE OWNER-OCCUPIED HOUSING WE HAVE, WE PROVIDED A TOTAL OF 13 HOUSEHOLDS WITH THREE PROJECTS.

OF THOSE HOUSEHOLD BENEFIT FROM WORLD CHANGERS, PAINT OUR TOWN, AND THE FINAL ONE WAS THE GRANTS REHABILITATION, WHERE WE WERE ABLE TO REHAB HOUSES AND PROVIDED THOSE IN NEED OF REPAIRS, SOME VERY VITAL FRONT WINDOWS TO AIR CONDITIONING UNITS, THINGS OF THAT NATURE. OUR FINAL PROGRAM WAS THE NEIGHBORHOOD REVITALIZATION, WHERE WE HELPED 2000 MEMBERS THROUGH THE LINCOLN PARK MAINSTREET FORT PIERCE MAIN STREET, THE HIGH WOMAN'S FESTIVAL, AND OUR JUNETEENTH ANNUAL PRESENTATION. AS I SAID, SOME OF THE HIGHLIGHTS ARE THE 35 BUSINESSES WHERE WE PROVIDED TECHNICAL AND ADVISEMENT SERVICES USING THE GRANTS. THE SMALL BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT CENTER AT IRS SEE WAS ONE OF THE VEHICLES WE USED TO CONNECT WITH THOSE SMALL BUSINESSES. AND AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, WE DID 13 HOUSEHOLD REHABS THROUGH THE GRANT, HIGHLIGHTING ALL OF THOSE PROGRAMS THAT I DISCUSSED. THE WORLD CHANGERS AND PAINT OUR TOWN. ONE OF THE PUBLIC SERVICES WE UTILIZED WAS THE SUMMER CAMPS AND YOUTH TRAINING FOR OUR BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB WESTSIDE CHURCH. WE WERE ABLE TO HELP A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF FOLKS WHO ARE LOW INCOME THROUGH THAT ORGANIZATION. AND OUR FINAL NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES , WE SERVED 2000 PEOPLE. THIS IS A TYPO, AND ARE LOW TO MODERATE INCOME TO THE COMMUNITY GARDEN. WELL, ONE OF THOSE COMMUNITY GARDENS WAS OUR PROGRAMS. SO, THE UTILIZATION OF THE CARES ACT, WE WERE ABLE TO COVER, WE WERE ABLE TO USE $70,000 IN FUNDING, ASSISTING 75 YOUTH JOB AND READINESS PROGRAMS, AND GETTING THEM READY FOR THE SKILLS PERSPECTIVE. THE BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB, AGAIN, RECEIVED SERVICES THROUGH THOSE JOB PLACEMENTS IN HIS INTERNSHIP. AND WE WERE ABLE TO UTILIZE OUR PARTNERSHIPS WITH THE HANDS CLINICS TO SERVE 3000 PEOPLE IN ACQUIRING COVID VACCINATIONS IN LOW INCOME AREAS. OUR REQUEST OR OUR APPEAL FOR RECOMMENDATION IS THAT THE COMMISSIONERS AND MADAME MAYOR PROVIDE US WITH THE ABILITY TO SUBMIT THE C.A.P.E.R. TO HUD, AND ANY RECOMMENDATIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE FOR US, WE WOULD BE REALLY APPRECIATIVE OF THAT. TO MAKE SURE THAT ALL INFORMATION IS BROUGHT BACK TO OUR ENTERAL PARTNERS.

>> THANK YOU, MA'AM. >> THANK YOU FOR THE

OPPORTUNITY. >> I WILL START OFF WITH A COMMENTS. WELCOME, MS. CLARK. SO, REALLY, A COUPLE OF COMMENTS. THIS WAS ONE AREA THAT REALLY DUG INTO AND WE CONTINUE TO DIG INTO, AS YOU HAVE HEARD FROM SOME COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC, MAYBE. YOU HAVE A HABIT. BUT THIS IS OUR OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE THOSE RESOURCES TO THE COMMUNITY AND WITH OFFICIAL PARTNERS. AND I THINK AS WE CONTINUE TO MOVE FORWARD, IT IS IMPORTANT, I WANT TO HIGHLIGHT A COUPLE OF THINGS. THESE ARE FEDERAL DOLLARS THAT WE GET. WE HAVE TO UTILIZE THOSE WITHIN THEIR GUIDELINES. SOMETIMES THEY CAN BE PRETTY STRICT AND VERY , VERY, YOU KNOW, DIRECT AS TO WHAT YOU CAN AND CANNOT DO. AND I THINK THE OTHER THING IS THAT IF WE ARE NOT UTILIZING FUNDS AND CANNOT FIND THE UTILIZATION OF THEM WITHIN THE PARAMETERS, WE LOSE THESE OPPORTUNITIES, OR WE MAY LOSE THESE OPPORTUNITIES BECAUSE THOSE FUNDS ARE EITHER TAKEN FROM US AND WE ARE LOCATED AT SOME OTHER POINT. SO I AM REALLY APPEALING TO THE PUBLIC WITH THIS AS WELL. YOUR GRANTS DEPARTMENT PERSON ACTUALLY CAME, IT WAS A GROUP OF FAITH LEADERS THAT REALLY WANTED TO UNDERSTAND. WE HAD JUST RELEASED THE REHAB HOUSING PROGRAM, ET CETERA. AND THERE WERE MORE QUESTIONS ABOUT QUALIFICATIONS FOR GRANTS. PART

[01:10:02]

OF THAT, I WILL GET TO THE QUESTION IN A SECOND, THERE ARE STIPULATIONS. AS I LOOKED AT YOUR REPORT ON DETAIL IN THIS PRESENTATION, THE ACTUAL DETAILED REPORT, I HAD SOME CONCERNS ABOUT CATEGORIES THAT WE HAD FORECASTED, YOU KNOW, THERE WERE DOLLARS ALLOCATED. AND WE HAD ZERO SPANS, OR EVEN ZERO PEOPLE TOUCHED. I WILL NOT GET INTO THE ACTUAL SPECIFICS.

BUT IF YOU LOOK AT IT IN THAT DOCUMENT, IT IS PAGES TWO THROUGH FOUR. AND THERE WERE A NUMBER OF CATEGORIES THAT WERE MISSING. SO I NEEDED TO HEAR FROM YOU AS TO, YOU KNOW, WHAT DO WE DO? HOW DO WE HELP? BECAUSE SOME OF THOSE CATEGORIES I USED FOR INSTANCE, ASSISTANCE WITH OUR COMMUNITY THAT MAY BE OF SPECIAL NEEDS. THAT IS OBVIOUSLY SOMETHING SPECIFIC THAT WE HAVE TO DO WITH THE SPECIAL NEEDS COMMUNITY TO GET THIS KIND OF MONEY THERE. TO DATE, WE DO NOT FOR THIS. CAN YOU HELP ME AND - HELP EVERYBODY UNDERSTAND THIS? THAT IS TRUE. MOST OF THOSE CATEGORIES ARE NOT HOUSING PROGRAMS, WHICH IS WHERE WE RUN INTO CHALLENGES. BECAUSE MOST OF OUR RESOURCES AND FOCUS IS ON HOUSING, BECAUSE THAT IS OUR GREATEST NEEDS. WE ARE BOMBARDED WITH CITIZENS REQUESTING FOR HOUSING. HOWEVER, WE STILL HAVE TO ACCOMMODATE ACCORDING TO HUD, $13 HERE. A LOT OF TIMES, THE CASA PROGRAMS IS NOT IN PLACE AND IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE TO PARTNER WITH SOMEONE THAT HAS SOMETHING WORK CAN CREATIVELY COME UP WITH SOMETHING, AND IT IS VERY SPECIFIC. IT HAS TO BE SPECIFIC TO SPECIAL NEEDS, AND THEN THERE ARE CERTAIN CRITERIA EVEN WITHIN THOSE SPECIAL NEEDS THAT, YOU KNOW, HAVE TO BE FOLLOWED AS WELL. SO WE ARE AWARE THAT THERE ARE SOME AREAS THAT WE HAVE NOT, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF TIMES IN THOSE AREAS WHAT WE HAVE TO DO IS REALLOCATE THOSE MONIES TO HOUSING PROGRAMS, WHICH IS WHEN WE COME BACK TO YOU AND ASK FOR AN AMENDMENT TO OUR C.A.P.E.R.

. FOR INSTANCE, LIKE WE JUST DID A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO, AND WE INCREASED THE DOLLAR AMOUNTS THAT WE HAD FOR THE HOUSE AND WE HAD, BECAUSE WE WERE HAVING ISSUES. AGAIN, IT FALLS IN LINE WITH THIS. LIKE I SAID, WE HAVE GUIDELINES. WE HAVE TO EXPENDED BY A CERTAIN TIME. BY JUNE 30TH, WE HAVE TO SPEND A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF MONEY. SO WE CAME BACK AND SAID, OKAY, WE NEED TO INCREASE THE AMOUNT WE HAVE ALLOCATED FOR OUR HOUSING REHAB SERVICES BECAUSE WE ARE UNDERSTANDING NOW THAT WE ARE GETTING IN AND BECAUSE WE ONLY HAD THE $15,000, WELL, WE CANNOT DO ANYTHING ABOUT THE COST OF LABOR AND MATERIALS THAT HAS INCREASED. SO WE ASKED FOR AN INCREASE SO THAT WE COULD EXPAND THOSE DOLLARS. THAT IS PART OF THE ISSUES THAT WE ARE FOCUSED IN ON. OUR HOUSE AND NEED HERE IN FORT PIERCE IS SO GREAT THAT WE HAD TO CENTER IN SO MUCH ONTO THAT. FOR INSTANCE, WE JUST OPENED OUR HOUSING REHAB PROGRAM, OUR DOWN PAYMENT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM, AND OUR RAPID REHOUSING PROGRAMS. WE REOPENED IT. WITHIN THREE WEEKS, WE HAD TO SHUT IT DOWN BECAUSE WE WERE WELL OVERCAPACITY AS TO WHAT WE COULD EVEN ENTERTAIN. YOU KNOW, 600 APPLICANTS FOR ONE PROGRAM, 600 FOR THE OTHER. WE KNOW WE CANNOT SERVICE THAT MANY PEOPLE, SO WE JUST HAD TO SHUT IT DOWN AND REVIEW BASED ON THAT. ANOTHER ISSUE, I DISCUSSED THIS WITH YOU AS WELL, IT IS SOMEWHAT OF A HUD REQUIREMENT MET, AND IT IS DEFINITELY A CITY IS -- CITY OF FORT PIERCE. IF ONE PERSON IS REWARDED, WE CANNOT CONTINUALLY REWARD THAT ONE PERSON. I THINK IT IS EXCELLENT CRITERIA, BECAUSE WE ARE FINDING THAT WE ARE HAVING THE SAME APPLICANTS THAT ARE, YOU KNOW, COMING BACK YEAR AFTER YEAR ATTENDING TO APPLY FOR THE PROGRAM. IN THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT IS AN ISSUE. BUT THEN THEY HAVE ALREADY GONE THROUGH THE PROCESS. SO WE HAVE TO REVIEW IT, AND THEN THEY PUT THEIR TAB INTO THIS AS WELL. IT IS WORKING THROUGH A WHOLE LOT, BUT IT IS NOT US. A LOT OF PLACES, LIKE YOU SAID, WE ARE MANDATED BY HUD AS TO WHAT WE CAN AND CANNOT DO. WHAT WE CAN AWARD, YOU WILL PUT THE AMOUNTS IN AS TO HOW MUCH WE CAN AWARD INDIVIDUALS AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE. SO, IT IS MOSTLY THE

NOT HOUSING PROGRAMS . >> WITH THE NOT HOUSING, HAVE WE REALLOCATED THOSE NOT HOUSING? OR CAN WE REALLOCATE THE MAJORITY OF THOSE NON-HOUSING FUNDS TO HOUSING

TIGHT FUNDS? >> WE CAN ALLOCATE.

>> THE OTHER THING TOO, AS A LOOK DEEPER INTO THE REPORT, THERE WAS A LINE IN THERE THAT TALKED ABOUT THE WEATHERIZATION PROGRAM. BASICALLY WHAT I READ WAS THAT WAS A CHALLENGE, AND

[01:15:03]

THAT LINK WAS NO LONGER THERE WITH US PROVIDING FUNDS WITH THE WEATHERIZATION PROGRAM, WHICH WE ALL KNOW WHAT IS RUNOFF, SO THEY MADE SOME CHANGES TO THAT AND WHO CAN QUALIFY FOR THAT. SO, CAN YOU PROVIDE SOME CLARITY, AS TO WHAT I READ, THAT IS NO LONGER THE CASE PARTNERING WITH THEM? ERROR FROM THE PRIOR DOCUMENT. YOU CAN REMEMBER IN 2020 AND 2021, IT WAS TERMINATED BECAUSE OF COVID. BECAUSE OF, COVID, WE TERMINATED THE RELATIONSHIP. THAT LANGUAGE SHOULD BE TAKEN OUT. SO BEFORE IT IS SUBMITTED, WE WILL MAKE SURE THAT LINE --

>> THAT WAS DEEP INTO THE FINE PRINT.

>> AND CATHERINE -- PASSIONATE ABOUT THE WEATHERIZATION PROGRAM. THE HEAT IS ALREADY STARTING TO COME. HOMES THAT ARE INEFFICIENT WITH INSULATION , DOORS, OR WINDOWS, THAT IS THE ONE WAY THAT I THINK WE CAN ADDRESS THAT. IF WE DO NOT HAVE, AND THEY ALSO CHANGE THE CRITERIA THIS YEAR WITH WHO CAN QUALIFY. AND SO THAT IS IMPORTANT. THAT IS HOW WE HAVE THESE FUNDS, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THOSE FUNDS GET TO THE PEOPLE TO HELP THEM ADDRESS AND HIGHLIGHT BILLS AND INEFFICIENCIES IN THEIR HOMES. SO, GLAD TO HEAR THAT. THAT WILL BE STRICKEN, I WILL MAKE NOTE OF THAT. AS FAR AS A REALLOCATION, I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR, WE VOTED LAST TIME. MY MEMORY IS FAILING ME NOW AND WILL BE ALLOCATED.

>> WE INCREASED THE MONEY FOR CERTAIN CHANGES. YES.

>> BUT WHAT I SEE THERE NOW IN THE NON-HOUSEHOLD CATEGORY IS $10,000 SITTING THERE. SO WHAT I SEE IN THIS REPORT NOW, THAT IS WHAT WE WILL SIGN OFF ON. AND IF WE WANT TO CHANGE THAT,

WE HAVE TO COME BACK. >> THAT WAS IN THE 2022 C.A.P.E.R. WE ARE NOW IN OUR 2023. I DO NOT HAVE THAT ACTION PLAN IN FRONT OF ME, BUT WE PROBABLY HAVE ALREADY AMENDED THAT NUMBER BASED ON PRIOR NON-USAGE OF IT. BUT, YEAH.

>> THINKS FOR THIS. IT IS AN EXERCISE I WANT TO THE PUBLIC TO HEAR. THAT THEY UNDERSTAND WHAT WE DO, TO TRY TO MAKE SURE WE ARE PROVIDING THE ASSISTANCE, THE ECONOMIC BENEFITS THAT WE ARE GIVING TO BUSINESSES, WHO WE HAVE TEAMED UP WITH, WITH THOSE EFFORTS IN THE BUSINESS FIELD TO HELP PROVIDE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE TO SMALL BUSINESSES. YOU KNOW, THAT IS HOW WE ARE UTILIZING THESE FEDERAL DOLLARS. SO THANK

YOU. >> ANY OTHER COMMENTS? YES,

SIR. >> I ACTUALLY HAVE A QUESTION THAT IS SLIGHTLY OFF TARGET. BUT WHILE I HAVE YOU HERE, I FIGURED I WOULD ASK THE QUESTION. AND IF YOU DO NOT HAVE THE ANSWER, I CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND. THIS WAS NOT PART OF YOUR PRESENTATION, NOR THE BACKUP MATERIALS I READ. THANK YOU FOR THE GRANULARITY OF YOUR COMMENTS TONIGHT. LIKE I SAID, IF THIS ANSWER IS NOT READILY AVAILABLE, WE WILL GET TO IT AT A FUTURE DATE. BUT IN THIS PARTICULAR REPORT, WHERE LINE ITEMS FOR PUBLIC THE STRUCTURE AND THINGS OF THIS NATURE, I KNOW THE GRANTS PROGRAM IS SIGNIFICANTLY BIGGER THAN THIS PORTION THAT WE ARE DISCUSSING HERE TONIGHT. AS WE ALL KNOW, THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE IS CHALLENGED BY OUR BUDGET CONSTRAINTS. OUR ENTIRE BUDGET IS $50 MILLION. WHEN YOU TELL PEOPLE THAT, THEY ARE STUNNED. THEY THINK $58 MILLION IS WHAT WE ARE ALL GETTING PAID, I IMAGINE. IN ALL SERIOUSNESS, YOU KNOW, THE CITY BUDGET IS NOT EXPENSIVE. WE KNOW THAT WE HAVE PROBLEM AREAS THAT NEED ADDITIONAL FUNDING. PUBLIC WORKS, PUBLIC SAFETY, A VARIETY OF THESE THINGS. YOU ARE AT ATTENDANCE IN A MEETING RECENTLY, THE CITY MANAGER AND MYSELF, AND WE ALL KNOW THAT THERE HAS BEEN SOME SIGNIFICANT CRITICISM OF THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE FROM OUR CONGRESSMAN, BRIAN MASK. IT HAS BEEN PUBLICIZED IN THE NEWSPAPERS AND PUBLICIZE EXTENSIVELY. THAT IS AN INTENTIONAL ACTION. IN AN EFFORT TO SEEK COOPERATION, I REQUESTED A MEETING WITH HIS LOCAL REPRESENTATIVES AND OUR ENTIRE GRANTS TEAM. I THINK THERE WERE 20 OF US IN A CONFERENCE ROOM, OR 18 OF US IN THE CONFERENCE ROOM. AND WE DISCUSSED THE POSSIBILITY OF HIS STAFF ASSISTING THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE FOR A WHOLE HOST OF PROGRAMS, INCLUDING, JUST TO NAME A COUPLE, ALL THE DOLLARS WE ARE PUTTING OUT FOR SECURITY SERVICES FOR A FEDERAL TRIAL. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE, WHICH WE ARE HAVING TO COME UP WITH MONEY OUT OF OUR EMERGENCY FUND TO COVER, TO MAKE SURE THE PUBLIC IS SAFE AND ALL PARTICIPANTS ARE SAFE. SECONDARILY TO THAT, OF COURSE,

[01:20:03]

A CONVERSATION I REALLY WANTED TO GET INTO GRANULARITY ON WAS PUBLIC WORKS AND HOW WE CAN GET MORE STAFF AND WORKS EQUIPMENT FUNDED BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WITH AN ENDORSEMENT FROM CONGRESSMAN MASSE'S OFFICE. WE HAD THE ENTIRE GRANTS TEAM THERE TO TRY TO BUILD THIS RELATIONSHIP THAT ALL OF ERIC GRANTS WRITERS AND OLIVER GRANTS DEPARTMENTS TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, PUBLIC WORKS, THERE ARE A WHOLE HOST OF THEM. AND SO I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, I KNOW IT IS OFF TARGET, BECAUSE I WAS REALLY HOPEFUL THAT WE WERE GOING TO FIND ASSISTANCE IN SECURING THE FEDERAL DOLLARS FOR BADLY NEEDED AREAS OF OPERATION IN THE CITY. IN YOUR OPINION, HAS THERE BEEN ANY ASSISTANCE GIVEN TO THE CITY BY CONGRESSMAN MASSE'S STAFF TO FACILITATE THAT, OR ANY ACTIVITY AT ALL? IF I AM PUTTING YOU ON THE SPOT, BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO SPEAK TO HER FOLKS, I GET IT. BUT THIS MEETING WAS FIVE OR SIX WEEKS AGO? OKAY. MAYBE IT IS IN THE INFANCY OF THIS. BUT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT IS ON MY RADAR SCREEN AND WILL CONTINUE TO HAVE MY ATTENTION. BECAUSE IN MY OPINION, SOLELY, IF YOU WILL CRITICIZE THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE IN OUR OPERATIONS, LET'S GET EVERYBODY TO THE TABLE TO DISSIPATE IN FIXING THE PROBLEM. COMPLAINING ABOUT IT IS FINE, BUT EVERYBODY'S GOT TO COME IN AND PUT CHIPS ON THE TABLE TO FIX IT. BECAUSE $58 MILLION IN OUR BUDGET WILL NOT GET IT DONE. SO I WAS HOPEFUL THAT WITH THE ABUNDANCE OF MONEY AVAILABLE IN A FEDERAL ELECTION YEAR, POTENTIALLY SOME OF THAT MONEY COULD GET CARVED OUT TO COME TO THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE. YOU CAN TELL ME, NOTHING IS HAPPENED TO DATE, THERE HAVE BEEN DISCUSSIONS, IT IS A LONG-TERM PROGRAM TO ESTABLISH, OR YOU CAN JUST TELL ME, I HAVE NO INPUT AT THIS TIME. AND YOU WANT TO GET BACK

TO ME ON IT. >> COMMISSIONER , SO THE -- DOESN'T ANSWER THE QUESTION, I WILL SIMPLY SAY TO YOU THAT WE ARE CONTINUING WITH OUR EFFORTS WITH CONGRESS AND CONGRESSMAN MAST. THE POLICE CHIEF'S MEETING WITH CONGRESSMAN MAST THIS WEEKEND TO REVIEW THE CONTINUAL COST OF SECURITY ON FOR SAID SERVICES FOR THE FEDERAL TRIAL ACROSS THE STREET. SO THAT IS ONE OF OUR HIGHEST TARGETS. AND THAT IS TO GET REIMBURSED FOR THE VAST AMOUNT OF RESOURCES THAT ARE BEING UTILIZED, AND SHALL CONTINUE TO BE UTILIZED AS THIS TRIAL PROGRESSES. I WOULD SAY AS OF RIGHT NOW, WE ARE STILL WORKING TOWARDS RECEIVING SOME TYPE OF ASSISTANCE WITH HIS OFFICE. SO, NO HARD TANGIBLE INFORMATION AS OF YET, SIR.

>> A VERY POLITICALLY CORRECT ANSWER.

>> I DO NOT MEAN TO PUT YOU ON THE SPOT BY ANY MEANS. I KNOW YOU ARE WORKING FOR THE BETTERMENT OF THE CITY. AND WE ARE A, YOU KNOW, WE ARE A PARTICIPANT IN THAT, LOOKING TO JUST GET ALL THE HELP WE CAN GET TO GET IT ON THE TABLE.

NICK, IF YOU NEEDED SOMEBODY AT THAT MEETING REPRESENTING OUR SIDE, I AM MORE THAN HAPPY TO PARTICIPATE. COMMISSIONER GAINES, MAYBE NOT SUCHA GOOD IDEA. IF YOU KNOW SOMEBODY THERE. THE MAYOR IS APPOINTING ME RIGHT NOW TO A COMMITTEE.

SERIOUSLY, IN ALL CANDOR, THIS IS AN IMPORTANT ISSUE. THE CITY IS GOING TO PUT OUT HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS, IF NOT MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN THE PROTECTION OF THE CITY, ITS CITIZENS, AND ALL PARTICIPANTS OF THIS EVENT. WE ARE SIMPLY NOT IN THE FINANCIAL POSITION TO DO THAT. WE NEED A FINANCIAL GOVERNMENTS HELP. IF WE CAN BREAK THE ICE ON WORKING WITH CONGRESSMAN MAST 'S OFFICE, MAYBE THAT IS THE START OF GREATER THINGS TO COME. I WOULD ADVOCATE FOR THAT. IN ALL SERIOUSNESS, I WOULD BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO BE AN ENTHUSIASTIC SUPPORTER OF DISSIPATING IN THAT MEETING. I MEAN THAT WITH ALL SINCERITY. I WOULD GET UP ON THE TABLE, JUMP UP AND DOWN UNTIL THEY GET THE

CHECK OUT. >> YOU HAVE DONE THAT BEFORE.

>> YES, IT IS A REGULAR THING.

>> I WOULD SUGGEST THAT IS A GOOD START. AND I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO HAVING THE RESULTS OF THAT MEETING. AND I AM HOPEFUL THAT AS A STEPPING STONE TO BIGGER AND BETTER.

>> MR. JOHNSON, DID YOU WANT TO SAY ANYTHING?

>> NO, MA'AM. YOU ARE SPOT ON. >> I JUST WANT TO ADD TOO, IN ADDITION TO THE FINANCIAL COST, IT HAS TAKEN A BIG TOOUR POLICE DEPARTMENT OVER TIME, ALL THE HARD WORK THAT THEY HAVE HAD TO DO. AND I THINK THAT WE ALL NEED TO BE MINDFUL OF WHAT STRAIN IT IS, NOT ONLY ON FINANCES, BUT ON OUR

[01:25:08]

PERSONAL PERSONNEL. AND WE DID GET OFF TOPIC, DIDN'T WE?

>> APOLOGIES. BUT I HAD EVERYBODY HERE.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? I THINK ALL WE NEED TO DO IS ACCEPT THIS. IS THAT RIGHT?

>> WE NEED TO HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING. IMAGINE THAT. IS THERE ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC WISHING TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE,

PLEASE COME FORWARD. >> WHILE I APPRECIATE AND UNDERSTAND THE HUD, I WAS TRYING TO GET ANY GUYS EARLIER IN THE OTHER REQUIREMENTS, MY QUESTION HAS BEEN, AGAIN, HOW WE ARE ALLOCATING PIAZZA FOR THE BUSINESSES, THE DOWNTOWN BUSINESSES, AND 0%. THROUGHOUT THE HOME, ANDERSON THERE ARE MORE, BUT I THINK I KNOW THAT THE MONEY THAT WAS ALLOCATED WAS FOR A CLASS FOR MARKETING FOR THE BUSINESS OWNERS TO ATTEND. BUT THAT IS NOT REALLY HELPING THEM STAY IN BUSINESS.

THE OTHER MONEY, HOW IS IT BEING ALLOCATED? I THINK WE NEED A LITTLE MORE ATTENTION AND HELP. I DO NOT EVEN KNOW ALL THE PROGRAMS AND EVERYTHING THAT ARE OUT THERE. THERE ARE SOME OTHER ONES. THE WAY THEY ARE BEING ADVERTISED, THAT EVERYBODY GETS ON THE COMPUTER. WHAT IS THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE WEBSITE, IT IS NOT THE EASIEST TO GO THROUGH AND FIND INFORMATION ON THERE. IT IS A LITTLE BIT ALL OVER THE PLACE.

SO OWNERS, BUSINESS OWNERS, THE GENERAL PUBLIC ARE NOT GETTING THE INFORMATION TO UNDERSTAND WHAT GRANTS ARE AVAILABLE TO THEM. I WILL TELL YOU WHAT. I WENT TO MR. MATH'S OFFICE AND SPOKE TO MR. GARY. A GREAT GUY. COMING IN AND JUMPING DOWN TO TALK TO THEM ABOUT THE AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS. NOBODY ELSE HAS DONE THAT. NOBODY HAS GONE TO THE DPA TO SIT THERE AND TALK TO THEM. THEY DO NOT HAVE THE TIME TO COME UP HERE, HENCE WHY THEY NEVER COME APPEAR TO DO THIS. BECAUSE THEY CANNOT GET THE TIME OFF. THEY ARE ONE SHOW OPERATIONS, MOST OF THEM. BUT HE HAS ALL SORTS OF AVAILABLE FUNDS. HE SAID HE WILL WORK WITH THEM TO SEE WHAT QUALIFIES, AND HE WILL HELP THEM. HE TALKED TO THEM AND IS GOING DOWN ON THE NEXT MEETING TO HELP THEM WITH THAT. SAME THING, I THINK MAYBE SOME GRANTS SHOULD BE ALLOCATED TO OTHER BUSINESS OWNERS. AND TO THE DOWNTOWN AREA. I DO NOT THINK WE HAD A GRANT AVAILABLE FOR THE DOWNTOWN AREA FOR FIXING UP THE AREA. THERE ARE A LOT OF BUILDINGS THAT ARE FALLING DOWN OR IN NEED OF SOME HELP. THE SEVEN GABLES IS SUPPOSED TO BE OUR WELCOME CENTER, OUR VISITOR CENTER. IT LOOKS HORRIBLE. YOU KNOW, IT IS A HISTORIC BUILDING. I THINK IT IS ON THE NATIONAL REGISTRY. IT IS INDIVIDUALLY LISTED. THEY NEED TO FIX THAT. IN THESE BUILDINGS ARE VERY EXPENSIVE FOR THE HISTORIC BUILDINGS. WE NEED YOU ALLOCATE SOME FUNDS FOR THAT. A LOT OF THINGS THAT NEED TO BE FIXED AND DONE. I JUST DO NOT UNDERSTAND, AGAIN, THOSE LINE ITEMS IN 0% BEING ALLOCATED TO BUSINESSES. AND I YOU ARE SAYING YOU WILL TAKE THE LEFTOVER MONEY AND MOVE IT TO HOMES, IF I'M UNDERSTANDING THAT CORRECTLY? IF YOU HAVE SEEN, MORE BUSINESSES HAVE GONE OUT OF BUSINESS LATELY THIS WEEK. THE DAILY FISH IS CLOSING THIS WEEK. WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING TO MAKE THE DOWNTOWN BUSINESSES AWARE OF THE PROGRAMS AVAILABLE, OR HELP THEM TO STEP IN. OTHERWISE WE WILL NOT HAVE A DOWNTOWN. YOU NEED TO MAINTAIN THE BUILDINGS.

HOW MANY OF THESE ARE HISTORIC BUILDINGS? THERE ARE CITY CODES LETTING THEM GO. IT IS NOT FAIR TO BUSINESS OWNERS LIKE US THAT MAINTAIN OUR BUILDINGS AND DO IT RIGHT, AND THE OTHER ONES

ARE FALLING APART. >> THANK YOU, MA'AM. ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION? PLEASE COME

FORWARD. >> I HAVE TO CONCUR WITH MS. EINSTEIN. I TOO HAVE MET WITH THE OFFICE WITH ABSOLUTELY NO RESISTANCE. THE FACT THAT COMMISSIONER BRODERICK IS SAYING THAT HE HAS MET WITH THEM, AND SEVERAL WEEKS AGO, FROM WHAT I AM GATHERING, AND THAT THERE IS NO FORWARD MOVEMENT, HOW IS THAT POSSIBLE? DEREK IS AMAZING, HE GETS BACK TO YOU RIGHT AWAY. YOU KNOW, IF YOU GUYS ARE REALLY , YOU KNOW, SUPPORTING YOUR CITY, WHY ARE YOU GUYS NOT SUPPORTING YOUR LOCAL RETAIL STORES? I DO NOT UNDERSTAND THIS. I MEAN, I HAVE DUAL RESIDENCIES. I GO BACK AND FORTH. I SPEND ALL MY MONEY IN FORT PIERCE TO HELP SUPPORT THIS CITY. I AM PRETTY DISGUSTED THAT I KEEP HEARING ONE BUSINESS AFTER ANOTHER FALLING THROUGH THE CRACKS. I MEAN, WELCOME TO FORT PIERCE, YOU'VE GOT A BIG PROBLEM. I HOPE THAT YOU CAN GET THESE GRANTS GOING BECAUSE YOU GUYS ARE NOT PRO-BUSINESS. IT HAS

[01:30:02]

BEEN A LONG HISTORY WITH THE COMMISSION SITTING UP HERE, DOING A LOT OF DO AS I SAY, NOT AS I DO, AND ALL THIS OTHER STUFF. I HAVE HAD ENOUGH. I MEAN, I HAVE HAD ENOUGH OF YOUR GUISES BEHAVIOR. WE HAVE A LOT OF LAWBREAKERS APPEAR THAT ARE, YOU KNOW, NOT DOING WHAT THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO BE DOING. LOOK

INTO THAT IN PUBLIC SPEAKING. >> ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION? PLEASE COME FORWARD.

>> I AM BECKY EMANUEL. 205 NORTH SECOND STREET. FIRST THING I WOULD LIKE TO SAY IS WITH MIXED EMOTIONS, I WILL BE CLOSING MY STORE AFTER 10 1/2 YEARS, FOR A LOT OF THE SAME REASONS THAT THE OTHER TWO LADIES HAVE MENTIONED. YOU KNOW, THE COST TO RUN A BUSINESS FOR ONE PERSON HAS GONE UP , UP, AND UP. UTILITIES, RENTS, I DO NOT CARE. YOU KNOW WHAT IT IS COSTING. WITH THE INFLATION AND EVERYTHING, AND I HAVE TO SAY, IT IS REALLY HARD. WHEN I STARTED MY BUSINESS 10 1/2 YEARS AGO , HEALTHY STORES, PROBABLY A THIRD TO A HALF OF THE STORES WERE EMPTY. AND I THOUGHT, WELL, THERE IS ONLY ONE WAY TO GO HERE, AND THAT IS UP. UNFORTUNATELY, 10 1/2 YEARS LATER, I WENT TO THE LAST COUPLE DAYS, 16 BUSINESSES HAVE CLOSED IN THE LAST THREE YEARS.

AND OUT OF THOSE 16 BUSINESSES, ONLY FOUR HAVE REOPENED WITH NEW BUSINESSES OR BEEN PURCHASED OUTRIGHT. SO, ONCE AGAIN, AFTER 10 1/2 YEARS, WE ARE SITTING THERE WITH A LOT OF EMPTY SPACES, A LOT OF TAX DOLLARS NOT GOING INTO THE CITY, YOU KNOW, THE STATE, AND IT IS INCOMPRESSIBLE TO ME.

BECAUSE THIS IS A DIAMOND IN THE ROUGH. YEARS AGO, WHEN WE FIRST HEARD ABOUT FISHERMAN'S WHARF, WE HEARD ABOUT KING'S LANDING , BRIGHT LINE. IT WAS LIKE, YOU KNOW, THE SUN CAME OUT. ALL OF THE BUSINESSES WERE, LIKE, PUMPED. WE WERE SAYING, WE WILL FINALLY GET STUFF THAT WILL MAKE OUR LIVES A LOT EASIER. WE WILL HAVE MORE CUSTOMERS, WE WILL HAVE A FANTASTIC, LIVELY DOWNTOWN. IT DID NOT HAPPEN. IT IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. SO HERE I SIT, 10 1/2 YEARS LATER, STILL STRUGGLING TO GET BY . YOU KNOW, I HAVE SHOWN LOSSES IN THE LAST THREE YEARS. WHAT DO I DO? I KEEP THINKING, WELL, IT WILL GET BETTER. I WILL PUT THE MONEY BACK IN THE INVENTORY. IT WILL GET BETTER, AND IT HAS NOT. AS FAR AS GRANTS ARE CONCERNED, I DO NOT KNOW OF ONE GRANT. I HAVE NO CLUE.

THERE IS NO TRANSPARENCY. YOU KNOW, SINCE I HAVE ANNOUNCED MY CLOSING, I PROBABLY HAD 100 CUSTOMERS COME IN AND ASK ME WHY. AND I HAVE BEEN PERFECTLY HONEST WITH THEM. TWO REASONS.

I WILL BE 75 YEARS OLD, AND IF I COULD HAVE AFFORDED TO STAY HERE AND HIRE PEOPLE SO THAT I COULD LEAVE MY LOVELY STORE OPEN, I WOULD HAVE. BUT I CANNOT AFFORD IT. SO WHAT IS MY CHOICE? I HAVE TO CLOSE. AND IT BREAKS MY HEART BECAUSE I REALLY THINK THAT MY LITTLE STORE WAS A STAPLE. I KNOW A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE UPSET WITH ME THAT I AM GOING TO RETIRE. BUT, YOU KNOW, IN ALL FAIRNESS, I THINK THE CITY TRULY HAS LET US DOWN WHEN IT HAS COME TO THOSE PROJECTS, THE DEVELOPMENTS.

SURE, WE'VE GOT THE CAR SHOW ONE NIGHT A MONTH , I DO NOT GET ONE CUSTOMER FROM IT, NOT ONE. BECAUSE IT IS A DIFFERENT DEMOGRAPHIC. THOSE PEOPLE ARE YOUNG, THEY ARE LOOKING AT CARS, HAVING A BEER, YOU KNOW, A DRINK, THE MUSIC. THANK YOU.

ADDRESS THIS ISSUE, PLEASE COME FORWARD.

>> HELLO. THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME. MY NAME IS MIKE CAREY. 2208 NORTH OLD DIXIE. I AM THE OWNER OF FORT MARINE, THE MARINA THAT HAS THE LAST BASTION OF HISTORICAL FISHING HERE. WE HAVE OVER 20 FISHING BOAT. WE COULD USE SOME GRANT MONEY TOO, EVERYBODY CAN, I AM SURE. RECENTLY, I READ IN THE FORT PIERCE CONNECTION, THE CLOSING OF TREASURY COAST FRESH FISH AND SOME PEOPLE HAVE TEXTED ME ABOUT IT. THEY ARE A TENANT THAT WAS IN OUR MARINA. WE ARE RIGHT AT THE BASE OF THE NORTH CAUSEWAY BRIDGE. WHERE YOU CAN SEE ALL THE COMMERCIAL FISHING GOING ON. TREASURE COAST FRESH COAST FISH DID CLOSE. THERE WAS A WHOLE RETAILER OUT OF THE PROPERTY.

WHAT WE HAVE DONE SINCE THEN, OR CONTINUOUSLY, WE HAVE

[01:35:02]

ASSEMBLED THE FISHERMAN THEMSELVES INTO A CO-OP. SO WE HAVE SIGNED UP 70 LOCAL FISHERMEN. AND NOW THE WHOLESALER IS GONE, BUT THE FISHERMAN NOW ON THE BUSINESS.

SO WE ARE CONTINUING SELLING FISH AT FORT MARINE AS FLORIDA FRESH FISH CO-OP. IT IS 70 LOCAL FISH FRESHMAN HAVE SIGNED UP HERE THEY OWN THE BUSINESS, THE ONLY RETAIL, THEY OWNED THE WHOLESALE. AND WE ARE EXCITED ABOUT WHAT IS GOING TO GO FORWARD. BUT WE HAVE ALL THE SAME PROBLEMS THAT MOST BUSINESSES DO. BUT MOST OF OUR PROBLEMS REALLY RELATE TO STATE AND FEDERAL ISSUES. AND WE ARE THE GUYS THAT MASSED NEEDS TO COME HELP. IT IS NOT SO MUCH WHAT THE CITY CAN DO FOR US, IT IS WHAT CAN THE STATE AND FEDERAL GOVERNMENT? WE HAVE BIG REGULATORY ISSUES. GO TO PUBLIX STORE. I WAS IN THERE TODAY.

CHECK IT OUT YOURSELF. 15 VARIETIES OF FISH AVAILABLE.

NONE FROM FLORIDA. ABSOLUTELY NOTHING THAT IS CAUGHT IN FLORIDA. WE HAVE PERMITTING ISSUES THAT ARE FEDERAL. YOU GO BY A PERMIT TO FISH FOR TUNA AND SWORDFISH, 14, $15,000 FOR THE PERMIT, NOAH DESIGNATES NOW FORT PIERCE, A COUPLE HUNDRED YEAR HISTORY OF FISHERMAN HERE. THOSE 70 FISHMAN, THOSE ARE 70 BUSINESSES. THOSE ARE 70 FAMILIES. THOSE ARE KIDS THAT GO TO SCHOOL HERE. THEY ARE LOCALS. THEY HAVE GENERATIONS.

THOSE PERMITS FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT KEEP PUSHING THE FISHERMAN FURTHER, FURTHER, AND FURTHER OUT. AND NOW OUR FLORIDA FISHERMAN , YOU WILL BE ASTOUNDED. NOT 60 MILES SOUTH TO FISH, NOT 20, 30, THEY HAVE TO GO 500, 600 MILES OUT TO

FISH. >> THANK YOU, SIR. YOUR TIME IS

UP. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> YES, SIR. ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE? PLEASE COME FORWARD.

>> INTERNATIONAL WORLD NEWS HERE. THESE ARE MY CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS, RIGHT HERE. THIS IS A VIOLATION OF MY CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT. MR. MIMS RESTRICTED MY ACCESS TO THE SECOND AND THIRD FLOORS OF THIS BUILDING IS AND I CANNOT GO UP THERE TO FILM. I HAVE TO PROVIDE MY I.D. AND WAIVE MY FOURTH AMENDMENT TO GO UP THERE. IT IS NOT COOL, THIS NEEDS TO BE OVERTURNED. THIS IS A LAWSUIT AGAINST THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE FOR $100 MILLION FOR VIOLATION OF MY CIVIL RIGHT FOR RETALIATION AND A WHOLE BUNCH OF OTHER CRAP .

UNACCEPTABLE. I DO NOT WANT TO HAVE TO FILE THIS, BUT NOW IT IS. THE U.S. MARSHALS WILL SERVE YOU GUYS THEN. ONCE THE JUDGE SIGNS OFF ON SOME PAPERWORK. I'VE GOT SOME COMPLAINTS TO FILE. I WILL DO THAT TOMORROW. AND YOUR SECURITY UP FRONT THREATENED TO BREAK MY CAMERA, I'VE GOT IT RECORDED. NOT COOL. THERE STEPPING IN FRONT OF MY CAMERA, VIOLATING MY FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT WHILE I AM TRYING TO REPORT ON NEWS. IT NEEDS TO STOP. THAT IS EVIDENCE THAT WILL BE USED IN COURT IN THIS CASE AS WELL. SO HOPEFULLY WE CAN SIT DOWN AND TALK ABOUT THIS AND GET STUFF RAISED.

>> THANK YOU, SIR. ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION? PLEASE COME FORWARD. OH, SOMEONE IS COMING

FORWARD. >> HELLO. MY NAME IS DEBORAH BROWN. JESUS, THANK YOU, LORD. I JUST WANT TO SAY THANK YOU FOR THE LAST TIME I WAS HERE. I WATCHED A VIDEO AT MIDNIGHT AND I WAS JUST SO SHOCKED. EVERYBODY THAT WATCHED IT WAS SHOCKED. EVEN THE LADY WHEN I FIRST CAME IN, SHE THANKED ME AND TOLD ME TO DO IT AGAIN. I SAID, DON'T THINK NOBODY BUT GOD. BUT I APPRECIATE THAT. JUST KNOW THAT I DO NOT COME HERE TO BE SEEN. IF I WANTED TO BE SEEN, I'D SIT ON THE FRONT PORCH. I'M HERE FOR A PURPOSE. I AM GLAD YOU GUYS ARE HERE TONIGHT FROM THE FEDERAL. THE 707 NEEDS MONEY. IT NEEDS HELP.

IT HAS BEEN FIVE OR SIX YEARS. IT IS JUST RIDICULOUS. YOU KNOW WHAT? I HEARD HIM EVEN MENTION ABOUT TEARING IT DOWN, THE BUILDING IS TIRED. YOU KNOW? IT IS TIME FOR IT TO COME DOWN.

BUT I THANK GOD FOR BEING THERE. YOU KNOW, HE PLACED ME THERE. I ONLY AM A LITTLE TIRED AND NERVOUS OR WHATEVER, BUT I

[01:40:03]

AM MORE TIRED THAN NERVOUS. BUT YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A MANAGERS PROBLEM IN THIS CITY. AN ISSUE WITH THE BUS COMPOUND, I WILL NOT GO INTO THAT. BUT IT IS JUST A REFLECTION OF MANAGEMENT. I KNOW Y'ALL FIGHT FOR THE CITY WORKERS TO GET A RAISE. BUT YOU'VE GOT TO SET YOUR STANDARDS HIGHER. BECAUSE BRIAN MASK COMING BACK IN, I THINK YOU FOR WHAT HE SAID.

THANK YOU. BECAUSE NOW I DO NOT HAVE TO SAY IT. THANK YOU, JESUS. THANK YOU. BUT ANYHOW, THERE IS NO WEAPON FORMED AGAINST YOU. YOU WILL PROSPER. THANK YOU. I LOVE THIS CITY. I PRAY FOR YOU. JUST KNOW, I GET ANSWERS. YOU KNOW GOD WHEN YOU SEE IT. AND I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU. BE ENCOURAGED TO STAY ENCOURAGED. I LOVE YOU GUYS. I WILL SEND YOU A PICTURE DOWN ON THE BOARD AS WELL. I SAY THANK YOU, WOW. AND DO NOT FORGET, MAYOR. SAVE YOUR NAME. DO NOT LET YOUR NAME TO.

REMEMBER HIM. IT IS NOT ABOUT THE BUILDING, IT IS ABOUT HIS NAME. SO, LET'S DO WHATEVER WE NEED TO DO FOR HIS NAMESAKE.

THAT IS THE ONLY REASON WHY I AM HERE. I JUST THINK GOD. I THROW MY HANDS UP AND I THANK YOU. JUST BE ENCOURAGED. THAT

IS ALL I'VE GOT TO SAY. >> THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION? PLEASE COME FORWARD.

>> ALREADY. WE WILL TURN BACK TO THE COMMISSION. ANY OTHER

COMMENTS? >> MADAME MAYOR, JUST A COUPLE COMMENTS REAL QUICK. WE HAVE HEARD FROM THE PUBLIC TONIGHT.

IN THE GRANTS APARTMENT HEARD FROM THE PUBLIC TONIGHT. I HAVE ALWAYS SAID NOTIFICATION, NOTIFICATION, NOTIFICATION.

AGAIN, LET'S FIGURE OUT SOMETHING. EVERYBODY KNOWS AND I KNOW THAT WHEN WE PUT THE HOUSING OUT, I KNOW, BECAUSE I GET THE COALS TOO, WHEN IS IT STARTING? I KNOW 8:00, THE PHONES GO CRAZY AND EMAILS GO CRAZY. I UNDERSTAND THAT. BUT IF THERE ARE GRANTS OUT THAT OTHERS ARE NOT GETTING, LET'S JUST GET IT OUT THERE. NOT SAYING YOU ARE NOT DOING IT, LET'S JUST FIND A WAY TO GET IT OUT TO THE MASSES. MADAME MAYOR, THE SECOND THING IS, I LEARNED SOMETHING TONIGHT. AND I WILL BE THE FIRST TO ADMIT IT. I HAD NO IDEA THAT THERE WAS FRESH FLORIDA FISH BEING SOLD. YOU KNOW, AND HE TO GUARANTEE ANYTHING, BUT THERE IS A LOT OF PEOPLE IN FORT PIERCE THAT I KNOW PERSONALLY THAT EAT SEAFOOD EVERY OTHER DAY. AND I DO NOT KNOW IF THEY ARE AWARE. SO YOU COME HERE TONIGHT, SIR, SAYING THAT , I WOULD LOVE TO COME IF YOU HANG AROUND, BECAUSE WE WILL BE HERE A LONG NIGHT, OR EMAIL ME. YOU KNOW, EMAIL ME. I WOULD LOVE TO COME VISIT, BECAUSE I LIKE FRESH FISH. I'M HONEST WITH YOU. I LIKE FRESH FISH. AND TO GET THE WORD OUT. THOSE THINGS LIKE THAT THAT I DID NOT KNOW, IF I DID NOT KNOW, I AM PRETTY SURE, IF I AM RAISING MY HAND, I CANNOT ASK ANYBODY TO RAISE THEIR HAND HERE TONIGHT, YOU KNOW, I HOPE I AM NOT ON ONE, I COULD BE. BUT I DO NOT KNOW. I UNDERSTAND THE REGULATIONS TALL SO THAT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT.

BUT LET'S TAKE THE TIMELINES WE HEARD, LET'S TAKE THE COMMENTS WE HEARD AND SEE HOW EVER IT IS IN OUR POWER TO GET THE WORD OUT, BUSINESSES THAT ARE TRYING TO DO WHATEVER, YOU KNOW, LET'S DRIVE THE MASSES THERE. AND THE LAST THING I WILL SAY TO THE YOUNG LADY WHO SAID SHE IS RETIRING AT 75, I WISH YOU WOULD HAVE BEEN HERE LAST, WAS IT MONDAY NIGHT OR TUESDAY NIGHT? WAS IT MONDAY NIGHT? TUESDAY NIGHT. WHEN WE HAD KINGS LANDING HERE, TUESDAY NIGHT. I WISH YOU HAD BEEN HERE. BECAUSE WE FEEL YOUR PAIN ON THAT. WE FEEL YOUR PAIN ON HAT. AND WE KIND OF GRI THE DEVELOPER. WE ASKED A LOT OF QUESTIONS AS TO WHY. BECAUSE EVERYBODY APPEAR WAS JUST AS EXCITED AS YOU WERE WHEN WE SAID WE WANT SHOVELS IN THE

[01:45:03]

GROUND. AND EVERYBODY ELSE STILL WANTS SHOVELS IN THE GROUND. I SAID IT AND I COULD SAY A WHOLE LOT MORE, BUT I AM LEARNING TO SHUT UP SOMETIMES. WE WERE COUNTING ON IT TOO. AND WE ARE STILL PUSHING FOR THAT TO HAPPEN. YOU KNOW? BUT IF WE COULD GET SOME KIND OF DEPARTMENT, LET'S JUST START SEEING IF WE CAN GET THE WORD OUT TO HELP OTHER PEOPLE.

NOTHING MORE REPORTS, GREAT FOR THE FIRST TIME. BUT IF WE ARE GOING TO BE ONE FORT PIERCE AS WE SAY, LET'S BE ONE FORT PIERCE AND GET THE WORD OUT AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE AS WE CAN.

>> MAYOR, JUST TO ADD QUICKLY, OBVIOUSLY WE HAVE TO, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE TO PROGRAM EVALUATE WHAT WE DO IN OUR PROGRAMMING, TAKE THE MONIES, REDIRECT WHEN WE NEED TO. OBVIOUSLY, WE HAVE HEARD FROM THE PUBLIC TONIGHT WHERE OUR FOCUS SHOULD BE AND CAN BE. AND I KNOW WE HAVE DONE IT. I MET WITH MR. CONJURED HIMSELF AT THE COLLEGE MANY, MANY TIMES. HE IS CONCERNED WITH IT AT THE SAME TIME. THAT DOES NOT JUST MEAN MEETING WITH IRS E, THE SMALL BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT. IT MEANS BRANCHING OUT TO SOMETHING WE HAVE NOT EVEN THOUGHT OF YET. THAT IS WHAT WE ARE COMMITTED TO DOING. I KNOW YOUR GROUP AND YOUR TEAM IS COMMITTED TO DOING THAT. SO WHATEVER WE CAN DO TO BE NIMBLE AND DYNAMIC IN OUR PROGRAMMING, WE HAVE TO DO THAT. THAT IS WHAT WE HAVE HEARD TONIGHT IN THE EVALUATION. AND WE HAVE CRITICAL NEEDS. IT IS HOUSING, YOU KNOW , THE LOW INCOME TO MODERATE INCOME NEEDS, BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT, DEVELOPING OUR YOUTH THAT ARE THE NEXT UP-AND-COMING WORKERS WITHIN OUR INDUSTRIES. THAT IS ALL PART OF THE SYSTEM. YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY WE HAVE HEARD AN OUTPOURING OR OUTCRY FROM THE PUBLIC TONIGHT AND MAYBE CHANGING UP A LITTLE BIT. I KNOW WE HAVE PROGRAMS IN PLACE AND WE HAVE LOOKED AT HISTORICAL NUMBERS OF WHERE TO DIRECT THAT. SO WHATEVER WE NEED TO DO AS A COMMISSION AND A BODY, WE ARE BEING ENTRUSTED WITH THESE FUNDS. I THINK WE HAVE DONE A GOOD JOB TODAY.

BECAUSE THE NEEDS HAVE BEEN GREAT, THEY HAVE BEEN GREAT ON EVERY LEVEL. IF WE NEED TO DIAL BACK AND REFOCUS THE ENERGY, THAT IS OKAY. I THINK WE ARE SUPPOSED TO DO THAT. BUT IT TAKES THE COMMISSION COMING FORWARD WITH THE INFORMATION WE HAVE FROM STAFF TO DO THAT. JONAH, I KNOW YOU ARE CHOMPING AT THE BIT TO SAY A FEW THINGS. AND I WOULD APPRECIATE OF YOU TO SAY A FEW THINGS, IF THAT IS OKAY.

>> ABSOLUTELY. I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY AND LET IT BE KNOWN THAT THE GRANTS DIVISION IS WORKING EXTREMELY HARD LOOKING FOR GRANTS FOR ALL TYPES OF REDEVELOPMENT, TO HELP OUR CITIZENS IN OUR CITY AS WELL, WITH PHENOMENAL GRANTS WRITER TERESA, WHO DOES AN EXCELLENT JOB OF GRANTS. SINCE SHE HAS BEEN IN, WE HAVE ACQUIRED A GREAT NUMBER OF GRANTS FOR DIFFERENT PROJECTS. HOWEVER, I WANTED TO BE SUPER CLEAR WHEN IT COMES TO THIS REPORT WE ARE PRESENTING TONIGHT, THE C.A.P.E.R.. THESE ARE CDG B COMMUNITY GRANTS BLOCK FUNDS, WHICH ARE SUPER SPECIFIC AS TO HOW WE CAN SPEND IT. IT IS MAINLY LOW TO MODERATELY LOW INCOME INDIVIDUALS. WE WOULD WANT TO HELP, YOU KNOW, BROADEN THE SCOPE. HOWEVER, WE ARE LIMITED. HUD GIVES US THE INCOME VERIFICATION AND THE GUIDELINES WE HAVE TO FOLLOW. WE CANNOT DETER FROM THEM IN ANY WAY. WE WANT TO HELP OTHERS. HOWEVER, BASED ON THIS GRANT, THE SAME THING. THOSE TWO COMPONENTS, WHICH ARE THE LARGEST GRANTS THAT WE ARE ADMINISTERING IN THE DIVISION, ARE WHY THE SCOPE IS SO LIMITED AS TO WHERE WE ARE REACHING IN CERTAIN BLIGHTED AREAS AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE, AS TO WHO WE CAN SERVICE AND HOW WE CAN SERVICE USING THESE DOLLARS. EVEN THE AGENCIES THAT WE AWARD TO HAVE TO BE SERVICING THESE PARTICULAR PERSONS AS WELL. AGAIN, LIKE I SAID, WE ARE CONSTANTLY WORKING AND LOOKING AT WAYS AS TO HOW WE CAN CREATIVELY COME UP WITH CONCEPT, AS TO HOW WE CAN AWARD. ONE OF THE AGENCIES, REQUIREMENTS HAVE SAID WE CAN NO LONGER FINANCE A PORTION OF WHAT IT IS THAT THEY ARE DOING.

SO WE ARE TRYING TO WORK WITH THEM TO SEE HOW WE CAN DO

[01:50:04]

THAT. THERE ARE WAYS, OKAY. BECAUSE THIS IS HERE, WE CANNOT FUND IT. BUT IF YOU REMOVE THIS COMPONENTS, WE CAN. WE CAN HELP THEM CREATIVELY COME UP WITH WAYS WHERE WE CAN CONTINUE TO SERVICE THEM. BUT IT IS JUST THAT WE ARE, THE GUIDELINES ARE SO STRICT AS TO HOW WE CAN AWARD AND WHAT WE CAN AWARD.

AND THAT IS WHAT HAS STRICKEN ASSET MOMENTS.

>> THIS IS ONE POOL OF MONEY THAT IS GOVERNED BY A HUD REGULATION. RIGHT? ANYTHING ELSE? ANYTHING ELSE? SO, MR.

MIMS? >> MADAME MAYOR, IN PREVIOUS YEARS, THROUGH OUR CDG B PROGRAM AND OUR ANNUAL EXIT PLAN, THAT WE GENERATE ON AN ANNUAL BASIS, AND WE BRING TO A PUBLIC HEARING FOR PUBLIC CONSUMPTION AND PUBLIC INPUT, WE CREATED THESE ACTION PLANS. AND WE HAVE EXPENDED FUNDS THROUGH COMMERCIAL FACADE GRANTS AND OTHER MEANS.

ESPECIALLY SMALL BUSINESS COUNSELING AND EDUCATION THROUGH OUR PARTNERSHIPS WITH THE SPD SEE AND SCORE. WE SHALL CONTINUE TO DO THAT. IN ADDITION, THIS IS ALSO WITHIN THE FPR A. THIS IS OUR BOUNDARY AND WE HAVE SEVERAL GRANT PROGRAMS WITHIN THE CRA AGENCY THAT CAN DEFINITELY HELP AND ASSIST BUSINESSES AND RESIDENTS WITHIN THOSE BOUNDARIES. I DO NOT HAVE A PROBLEM WHATSOEVER IN SENDING A CITY REPRESENTATIVE TO A MEETING TO EXPLAIN ALL OF THE AVAILABLE CRE GRANTS, AND WE SHALL DO THAT. BUT OUR CDG B HAS A PROCESS. IT ACTUALLY HAS A PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS. THAT WAY, EVERYBODY IN OUR COMMUNITY CAN PARTICIPATE IN THE GENERATION OF HER ANNUAL ACTION PLAN AND ALSO, THE LIMITATION OF THE FUNDING IN THE EXPENDITURES OF THOSE FUNDS. WE SHALL CONTINUE TO FOCUS ON THE TARGETED AREAS. THROUGHOUT CRA, WE SHALL CONTINUE TO FOCUS ON OUR BUSINESSES AND RESIDENCIES

WITHIN THOSE BOUNDARIES. >> THANK YOU, SIR, VERY MUCH.

>> WE NEED A MOTION TO ACCEPT THIS?

>> MADAME MAYOR, I MOVED TO ACCEPT THE REPORT AS PRESENTED WITH TH NECESSARY CORRECTION. STRIKING THE LAST LINE ABOUT NO

LONGER BEING IN PARTNERSHIP . >> I GOT YOU. IS THERE A SECOND?

>> CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE. >> THANK YOU, MA'AM.

[b. Legislative Hearing - Ordinance 24-001, Amending Chapter 103, Division I, Section 103-24, Subsection (a), providing Local Administrative Amendments to the 8th Ed. Florida Building Code with regard to Scope and Administration. FIRST READING]

>>> NEXT, THE LEGISLATIVE HEARING ON ORDINANCE 24 E- 001. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 103 DIVISION 1 SECTION 103 DASH 24 SUBSECTION A, TO PROVIDE THE MINISTRY OF AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA BUILDING CODE. IN ADDITION, 2023 IN THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, REVEALING ALL ORDINANCES FOR PART OF ORDINANCES ENCOMPASSED HERE AND IN PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

>> MR. MIMS, DO YOU HAVE ANY LEAD-IN?

>> MADAME MAYOR, COMMISSIONERS, I PROMISE YOU, THIS WILL BE THE QUICKEST ITEM OF THE WHOLE EVENING. THIS IS ACTUALLY REALLY JUST MORE OF A FORMALITY. THE ONLY REASON WE ARE HERE IS BECAUSE OF THE FOR THE BUILDING CODE CHANGED TO THE EIGHTH EDITION IN DECEMBER. SO, CHAPTER 1 GIVES THE ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITY LOCALLY TO THE STATE BUILDING CODES. REALLY, THERE ARE NO CHANGES. WE DID NOT DO ANY MODIFICATIONS AT ALL. IT IS JUST A FORMALITY BECAUSE OF THE

CYCLE CHANGE. >> WOW, THAT IS SHORT. ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. THOMAS? NO QUESTIONS?

>> THINK YOU VERY MUCH. THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. ANYONE WISHING TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE, PLEASE COME FORWARD.

>> YOU HAVE SOMEBODY COMING FORWARD.

>> MICHELLE GARZA, CONFIDENTIAL. REALLY QUICKLY, I WOULD LIKE TO SAY SOMETHING ABOUT THE WAY THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT IS RUN. IT IS AMAZING. I NEVER HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT. ALL OF THE STAFF ARE ON POINT.

MR. THOMAS IS AN AMAZING BUILDING OFFICIAL. WE HAVE HAD TO GO THROUGH PROCESSES TOGETHER, EVERYTHING WAS SEAMLESS, AND EVERYTHING IS COMPLETELY CHARM -- DONE WITH INTEGRITY. THERE HAS NOT BEEN ONE PERSON THAT I HAVE DEALT WITH AT THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT THAT HAS NOT BEEN REPRESENTATIVE OF THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE IN THE UTMOST LIGHT. SO I JUST WANT TO GIVE PROPS TO THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT. I ALSO WOULD ENCOURAGE CITY HALL TO MIRROR THEIR TYPE OF PUBLIC SERVICE LIKE THEY HAVE. THANK YOU.

[01:55:06]

>> THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE, PLEASE COME FORWARD. NO ONE, WE WILL CLOSE THE HEARING.

>> I MOVE THAT WE MOVED TO APPROVE THE ORDINANCE.

>> SECOND PEER >> A MOTION AND A SECOND,

[c. Legislative Hearing - Ordinance 24-005: Review and approval of a voluntary annexation by Owner, Harry Blue, to extend the territorial limits of the City of Fort Pierce, Florida, to include four (4) parcels at or near the southwest intersection of South 7th Street and Kanner Drive on Duban Terrace. The proposed Future Land Use for the proposed properties is RH, High Density Residential, with a proposed zoning of R-4, Medium Density Residential. Parcel IDs: 2427-603-0135-000-3, 2427-603-0136-000-0, 2427-603-0104-000-7 and 2427-603-0134-000-6. FIRST READING]

ROLL BEING CALLED ]CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE.

>> NEXT, WE HAVE ORDINANCE 24 E- 005 . AN ORDINANCE EXTENDING THE TERRITORIAL LIMITS OF THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE IN ORDER TO INCLUDE FOUR PARCELS AT OR NEAR THE SOUTHWEST INTERSECTION OF SOUTH SEVENTH STREET AND KENARD DRIVE ON EXHIBIT A, DIRECTING THE PROPERTY APPRAISER TO ASSESS SAID PROPERTY AND PLACE IT ON THE CITY TEXTILES AS OF JANUARY 1ST, 2024, ADJUSTING THE TAX COLLECTOR TO ADDRESS TAXES ON THE PROPERTY ESTABLISHING THE ZONING DESIGNATION AND ESTABLISHING A ZONE USE LEGISLATION. ANTIFEMINIST RATE OF OFFICER OF ST. LOUIS COUNTY, DIRECTOR OF THE CHARTER BOUNDARY ARTICLE TO BE FILED WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE AND SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF RESEARCH. AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THIS IS THE FIRST READING.

>> ALREADY. WELCOME. HAVE A SEAT.

>> COMMISSIONERS, BEFORE YOU TODAY IS AN APPLICATION FOR AN ANNEXATION FOR HARRY BLUE AT 2427-603 --

>> ARE WE SUPPOSED TO HAVE SOMETHING ON THE SCREEN?

>> HOURS ARE NOT WORKING. JUST GIVE ME ONE SECOND.

>> MAYBE? ALMOST. THERE WE GO. >> PERFECT. SORRY ABOUT THAT.

>> ABOVE YOU IS APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION BY HARRY BLUE TO EXTEND -- 2427 DASH 603 DASH 0135 DASH 000 DASH THREE, 2427 DASH 603 DASH 0136/000 DASH ZERO, AND 2427-603-0134-000-6.

IN SUMMARY, THIS IS A REQUEST FOR A REVIEW OF AN APPLICATION FOR AN ANNEXATION OF FOUR PARCELS INTO THE CITY. THE SUBJECT PROPERTIES HAVE FAMILIES THE COUNTY FUTURE LAND USE OF RESIDENTIAL MULTI FAMILY, A ZONING, AND A FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF RH RESIGNATION HIGH. POLICY 1.115 OF THE CITY'S BRANDS OF PLAN, THE PROPOSED ZONING DESIGNATION FOR THE PARCELS IS MEDIUM DENSITY, WITH A FUTURE LAND USE CLASSIFICATION OF RH RESIDENTIAL HIGH DENSITY. THE CURRENT TAXABLE VALUES OF THE THREE SMALLER PROPERTIES ARE EACH 15,367. AND THE CURRENT VALUE OF THE LARGER PROPERTY IS 121,968. APPLICATIONS FOR ANNEXATION SHOULD BE APPROVED, THEY COULD CREATE A CHOICE OF ADDING TAX REVENUE ANNUALLY TO THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE, DEPENDING ON THE MILLAGE RATE PER YEAR, WHICH CURRENTLY IS 6.9. THESE ARE THE SITE LOCATIONS OF THE FOUR PARCELS. WITH AN ACREAGE TOTALING GIVE OR TAKE 2.95 ACRES. THE CURRENT FUTURE LAND USE IN THE COUNTY, AND THIS IS THE COUNTY MAP, IS A HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL. IN THE PROPOSED COMING INTO THE CITY WOULD BE HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL. THIS IS THE EXISTING ZONING OF THE PARCELS, AGAIN, THESE ARE IN THE COUNTY. IT IS RM 11, WHICH IS RESIDENTIAL FAMILY 11 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE. IN THE CITY, THEY WOULD COME IN WITH A R 4 MEDIUM DENSITY BUSINESS RESIDENTIAL ZONING. THE PLANNING BOARD AT THE JANUARY 8, 2000 BEFORE MEETING UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THE ANNEXATION AND THE RECOMMENDATION FOR THE STAFF IS FOR THE CITY COMMISSION TO VOTE APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION. ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATIONS ARE A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS OR A RECOMMENDATION

OF DISAPPROVAL. THANK YOU. >> QUESTIONS FOR STAFF?

>> A COUPLE QUESTIONS. DID THIS GO THROUGH THE TRC PROCESS? WERE THERE ANY COMMENTS FROM ST. LUCIE COUNTY?

[02:00:01]

>> NOT THAT I SAW, NO. >> NOTHING FOR TECHNICAL REVIEW. SO NO SPECIFIC COMMENTS? ARE THE RIGHT OF WAYS AND ROADWAYS IN THE COUNTY OR CITY?

>> THESE WOULD BE ON COUNTY. >> COUNTY?

>> YES. >> THINK YOU FOR THAT. DO

PUBLIC UTILITIES EXIST? >> YES. I BELIEVE THE ELECTRIC, GAS, AND ELECTRIC ARE ALL WITHIN IT.

>> HOW ABOUT SEWER? >> SEWER? YES.

>> COMMISSIONERS, THE REASON I AM ASKING THIS QUESTION, AND THERE ARE SOME MORE COMMENTS, MAYBE. WHEN I HAD THE MEETING WITH COUNTY STAFF AND CITY STAFF, THIS IS EXACTLY THE TYPE OF CONVERSATION THAT I WAS HAVING. WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO, AND HOW WILL WE GROW OUR CITY WITHIN OUR CITY? THIS IS COUNTY UNINCORPORATED LAND WITHIN OUR CITY BEING ANNEXED HERE. BUT THERE IS STILL A DISCUSSION ON THE ROAD OF RIGHT AWAY'S, PUBLIC FERTILITY -- UTILITY INFRASTRUCTURE. I WILL BE CAUTIOUSLY OPTIMISTIC. I WILL PUT IT THAT WAY. THAT SOMETHING CAN BE DONE AS THIS COMMUNITY AND AS PART OF OUR CITY DEVELOPS AND GROWS. WITHOUT AGREEMENTS IN PLACE SPECIFICALLY WITH THE COUNTY, OR THE COUNTY MAKING DEDICATION OR COMMITMENTS TO INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS, OR THE CITY MAKING COMMITMENTS TO THAT, THIS WILL BE CHALLENGING.

YOU KNOW, I AM IMAGINING THAT THE ANNEXATION, OKAY . VACANT LAND, CURRENTLY? OKAY. I IMAGINE THAT SOMETHING IS GOING TO HAPPEN ON THESE PARCELS, OR A REQUEST FOR SOMETHING TO HAPPEN ON THESE PARCELS COMING TO US SOON. THAT IS JUST THE PATTERN OF PROCESS AND WHAT WE HAVE WITNESSED IN THE PAST. IS

THERE AN APPLICATION PENDING? >> FOR THIS? NO.

>> NOT YET, OKAY. I HAVEN'T HEARD OF THIS. I AM JUST SPECULATING A LITTLE BIT AND HAVING CONVERSATION. SO I AM NOT SAYING THAT I AM IN FAVOR OR NOT IN FAVOR OF THIS, I JUST WANT TO MAKE A STATEMENT, THAT THESE TYPES OF CONVERSATIONS, AND HOW WE ARE DEVELOPING OUR CITY. DO WE HAVE AGREEMENTS WITH THE COUNTY AND WHO WILL MAINTAIN THE ROADS? BECAUSE I CAN TELL YOU THAT SEVENTH STREET, I HAVE BEEN DOWN IT, PERSONALLY. MAINTENANCE ROAD, IT HAS TURNED INTO A ROAD. SO I SHARE THAT WITH ALL OF YOU FOR THAT EXACT READING. MR. MIMS WAS AT THAT MEETING. HE WAITED FROM A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING STANDARD. THESE ARE THINGS THAT NEED TO BE TALKED ABOUT.

WHILE IT IS NICE THAT WE CAN SAY, LET'S ANNEXED AND ACQUIRED THIS ADDITIONAL TAX REVENUE, AT THE END OF THE DAY, WHAT IS THE IMPACT TO OUR CITY IS MY QUESTION. AND DO WE HAVE A PLAN TO ADDRESS THOSE POTENTIAL GROWTH IMPACTS? I DO NOT THINK WE HAVE A PLAN YET, AND I THINK WE NEED TO DEVELOP A PLAN. SO I WILL WRING THAT TO YOU AS A STATEMENT, AND ALSO A CONCERN OF MINE. THAT IS ALL I HAVE. THANK YOU.

>> IT IS A VOLUNTARY ANNEXATION. I NOTICED WHEN I WAS DOING MY HOMEWORK ON THIS, IT WAS SURROUNDED BY COUNTY

PROPERTIES. SURROUNDED. >> NO, NO. YOU GO AHEAD.

>> COMMISSIONER, I THINK I HEAR YOUR CONCERN. AND IT IS GOING TO A RESIDENTIAL HIGH. OBVIOUSLY, THE IMPACT OF MORE HOUSES, MORE PEOPLE, MORE TRAVEL, AND THE CONDITION OF THE WORLD NOW BEING WHATEVER IT IS, IT COULD OBVIOUSLY DETERIORATE WITH A HIGH-IMPACT AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC ON SCHOOL BUSES, ALL OF THAT KIND OF STUFF. THAT WAS MY QUESTION. I KNOW WHERE I'M AT. THIS IS THAT INDUSTRIAL AREA I CALL IT, RIGHT OVER OFF OF THE WEBSITE.

>> VISITED EAST RESIDENTIAL SIDE.

>> I HAVE BEEN DOWN INTO THAT PART. I DO NOT KNOW THAT, BUT I AM CONCERNED AS TO WHAT IS OVER THERE BESIDES THIS ONE TO YOUR TOLD ME THAT ALL THE PROPERTIES AROUND THIS ARE COUNTY

PROPERTIES? >> NOT ALL OF THEM.

>> A BUNCH OF THEM. >> A BUNCH, YES. ALL OF THESE IN COLOR RIGHT NOW ARE COUNTY. AND THEN THIS IS THE CITY MAP.

IT IS ALL IN COLOR HERE AROUND THE CITY.

>> WAIT A MINUTE. SO THAT TAUPE COLOR IS CITY ANNEXED?

>> YES. EVERYTHING IN COLOR HERE IS CITY. EVERYTHING IN

COLOR HERE IS COUNTY. >> OH, BOY.

>> SO CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE OTHER MAP? THANK YOU. YOU CAN SEE WHERE THE QUANDARY IS. WE ARE EXPANDING THE CITY. I'M NOT AGAINST EXPANDING THE CITY. BUT THIS IS STARTING TO GET

[02:05:02]

WHERE WE TALK ABOUT IN FIELD DEVELOPMENT. WE DO NOT HAVE A PLAN FOR INFRASTRUCTURE. THAT IS MY CONCERN. I AM NOT SAYING I AM AGAINST IT OR FOR IT RIGHT THIS SECOND. WE NEED TO HAVE MORE CONVERSATION. BUT I THINK THIS IS A VALID CONCERN. I THINK I HAVE HEARD FROM THE PUBLIC MANY TIMES ABOUT THE EXACT ISSUE. HOW WE WILL HANDLE CALLS FOR SERVICE AND INFRASTRUCTURE, ALL OF THE ABOVE.

>> WHEN YOU SAY INFRASTRUCTURE, YOUR TALK ABOUT ROADS, STORMWATER TREATMENT, SIDEWALKS. I THINK THE PUBLIC NEEDS TO HEAR THAT. THAT STUFF IS EXPENSIVE. RIGHT? SO, TO HAVE TO PUT THAT IN PLACE HERE IN ALL OF THE UNDERGROUND AND ALONG WITH THAT , WE WILL GET INTO THE COST AND HOW DO YOU BALANCE THAT WITH WHAT COMES IN, AS FAR AS TAXES FROM THAT PARTICULAR AREA? BECAUSE THIS IS OBVIOUSLY COUNTY ANNEXED.

I'VE GOT IT. >> THE GARBAGE TRUCKS ALL HAVE TO GO DOWN THAT ONE LITTLE STREET.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF OR DISCUSSION? OKAY. THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. ANYONE WISHING TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION ON THIS ISSUE, PLEASE COME FORWARD.

>> I HAVE A COUPLE COMMENTS HERE. FOR MR. HARRY BLUE. IF I WERE YOU, I WOULD RUN FAR, FAR AWAY FROM ANNEXING WITH THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE. THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE, AND ANOTHER QUASIJUDICIAL HEARING, WILL THEN TELL YOU THAT COMPETENT SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE WILL GIVE YOU REASON NOT TO PROVE WHATEVER IT IS THAT YOU WANT BASED ON THE ROLES AS THEY DID WITH JOHNSON JOSEPH IN A SHORT-TERM QUASIJUDICIAL HEARING. I WOULD NOT EVEN DEVELOP. I WOULD NOT ANNEXED

INTO FORT PIERCE. >> ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION ON THIS? PLEASE COME FORWARD. SEEING NO COMMENT, I WILL BRING THIS BACK TO THE COMMISSION.

>> ARE YOU LOOKING FOR A MOTION?

>> YES. >> META-MAYOR, AND MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE ORDINANCE 24 E- 005.

>> IS THERE A SECOND? >> SECOND.

>> CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE.

[d. Quasi-Judicial Hearing - Ordinance 24-004 providing for a Zoning Atlas Map Amendment by owner Ubilla-Duque Holdings, LLC., of one (1) parcel of land to change "Area 1" zoning classification from Commercial, General CG, to General Commercial, C-3, and "Area 2" zoning classification from Residential Multi-Familu (RM-11), to Residential High (R-5) generally located at 3307 S US Hwy 1 Fort Pierce, FL 34982. Parcel IDs: 2427-601-0050-000-7. FIRST READING]

>> NEXT, WE HAVE A QUASIJUDICIAL HEARING FOR ORDINANCE 24 E- 004. IN ORDINANCE I THE CITY COMMISSION REZONING A TOTAL OF PLUS OR -3.72 ACRES OF PROPERTY, GENERALLY LOCATED AT OR NEAR 3307 SOUTH U.S. HIGHWAY 1, IN ORDER TO REZONE PLUS OR -2.66 ACRES OF THE PROPERTY FOR COUNTY ZONING, COMMERCIAL OR GENERAL TO CITY ZONING COMMERCIAL OR GENERAL, AND TO REZONE PLUS OR -12.05 ACRES OF AREA TO. THE PROPERTY FROM COUNTY ZONING, RESIDENTIAL MULTIFAMILY TO RESIDENTIAL HIGH, PROVIDING FOR A SEPARABILITY CLAUSE, PROVIDING TO REPEAL ORDINANCES, PARTS THERE OF EFFECTIVE DATE, THIS IS THE FIRST READING.

>> OKAY. THIS IS THE FIRST OF SEVERAL QUASIJUDICIAL HEARINGS.

MS. HEDGES, WILL YOU READ THE PROCEDURES? AND IF EVERYONE WOULD LISTEN TO HER , SHE WILL NOT HAVE TO READ THEM AGAIN.

>> YES, MA'AM. >> THE CITY COMMISSION SERVES A LEGISLATIVE AND QUASIJUDICIAL ROLE. WHEN ACTING AS A LEGISLATIVE BODY, THEY PASSED LAWS AND ESTABLISHING POLICIES.

WHEN ACTING AS A QUASIJUDICIAL BODY, THE COMMISSIONER APPLIES THOSE LAWS AND POLICIES AND IS HELD TO STRICTER PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS. QUASIJUDICIAL SEEDINGS ARE LESS FORMAL THAN PROCEEDINGS BEFORE A CIRCUIT COURT, BUT ARE MORE FORMAL THAN NORMAL COMMISSION MEETINGS. QUASIJUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS MAY FOLLOW BASIC STANDARDS OF NOTICE AND DUE PROCESS, DECISIONS MUST BE MADE ON COMPETENT SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE.

THEREFORE, COMMISSIONERS HAVE A DUTY TO CONDUCT WITH THEIR JUDICIAL PROCEEDS WERE LIKE JUDGES THAN LEGISLATORS. THIS IS WHY THE COMMISSION HAS ESTABLISHED THE UNIFORM PROCEDURES FOR QUASIJUDICIAL HEARING THAT WILL BE FOLLOWED THIS EVENING. FINALLY, NO ONE SHOULD APPROACH ANY MEMBER OF THE CITY COMMISSION THAT THE CITY -- DURING THE HEARING IF DOCTORS ARE TO BE GIVEN TO THE CITY CLERK, PLEASE GIVE THEM TO THE SERGEANT AT ARMS , WHICH ARE EITHER OF THE TWO POLICE

OFFICERS IN THE CHAMBER. >> THANK YOU. THESE PROCEEDINGS ARE NOW CALLED TO ORDER. WOULD YOU PLEASE CONFIRM COMPLIANCE WITH ADVERTISING AND NOTICE REQUIREMENTS?

>> ADVERTISING HAS BEEN MET. >> WOULD YOU ASK COMMISSIONERS ABOUT ? PARTAKE COMMUNICATION?

>> YES, MA'AM. COMMISSIONER BRODRICK? COMMISSIONER GAINES ? COMMISSIONER C JOHNSON? COMMISSIONER JEH JOHNSON?

>> NO REPORT. >> WOULD YOU NOW IS THERE ANY

[02:10:07]

WITNESSES? >> ANYONE WISHING TO SWEAR ON THIS ITEM, PLEASE STAND. RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. JUST BECAUSE YOU STAND, DOESN'T MEAN YOU HAVE TO. DO YOU SWEAR TO TELL THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH?

>> THANK YOU. PROCEED . >> ALREADY. GOOD EVENING, META-MAYOR, CITY COMMISSIONERS. TONIGHT, I BRING BEFORE YOU A ZONING ATLAS MAP AMENDMENT. AT 3307 SOUTH U.S. HIGHWAY 1.

UBILLA-DUQUE HOLDINGS. THE APPLICANT IS --. IN A SUMMARY, REQUEST FOR REVIEW OF A ZONING ATLAS MAP AMENDMENT APPLICATION PARCEL OF LAND AT 3307 SOUTH U.S. HIGHWAY 1. THE REQUEST IS TO CHANGE FROM MORE OR LESS 2.66 ACRES, ALSO KNOWN AS AREA 1 OF THE PROPERTY, FROM COUNTY ZONING OF COMMERCIAL GENERAL CD TO CITY ZONING OF GENERAL COMMERCIAL SEE DASH 3.

AND TO REZONE, MORE OR LESS, ONE .5, 1.05 ACRES, ALSO KNOWN AS AREA 2 OF THE AREA FROM PROPERTY ZONING OF RESIDENTIAL MULTIFAMILY TO CITY ZONING RESIDENTIAL HIGH OUR CAPITAL FIVE. HERE IS A SITE AREA OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH IS ACROSS FROM 2.72 ACRES. THE EXISTING ZONING AND COUNTY AREA 1 COMMERCIAL GENERAL, ARIEL 2 IS RESIDENTIAL MULTIFAMILY. THE PROPOSED ZONING FOR CITY AREA ONE WOULD BE C-3, GENERAL COMMERCIAL, AREA TO, RESIDENTIAL HIGH. SO, THIS IS A COMPARISON CHART. BUT WITH THE CHANGE FROM ST. LUCIE COUNTY ZONING TO THE CITY COUNCIL ZONING. THE MAX UNITS WILL INCREASE BY 55. THE PLANNING BOARD AT THEIR AUGUST 14TH, 2023 MEETING VOTED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL FOR THE PROPOSAL WITH SUBMITTED DOCUMENTATION OF THE UP ZONING AND LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS THAT WAS PROVIDED. WHICH MOVED THE AGENDA TO THE NEVADA 20TH, 2023 CITY COMMISSION MEETING, WHERE WE VOTED TO APPROVE THE ANNEXATION OF THE PROPOSED ZONING. HERE IS A SCREENSHOT FROM THE CITY COMMISSION MEETING SHOWING WHAT THE PROPOSED ON IT WAS PRESENTED AS. DUE TO AN ERROR, THE ORDINANCE LISTED THE INCORRECT ZONING INFORMATION. WHICH BRINGS US HERE TODAY. AND FOR THAT REASON, STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE CITY COMMISSION VOTE APPROVAL ON THE ATLAS AMENDMENT.

>> QUESTIONS OF STAFF? COMMISSIONER BRODRICK.

>> I NEED TO GO BACK TO THE SLIDE, THIS SLIDE. WE ARE

GOOD, THANK YOU. >> YES, SIR. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF? ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF? NOW I OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. I WOULD LIKE THIS APPLICANT TO COME FORWARD, PLEASE. STATE YOUR NAME. DO YOU HAVE ANY

QUESTIONS OF STAFF? >> I DO NOT HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF. STAFF DID A GREAT JOB AT PRESENTING WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO HERE FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT --

>> STATE YOUR NAME FOR ME, PLEASE.

>> ALEJANDRA TAURO. THE STAFF DID A GREAT JOB OF PRESENTING OUR APPLICATION TODAY. WE ARE LOOKING FORWARD TO CEMENTING A FUTURE SITE PLAN APPLICATION REGARDING THE PRE-APPLICATION MEETING WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. THERE ARE CURRENTLY PLANS TO BE PREPARED FOR THE CITY AFTER THIS. BUT I HAVE NO FURTHER QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSIONERS.

>> ALL RIGHT. COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE, PLEASE COME FORWARD. SEEING NO MOVEMENT, I CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND ENTERTAIN A MOTION OR

DISCUSSION. >> META-MAYOR, AND MAKE A

MOTION TO APPROVE THE MOTION. >> SECOND.

>> CALL THE ROLE, PLEASE.

[e. *CONTINUED TO MAY 6, 2024* Quasi-Judicial Hearing - Review and approval of an application for a Site Plan (Development and Design Review), submitted by applicant Francarlos Rivera with TEG Developers, to construct a two-hundred and six (206) unit rental community with an amenity center, a proposed 10.7 acre conservation easement and associated development improvements at 5315 Edwards Road and 5496 Altman Road, more specifically at Parcel IDs: 2430-231-0001-000-4 and 2430-234-0001-000-3. ]

[02:15:19]

>> OKAY. NEXT, WE HAVE THE REVIEW, ANOTHER QUASIJUDICIAL HEARING FOR THE REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN DEVELOPMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW, SUBMITTED BY APPLICANT FRANCARLOS RIVERA WITH TGE DEVELOPERS TO CONSTRUCT A 206 UNIT RENTAL COMMUNITY WITH AN AMENITIES CENTER, A PROPOSED 10.7 CONSERVATION EASEMENT AND DEVELOPMENT IMPROVEMENTS AND 5315 EDWARDS ROAD AND 5496 OLD

MAN ROAD. >> OKAY. HAVE THE ADVERTISING

REQUIREMENTS BEEN MET? >> THEY HAVE BEEN MET.

>> NOTICE REQUIREMENTS ALSO? >> YES. THANK YOU.

>> WELL, I NEEDED TO ASK A LITTLE BETTER. HOW ABOUT ? PARTAKE COMMUNICATIONS WITH COMMISSIONERS?

>> COMMISSIONER BRODRICK, AND HE ASKED PARTAKE?

>> YES, RESIDENCE IN THE AREA.

>> COMMISSIONER GAINES ? >> NO, MA'AM.

>> COMMISSIONER C. JOHNSON? >> NO.

>> COMMISSIONER J, JOHNSON? >> IS. RESIDENCE ADJACENT OR

ACROSS THE STREET. >> AND MAYOR HUDSON?

>> NO, MA'AM. AND WOULD YOU SWEAR IN THE WITNESSES, PLEASE? THIS ITEM, PLEASE STAND AND RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. DO YOU SWEAR TO TELL THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, NOTHING BUT THE

TRUTH? THANK YOU. >> PROCEED.

>> MAYOR, COMMISSIONERS, BEFORE YOU IS AN APPLICATION FOR THE SITE PLAN AT 5153 EDWARDS ROAD AND 5496 ALTMAN ROAD. THE APPLICANT IS FROM CARLOS RIVERA WITH TGE DEVELOPERS. THE PROPERTY OWNERS ARE TGE MARINER COVE LLC. ANY PARTIAL I.D.S IN QUESTION ARE 2430, 241001, 004, AND 24300 24 001003. IN SUMMARY, THIS IS REQUEST FOR REVIEW OF AN APPLICATION FOR A SITE PLAN DEVELOPMENT AND REVIEW OF A 206 UNIT RENTAL COMMUNITY. THE COMMUNITY WILL CONSIST OF ONE BEDROOM, TWO BEDROOM, AND THREE BEDROOM DUPLEXES. IT IS A SISTER PROJECT TO THE EAST, WHICH THE COMMISSION APPROVED LAST MONTH.

BOTH COMMUNITIES WILL SHARE ACCESS TO AMENITIES, SUCH AS A FITNESS CENTER, FITNESS LODGE, COMMUNITY ROOM, PET SPA, OUTDOOR GRILLING AREAS, AND MORE. THE EAST IS BEING PROPOSED AT 5315 EDWARDS ROAD, AND 5496 ALTMAN ROAD. THE SITE LEAVES THE 8.20 ACRE WETLANDS, 2.25 ACRES ARE FRESHWATER MARSH, AND 5.9 ACRES OF IS ONE PRESERVED, PROVIDING AN ADDITIONAL 2.5 ACRES OF UPLAND ECOSYSTEMS ADJACENT TO THOSE WETLANDS AS A BUFFER. THE 10.7 ACRES OF WETLANDS AND BUFFER WILL BE PRESERVED THROUGH A CONSERVATION EASEMENT. THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS LOCATED ON A PARCEL WITH A FUTURE LAND USE OF MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND A ZONING OF MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL. THE PROPOSED 260 UNITS IS FAR BELOW THE ALLOTTED 10 UNITS PER ACRE ALLOWED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT, WHICH WOULD BE 397 UNITS. THE APPLICANT COULD BUILD IN THE ZONING DISTRICT. THIS IS THE SITE LOCATION WITH A SITE AREA GIVE OR TAKE OF 39 ACRES. THE CONSERVATION EASEMENT THAT IS BEING PROPOSED WOULD BE RUNNING ALONG 10 MILE CREEK HERE. THE FUTURE LAND USES MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL, THE ZONE USE IS MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL. THIS IS THE SITE PLAN. AS YOU CAN SEE HERE, HERE IS A CONSERVATION EASEMENT ALONG 10 MILE CREEK. WITH THE GIVEN SITE DATA. THIS IS THE LANDSCAPE PLAN WITH THE ASSOCIATED SPECIES THAT ARE BEING PROPOSED FOR THE PROPERTY. THESE ARE THE ELEVATIONS FOR THE CLUBHOUSE.

AND THE ONE BEDROOM DUPLEXES. THESE ARE FOR THE TWO BEDROOM DUPLEXES. AND THE THREE BEDROOM DUPLEXES. AND THESE ARE THE THREE BEDROOM DUPLEXES WITH GARAGES. RECOMMENDATION, THE STAFF RECOMMENDS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS. AN ESTIMATE OF LANDSCAPE PURSUANT TO CITY CODE IT SHALL BE REQUIRED

[02:20:01]

BEFORE THE FINAL CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY IS APPROVED FOR THIS SITE. A GOPHER TORTOISE SURVEY WILL BE REQUIRED BEFORE THE CONSTRUCTION CAN BEGIN. ADDRESSES WILL NEED TO BE SUBMITTED THROUGH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT FOR ALL UNITS PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMANENT APPLICATIONS. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY SITES CLEARING PERMITS, THE APPLICANT SHALL PROVIDE THREE SECRETARIES AND MEET WITH THE ARBORIST FOR THE CITY REGULATOR TREES PROPOSED TO BE REMOVED AS A RESULT OF THE SITES DEVELOPED IN CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY. AFTER FEBRUARY 12, THE 2023 MEETING, THE BOARD VOTED UNANIMOUSLY TO MOVE THE SITE PLAN, THE DEVELOPMENT AND SITE REVIEW TO THE CITY COMMISSION WITH A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL FOR THE FOUR CONDITIONS . A PAYMENT IN THE TO SAINT LUCIE COUNTY IN RESPECT TO THE PORTION OF SIDEWALK THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED BETWEEN THE TWO DIFFERENT DEVELOPMENTS, VIVA EAST AND WEST, AND THAT PORTION WOULD BE RELATED ONLY TO THE COST OF THE SIDEWALK ITSELF, NOT TO ANY STORMWATER OR INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS THAT MAY BE REQUIRED. SO, STAFF RECOMMENDATION TIE IS FOR THE CITY COMMISSION TO VOTE APPROVAL OF THE PLAN REVIEW WITH THE FIVE CONDITIONS. AN ULTIMATE RECOMMENDATION CAN BE GIVEN WITH THE RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS, ALTERNATE CONDITIONS, OR A RECOMMENDATION OF DISAPPROVAL. THANK YOU.

>> QUESTIONS OF STAFF? >> META-MAYOR, I HAVE A QUESTION. THIS COMMUNICATION, WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT THIS. WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT VIVA WEST AND VIVA EAST AT ANOTHER HEARING.

SO, IS THAT CONSIDERED A COMMUNICATION? WE TALKED ABOUT

IT HERE. >> IS A PUBLIC HEARING.

>> I GOT YOU, I WANTED TO MAKE SURE. I HAVE SEEN THIS BEFORE.

OKAY. >> YOU ARE RIGHT. NO, WE WANT

TO BE CAREFUL. I KNOW. >> TORTOISES, WE TALKED ABOUT THE SIDEWALKS. I JUST WANTED, OKAY. THAT IS ALWAYS ASKING.

>> QUESTIONS OF STAFF? >> META-MAYOR, I HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS. CAN YOU BRING UP THE SITE PLAN? YOU PROBABLY WILL HAVE TO BRING UP THE SITE PLAN ON THE WEBSITE WITH THE DEVELOPERS APPLICATION, BECAUSE THAT WAS A LITTLE BLURRY IN THE

PACKET. THIS ONE. >> OKAY.

>> AND I WILL SAY THAT THE ONE IN THE PACKET IS NOT THE UPDATED VERSION. THEY DO HAVE AN UPDATED VERSION WHERE A COURT WAS MOVED. SO LET ME GET THAT FOR YOU.

>> AND WHILE YOU ARE DOING THAT, I'M NOT SURE HE WANTS TO ANSWER MR. FREEMAN OR OTHER BODIES ABOUT THAT. TALK TO ME, PLEASE, ABOUT THE SIDEWALK. THE CITY.

>> THERE WAS A DISCUSSION ABOUT THE CONNECTIVITY BETWEEN THE TWO, VIVA EAST AND VIVA WEST. YOU MIGHT BE CONFUSED ABOUT WHY THE CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE STORM WATER, WHITE WAS RESTRICTED.

THE ROADWAY BETWEEN THE TWO IS TO BE IMPROVED AND SOMETIME IN THE FUTURE AS A ROADWAY. AND I CANNOT REMEMBER THE ACTUAL ROAD

NAME. >> JENKINS.

>> IT IS DUE TO BE A PROVED AT SOME POINT BY THE COUNTY.

>> IN 15 YEARS. >> SO THERE IS A REQUIREMENT IN CITY CODE THAT I SIDEWALK BE PROVIDED ALONG THE FRONTAGE ONLY OF EACH DEVELOPMENT. BUT THAT LEFT A SECTION THAT WOULD BE SEPARATE. IT WOULD BE DISJOINTED . ANY CONCERN OF THE PLANNING BOARD IS, HOW WOULD PEOPLE GET FROM ONE TO THE OTHER. ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE ARGUMENT WAS THAT THE ROADWAY WHERE THIS SIDEWALK WOULD BE WITHIN IS DUE FOR AN IMPROVEMENT. AND IT MAY BE ADDITIONAL RIGHT-OF-WAY REQUIRED FOR THE STORM WATER DRAINAGE SYSTEM, IT MAY NEED TO BE APPROVED FULLY BEFORE THE SIDEWALK WOULD BE PUT IN. SO IT WAS PUTTING IN SOMETHING THAT WOULD POTENTIALLY BE RIPPED IN THE FUTURE, IN FIVE YEARS OR SOMETHING. AND THERE WOULD BE OTHER ENGINEERING REQUIRED AROUND AND UNDER THE NEW SIDEWALK. THE APPLICANT OFFERED THAT CONNECTIVITY AS A BENEFIT, IF YOU'D LIKE, THAT THE TWO WOULD BE CONNECTED.

BECAUSE OF THE FUTURE ROADWAY, THE POTENTIAL ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS, THAT CONTRIBUTION WOULD HAVE BEEN MADE RATHER THAN THE ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION OF THAT SIDEWALK. MICROPHONE CLOSER? I'M HAVING A HARD TIME HEARING YOU.

>> I WOULD JUST TALK QUIETER.

>> OKAY, THANK YOU FOR THAT. >> DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? I

[02:25:03]

WAFFLED IN THE BIT I THINK. >> I THINK I GOT IT. SO, YOU GOT THE SITE PLAN HERE. SO WE ARE TALKING ABOUT SIDEWALKS. I HAD TO GO BACK AND WATCH THE VIDEO AND THE INFORMATION THAT WAS PRESENTED FROM VIVA WEST. AND THIS IS VIVA EAST, COMMISSIONER, RIGHT? SO THE APPLICANT TALKED ABOUT BOTH OF THESE IN THE PREVIOUS APPLICATION. WAS A PREVIOUS ALSO MENTIONED IN THIS APPLICATION ANYWHERE IN THE DOCUMENTS? BECAUSE I THOUGHT THERE WAS A TIE TO SOME OF THE

RECREATIONAL AMENITIES. >> YES, THEY ARE MENTIONED,

YES. >> HOW ARE THEY MENTIONED?

>> THE SIDEWALK CONNECTION? >> NO, THE AMENITIES THAT TIE

THE TWO PROJECTS TOGETHER. >> THEY ARE MENTIONED IN BOTH PROJECTS, THAT THERE ARE MANY OF THESE. THEY ARE NOT SPECIFICALLY LAID OUT AS TO EACH OF THE SITE PLANS SPECIFICALLY BEING LAID OUT. THE CLUBHOUSE IS, WHAT ARE IN THE CLUBHOUSES. SO WE CAN GO A LITTLE CLOSER, I GUESS, TO THIS ONE. BUT THEY ARE MENTIONED, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE MANY OF THESE AT BOTH. BUT THE VIVA EAST WILL HAVE MOST OF THE AMENITIES AND VIVA WEST, THE ONE TO WAS ALREADY APPROVED, IS MOSTLY JUST A CLUBHOUSE AND POOL.

>> ALL RIGHT. THAT BRINGS ME INTO THE SIDEWALK CONVERSATION.

THE CONNECTIVITY CONVERSATION. BECAUSE, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, I REMEMBER HEARING, AND WHEN I HEARD IT AGAIN ABOUT THE AMENITIES, IT WAS BASED ON THE FACT THAT THIS PROJECT WAS GOING TO HAVE A GREATER AMOUNT OF AMENITIES FOR VIVA WEST, WOULD YOU JUST SHARED, ALLOWING FOLKS TO COME OVER HERE AND USE THE AMENITIES ON THIS SITE. SO, YOU KNOW, THERE IS A PAY IN LIEU OF SIDEWALKS. THAT IS WHAT THE ADVOCATE HAS SHARED SO FAR.

>> OKAY. I WILL BRING THAT UP AGAIN WHEN THE APPLICANT COMES FORWARD. THE LAST QUESTION IS REGARDING PARKING. I KNOW THERE ARE DIFFERENT MODELS WITHIN THIS PROJECT SITE. I WAS A LITTLE CONFUSED, OR A NEED A LITTLE HELP IN THE EXACT MIDDLE OF THE SCREEN RIGHT NOW. THERE IS PARKING ON THE ROAD FRONTAGE, IT LOOKS LIKE, WELL, THAT WOULD BE STORMWATER, THAT STORMWATER INFRASTRUCTURE IN THERE IN THE MIDDLE?

>> YES. >> TO THE RIGHT OF THAT.

>> TO THE RIGHT HERE IS -- >> PARALLEL PARKING?

>> YES. >> HOW ABOUT TO THE RIGHT OF THAT? TO THE RIGHT WERE THE DEVELOP IT IS? YES. THAT IS A SQUARE OF WHAT LOOKED LIKE BUILDINGS, WITH SOME SORT OF CENTRAL SPACE IN THE MIDDLE. AND THERE IS 90 DEGREE PARKING ALONG THE TO ROAD FRONTAGES. TO HAVE THAT ACCURATE?

>> YES. SO THAT PARKING MEETS?

>> THERE ARE 50 SPOTS ABOVE THE REQUIRED PARKING FOR THIS

DEVELOPMENT. >> ALALL RIGHT. THAT IS ALL I

HAVE FOR NOW. >> ARE THERE QUESTIONS FOR

STAFF? >> YES. I WAS LOOKING AT THIS.

I WANT TO BE CLEAR IN THE INTEREST TO THIS DEVELOPMENT.

SO THAT IS IT THERE. AND WHEN YOU OBVIOUSLY ENTER HIGH UP, WHAT IS THAT ROADWAY CONSTRUCTION? THAT IS EDWARD RHODES, RIGHT? WHEN YOU COME OUT OF HERE, YOU CAN MAKE RIGHT AND LEFT TURNS OUT OF THIS SUBDIVISION. ANY SIGNAL LA'S

NATION GOING HERE? >> ON TO TALK ABOUT OR PROPOSE, NO. AND THE COUNTY DID NOT MAKE ANY COMMON ABOUT ANYTHING LIKE

THAT. >> A RIGHT OR LEFT ON EDWARDS, RIGHT? THAT IS EDWARDS ROAD. OKAY. WELL, I WILL GET TO THE DEVELOPER ON THIS. YEAH, I WILL HOLD OFF AT THIS POINT.

THANK YOU. >> COMMISSIONER BRODRICK?

>> QUESTIONS COMING UP ON COMMISSIONER J. JOHNSON'S COMMENTARY. I REMEMBER SPECIFICALLY THERE WAS CONVERSATION REGARDING, YOU KNOW, SHARING OF THESE COMMON AREA FACILITIES. SO I WOULD LIKE AND IN THE DISCUSSION AS TO HOW THEY TRANSPORT PERSONS BACK AND FORTH. THE SECOND QUESTION , SCHOOL-AGED CHILDREN PICK UP. HOW IS THAT BEING

MANAGED? >> THERE IS A SCHOOL BUS TURN IN HERE. THERE IS ALSO BEING PROPOSED A SHELTER FOR DROP

OFF. >> THE PRIOR DEVELOPMENT, WE REQUIRED SHELTERED PICK UP AS WELL. SO THERE IS WANTED FOR EACH DEVELOPMENT. NOBODY IS CROSSING STREET TO GET TO THE

PICKUP POINT. >> YES, SIR. JUST FOR A LITTLE CLARIFICATION, THEY HAVE MET THE TURNING.

>> YES. THEY HAD A LINE THERE AT ACCESS POINT. WAS THAT CORRECT? I COULD BE OFF ON THAT.

>> THE OTHER PROJECT IS ALIGNED WITH THE CAMPGROUND. BUT THIS, TO MY KNOWLEDGE, IS NOT ALIGNED.

>> OKAY. I MUST HAVE BEEN THINKING OF SOMETHING ELSE.

[02:30:01]

THAT IS ALL I HAD. >> I THINK TO THAT, GO BACK TO THE AREA WHERE THEY ENTER AND EXIT THIS PARTICULAR PARCEL. I REMEMBER WHAT YOU ARE SAYING, COMMISSIONER. THAT IS NOT THIS PROJECT. THIS PROJECT, THE INTEREST IS CLOSER TO SOVIETS.

OR IS IT CLOSER TO DINKINS? >> JENKINS, I THINK.

>> I REMEMBER , THEY DID NOT. >> THIS IS A DIFFERENT PROJECT.

INTEREST HERE, WHAT YOU ARE POINTING TO ME, AND WHERE IS THIS, WHAT IS THIS SIGNAL AT THE BOTTOM HERE?

>> THIS IS THE OTHER EXIT FOR THE KOA CAMPGROUNDS.

>> KOA, OKAY. BUT THIS ENTRY AND EXIT IS CLOSER TO JENKINS

AND EDWARDS? >> NEAR THE CORNER OF EDWARDS AND JENKINS. AND HOW MUCH FOOTAGE AREA DO WE HAVE BETWEEN THAT CORNER OF JENKINS AND EDWARDS, APPROXIMATELY?

>> LET'S SEE. >> AS LONG AS IT IS , THAT IS MY CONCERN. THE CONGESTION THERE OF ALL OF THESE RESIDENTS TRAVERSING IN AND OUT, AND THAT SIGNAL, THE CORNER OF JENKINS AND EDWARDS, IF IT IS CLOSE, AND THEN WE HAVE A LARGER COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION AT THE END OF THAT STREET AS WELL, AND SEVERAL THINGS. SO I AM JUST GETTING MY BEARINGS AS TO WHAT

IS. >> THIS, RIGHT HERE?

>> IF YOU ZOOM IN ON THE DRIVEWAY, ABOUT 600 FEET, 600.

BACK. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? OKAY. NOW IT IS TIME FOR THE APPLICANT TO COME FORWARD, PLEASE. STATE YOUR NAME FOR

THE RECORD, SIR? >> FRANCARLOS RIVERA, TEG

DEVELOPERS. >> ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF?

>> NO, MA'AM DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY? I THINK COMMISSIONERS WANT TO ASK YOU QUESTIONS. YOU WANT TO START OUT WITH SOMETHING? OR DO YOU WANT THEM TO ASK YOU QUESTIONS?

ASK AWAY. >> COMMISSIONER J JOHNSON, DID

YOU WANT TO ASK QUESTIONS? >> YES. SINCE WE LEFT OFF ON THE TRAFFIC CONVERSATION WITH SOME FELLOW COMMISSIONERS, COULD YOU WEIGH IN ON THE DISTANCE FROM THE INTERSECTION OF JENKINS AND EDWARDS TO YOUR PROPOSED DRIVEWAY?

>> YES, SIR. THE NORTH PROPERTY LINE ALONG EDWARDS ROAD IS ROUGHLY 1300 FEET LONG. AND OUR DRIVEWAY IS PUSHED CLOSE TO THE WEST MOST BOUNDARY OF THE PROPERTY. IF I HAD TO SAY I GUESS, I WOULD SAY 1100 FEET AWAY FROM THE INTERSECTION OF

JENKINS AND EDWARDS. >> ENDED ST. LUCIE COUNTY WEIGH IN ON TRAFFIC AT THE INTERSECTION? AND ALSO, DO YOU HAVE A TRAFFIC REPORT REGARDING THE INTERSECTION OF JENKINS AND EDWARDS? AND ALSO, EDWARDS AND SALVAGE ROAD?

>> WE DO FOR THE INTERSECTION OF JENKINS AND EDWARDS. SORRY, YES. JENKINS AND EDWARDS. THAT INTERSECTION WILL OPERATE AT THE SAME LEVEL OF SERVICE THAT CURRENTLY OPERATES AT. NOW I DO NOT HAVE ANYTHING FOR EDWARDS AND SAVAGE, IT WAS NOT INCLUDED

IN OUR TRAFFIC REPORT. >> IN THE COUNTY DID NOT

REQUEST THAT OF YOU? >> THEY DID NOT GIVE US ANY ADDITIONAL FEEDBACK OR ASK FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. BUT I UNDERSTAND THAT WHEN WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THE PROCESS, THEY WILL HAVE A THIRD-PARTY REVIEW BY ONE OF THEIR CONSULTANTS AS WELL. SO THERE MAY BE ADDITIONAL COMMENTS WORTH COMING, BUT WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANYTHING TO DATE.

>> I BELIEVE YOU WERE HERE BEFORE THE -- WEST, RIGHT? WELCOME BACK. IF YOU COULD, ELABORATE ON THE SIDEWALK DISCUSSION AND INFRASTRUCTURE DISCUSSION.

>> ABSOLUTELY. WE WANTED TO PROVIDE SOME KIND OF PEDESTRIAN CONNECTION BETWEEN THE VIVA WEST AND EVEN EAST COMMUNITIES.

WE STARTED LOOKING INTO INSTALLING A SIDEWALK EXTENSION FROM THE WEST PROPERTY DOWN TO THE EAST PROPERTY, RIGHT AT THE SECTION OF JENKINS AND EDWARDS. THE MORE WE LOOKED INTO IT, THE MORE RERUN INTO CERTAIN HURDLES. FOR EXAMPLE, THERE IS NO STORMWATER INFRASTRUCTURE ALONG JENKINS ROAD. IT IS CURRENTLY ALL OPEN SWALE. THE OTHER ISSUE WE RAN INTO,

[02:35:02]

FRANKLY, IF THE COUNTY HAS THE RIGHT-OF-WAY SOUTH OF OUR PROPERTY TO ALLOW FOR THOSE IMPROVEMENTS. SO WHERE WE WANT WILLING TO CONSTRUCT THOSE IMPROVEMENTS. NO, THE ADDITION OF ALL THE EXTRA INFRASTRUCTURE REQUIRED TO FACILITATE THOSE IMPROVEMENTS BECOMES OVERWHELMING. SO WE STILL WANT TO MAKE THE EFFORT TO INSTALL IT IF WE CAN FIGURE SOMETHING OUT WITH ST. LUCIE COUNTY. HOWEVER, IF WE CANNOT FEASIBLY PUT IN THE SIDEWALK, WE ARE MORE THAN HAPPY TO PAY THE COUNTY A PAYMENT IN LIEU FOR THE FUTURE CONSTRUCTION OF THE

SIDEWALK. >> THANK YOU.

>> YOU HAVE QUESTIONS? >> I WANT TO FOLLOW UP ON THAT.

IN THE ORIGINAL SITE PLAN, THERE WAS A DISCUSSION ON FACILITIES BEING SHARED BY ALL. WHERE IS THE CONNECTIVITY NOW IF THERE IS NO SIDEWALK CAPABILITY?

>> REALISTICALLY, IT WILL BE AUTOMOTIVE. PEOPLE WILL DRIVE FROM ONE WAY TO THE OTHER. I DO NOT KNOW IF ANYBODY HAS TRY TO WALKED ON JENKINS ROAD, BUT IT IS NOT THE MOST CONDUCIVE FOR PEDESTRIANS. IT IS A TWO LANE HIGHWAY. AND THAT IS WHY WE WANT TO INTRODUCE THE SIDEWALK FOR SOME KIND OF PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIVITY. TREASURE COAST WEST IS NOT WITHOUT AMENITIES.

IT DOES HAVE A POOL HOUSE, THEY HAVE THEIR OWN CLUBHOUSE BUILDINGS. THEY ALSO HAVE A BUILDING OF OUTDOOR AMENITIES.

BUT BY AND LARGE, THE PRIMARY AMENITIES CENTER, THE LEASING OFFICE, FITNESS CENTER, BUSINESS CENTER, CONFERENCE ROOM, ALL OF THOSE AMENITIES WILL BE LOCATED IN THE MAIN

CLUBHOUSE AT VIVA EAST. HIS >> WAS IT YOUR SUGGESTION TO PUT THE SIDEWALKS AND IN IT WAS SUGGESTED BACK TO YOU TO DO IN

LIEU OF? >> YES, SIR. WE WERE IN VALUATING INSTALLING THE SIDEWALK. IT IS SOMETHING WE ARE LOOKING INTO. AND I EXPLAINED SOME OF THE HARDSHIPS WE ARE HAVING WITH THAT INFRASTRUCTURE. SO I PUT IT OUT THERE AND MR. FRIEDMAN SUGGESTED MAYBE WE COULD DO A PAYMENT IN LIEU, INSTEAD OF DOING, YOU KNOW, THE FULL-BLOWN CONSTRUCTION OF THE SIDEWALK AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

>> I THINK DIRECTOR FREEMAN'S COMMENTS ARE CORRECT. THEY WILL BE'S TAUNTS TORN UP AT SOME POINT IN TIME. THAT TIME IS NOT SPECIFICALLY SET. HOWEVER, I AM VERY CONCERNED ABOUT PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC ON JENKINS, THE 55 MILE AN HOUR TRAFFIC UP AND DOWN THAT ROAD, EXACTLY IN THE AREA THAT YOU ARE REFERRING TO.

DIRECTOR FREEMAN, DO YOU HAVE --

>> I THINK THE MAIN ISSUE WAS THE ABILITY OF RIGHT-OF-WAY. IF

I RECALL CORRECTLY. >> IT'S GOT TO BE DEMOED BECAUSE THE RIGHT-OF-WAY DOES NOT EXIST CURRENTLY.

>> I THINK THE SIDEWALK MAY BE IN THE TOTALLY WRONG LOCATION.

IF THERE IS NOT RIGHT-OF-WAY AVAILABLE, YOU WOULD NEED, I BELIEVE , TO GET A DIRECT LINK THERE, THERE ARE A NUMBER OF PROPERTIES THEY ARE ENCROACHING.

>> OH, THAT IS A PROBLEM. THANK YOU.

>> REMIND ME OF THE PICTURE, WHERE IS EAST? WE APPROVED THAT? THIS IS EAST. OKAY. SO THE ISSUE OF GETTING THERE TO THERE IS DEFINITELY A DRAG. SO, BACK TO YOUR ENTRY AND EXIT FOR THIS EAST PROPERTY, RIGHT? YOU SAID IT IS 1000 YARDS OFF OF JENKINS. I AM CONCERNED. IT IS ONLY ONE WAY IN AND ONE WAY OUT FROM THAT EXIT. WAS THERE ANY CONSIDERATION GIVEN, JENKINS ROAD, TO TAKE SOME OF THAT TREASURE OFF OF THAT POINT?

>> WELL, JENKINS ROAD TRANSFORMS RIGHT AT THE INTERSECTION OF EDWARDS ROAD, AND IT BECOMES VERY MUCH A SUBSTANDARD, BASICALLY A DIRT ROAD. I'M NOT GOING TO LIE TO YOU. WE DID NOT REALLY CONSIDER IT FOR THAT REASON. IT IS SUBSTANDARD RIGHT AWAY. WE DO HAVE OUR EMERGENCY EXIT ONTO ALTMAN ROAD. BUT THAT IS ONLY IN CASE OF EMERGENCIES. WE DO NOT INTEND TO DIVERT TRAFFIC THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

>> ALL RIGHT. BUT THAT WILL HAVE ACCESS TO OUR EMERGENCY VEHICLES TO COME IN THERE. THERE IS A LOCK AND KEY TO COME OUT OF THERE, RIGHT? TO GET IN AND OUT ?

>> THAT ROAD, THIS MAY BE A QUESTION FOR STAFF. FURTHER

PART OF JENKINS WAY -- >> OKAY, GOT IT.

>> THIS IS A FAVORITE OF TRUCKS TO GET TO I-95. BETWEEN I-95 AND U.S. 1. SO I SEE THAT AS, THE CONNECTIVITY IS VERY CHALLENGING BECAUSE OF THAT. NOBODY IN THE COUNTY MENTIONED

[02:40:03]

THAT HEAVY TRAFFIC? YOUR TRAFFIC STUDY SAYS YOU WILL NOT

ADD TO IT. IS THAT RIGHT? >> WELL, WE WILL ADD TRIPS, BUT IT WILL MAINTAIN THE SAME LEVEL OF SERVICE THAT CURRENTLY PROVIDES. ONE OF THE THINGS SHE DID MENTION IN THE TRAFFIC REPORT, THIS WOULD BE UP TO THE COUNTY, SHE COMMENDED INSULATION. EITHER A ROUNDABOUT OR THREE WAY STOP SIGN AT JENKINS AND EDWARDS. I'M NOT SURE HOW THAT WOULD PLAY OUT WITH SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY. I MEAN, WE DEFINITELY WOULD NOT BE OPPOSED TO INSTALLING STOP SIGNS, IT IS NOT A BIG DEAL, WE CAN DO FITLY DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT, BUT I DO NOT KNOW IF WE WOULD BE ABLE TO GET IT APPROVED. OTHER QUESTIONS WERE

COMMISSIONERS? >> I HAVE ONE OTHER QUESTION ABOUT PROPERTY FRONTAGES, SORRY, SETBACKS. YOU MENTIONED JENKINS ROAD. COULD YOU ELABORATE ON THE CONDITIONS OF JENKINS ROAD SOUTH OF EDWARDS WHERE YOU WOULD NOT PROVIDE A

CONNECTION? >> SOUTH OF EDWARDS , I HAD A FEW CONTEXT PHOTOS WE SUBMITTED WITH THE APPLICATION.

ESSENTIALLY, IT IS NO LONGER A STRICT RIGHT-OF-WAY. ONCE YOU GET ONTO ALTMAN ROAD, IT EFFECTIVELY BECOMES A DIRT ROAD. SLIGHTLY BEYOND THAT, IT BECOMES A PRIVATE DRIVEWAY TO THAT REALLY BECAUSE DOWN ON 10 MILE CREEK.

>> IT IS PRETTY FAR SOUTH OF THE INTERSECTION. IS THAT

CORRECT? >> IT IS CLOSED-ISH. IT IS NOT

SUPER FAR. >> MAYBE I CAN REPHRASE THIS QUESTION. I NEED TO DO THIS BETTER.

>> HE HAS BEEN THERE A LOT.

>> YEAH. IS IT SUBSTANDARD IN WHAT FASHION BUT YOUR PROPOSED

PROPERTY? >> THE CONDITION OF THE ROAD COMPARED TO JENKINS ROAD. THE ROAD IS MORE DETERIORATED,

THERE IS NO STRIPING. >> THAT IS TOO FAR SOUTH. THAT

IS NOT ABOUT YOUR PROPERTY. >> OF PEOPLE DONE TO SLIGHTLY

-- >> WE ARE VERY SPECIFIC. THAT DOES NOT FRONT JENKINS. WE ARE ALMOST THERE, CLOSER. THERE WE

GO. >> THE STRIPING STOPS. THE ROAD IN IS NOT AS GOOD OF A CONDITION. THAT IS REALLY WHAT

WE ARE CONSIDERING. >> OKAY. SO, THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS OR STUDY, WHATEVER WAS PROVIDED, DID IT PROVIDE ANY INFORMATION ON THE STOP SIGNS AND ANY TRAFFIC IMPACT, OR WHAT CURRENT CONDITIONS ARE AT PEAK HOURS? DID IT DISCUSS THAT?

>> I DID NOT TALK ABOUT CURRENT CONDITIONS AT PEAK HOURS. WE TALKED ABOUT THE NUMBER OF PEAK HOUR TRIPS WE WOULD BE ADDING IN A.M. AND P.M. TRIPS, BUT IT DID NOT SPEAK TO THE TOTAL NUMBER OF EXISTING TRIPS. OR IF IT DID, IN ALL FAIRNESS, MAYBE I MISUNDERSTOOD THAT, BECAUSE THOSE REPORTS ARE CONFUSING.

>> VERY CONFUSING. BUT VERY, VERY IMPORTANT. YES. I CAN TELL YOU, YOU WILL NOT GET THE PHONE CALLS, WE WILL GET THE PHONE CALLS ABOUT WHAT IS HAPPENING HERE. ALL RIGHT. LET'S TALK ABOUT THE NEIGHBORS THAT ARE HERE ON THE SCREEN. IT WENT AWAY, IT IS COMING BACK, MAYBE. ALTMAN. WHAT IS HAPPENING WITH OUR NEIGHBORS AND SETBACKS? IN YOUR PREVIOUS APPLICATION, WE HAD A LENGTHY CONVERSATION ABOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT ABUTTED YOUR PARCEL AND HOW MANY INCLUSIONS YOU HAVE THEM BROUGHT PROVIDED, BASED ON THE PREVIOUS DISCUSSION, MAYBE? OR MAYBE WHAT YOU HAVE HEARD US TALK ABOUT BEFORE . THAT OUR

CONCERNS OF THE PUBLIC. >> I WILL GO THROUGH VARIOUS PROPERTY LINES. WE'VE GOT A RANGE OF DIFFERENT DISTANCES FROM THE PROPERTY LINE TO THE BUILDING. OWNER NORTH MOST PROPERTY LINE, THE DISTANCE FROM THE PROPERTY LINE RANGES FROM 38 FEET TO 63 FEET. I WAS MOST PROPERTY LINE ALONG JENKINS ROAD, IT IS APPROXIMATELY 40 FEET ALL THE WAY ACROSS. AND THAT IS AFTER YOU ACCOUNT FOR THE RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION TOWARD THE EDWARDS ROAD EXPANSION. ON THE FIRST SOUTHLAKE, WHICH IS THE ONE DIRECTLY AGAINST THE ALTMAN ROAD HOMES, IT IS ROUGHLY 54 FEET AT THAT LOCATION . DONE ON THE SOUTHWEST SIDE, DIRECTLY NEXT TO THAT, WE HAVE A RANGE OF 25 TO 33 FEET. THE FAR SOUTH, WE HAVE APPROXIMATELY 28 FEET ACROSS THE BOARD. AND ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, WE HAVE ABOUT 21 FEET. THE KEY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THIS PROPERTY IN TREASURE COVE WEST ARE THAT ALL THE UNITS AT TREASURE COAST EAST ARE ALSO STORY BUILDINGS. WE HAVE AN ALLOWABLE MAXIMUM BUILDING

[02:45:01]

HEIGHT OF 45 FEET. OUR TALLEST BUILDING, WHICH IS ACTUALLY OUR AMENITIES CENTER, IT'S 25 FEET. YOU LOOK AT A RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS, THEY RANGE FROM 16 FEET FROM ROUTE PEAK TO ROUGHLY 21 FOOT THREE INCHES TO THE ROOF PEAK. SO IN TERMS OF SCALE OF THE BUILDING THAT WILL BE PUSHED UP AGAINST THE PROPERTY LINE, THEY ARE VERY MUCH IN KEEPING WITH THE SCALE

OF THE ADJACENT COMMUNITY. >> LET'S TALK ABOUT THE PROPERTY LINE THAT IS ON THE LEFT-HAND SIDE OF THE PAGE RIGHT HERE. I SEE SOME KIND OF INFRASTRUCTURE. IS THAT STORM WATER, A MOUNT, A BERM WITH LANDSCAPING?

>> THAT IS STORM SOIL. >> OKAY. YOU GOT RETENTIONS FOR STORM WATER. ALL RIGHT. IS THAT ALSO HAPPENING ALONG THE BOTTOM LEFT-HAND SIDE OF THE PAGE? WHAT IS HAPPENING AND THAT OTHER PROPERTY FRONTAGE WHERE IT COMES THROUGH THE BACKSIDE?

>> SO THE AREA YOU SEE IN, THAT IS THE FLOODPLAIN AREA. SOME OF THIS PROPERTY FALLS WITHIN THE FLOODPLAINS. SO THAT IS OUR RETENTION AREA IN CASE OF A STORM EVENT. EVERYTHING TO THE SOUTH OF THAT IS THE PRESERVE FOR THE PROPERTY OF THE 39 ACRES ON SITES, WE ARE PRESERVING 10.7 ACRES, ROUGHLY

27 1/2 FOR SOME OF THE SITE. >> WHAT IS THE BUFFER ZONE BETWEEN THIS SECTION HERE? THE FLOATING SETBACK REQUIREMENT?

>> YES, SIR. DIRECTLY TO THE LEFT, WHERE DID WE SEE THAT? 42

FEET. THEY GO. >> YES. BUT WHAT IS THERE? WHAT IS IN A GREEN SPACE? IS IT JUST GRASS? WHERE IS IT?

>> THERE WILL BE A PRIVACY FENCE. AND THEN I HAVE IMAGES

OF THE LANDSCAPE. >> VERY SIMILAR. WE HAVE SOME LANDSCAPING HERE SHOWN. A VERY SIMILAR CONVERSATION TO YOUR OTHER PROJECT. WE ARE LOOKING AT A MORE INTENSE USE, SO RESIDENTS HAVE CONCERN OF WHAT IS HAPPENING, YOU KNOW, ADJACENT, WHAT KIND OF BUFFERING, WHAT IS HAPPENING .

I THINK I EVEN SAW SOME RECREATION AMENITIES, SUCH AS PICKLE BALL COURTS ON YOUR PLAN?

>> SAY WHAT? WHAT? >> YOU DID, RIGHT?

>> YES, SIR. THERE IS ONE ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER.

>> THAT IS FINE. THEY ARE YOUR AMENITIES, RIGHT? THIS IS YOUR PARCEL. BUT I APPRECIATE THAT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY. ANYTHING ELSE YOU WANT TO SAY?

>> OKAY. NOW IT'S TIME FOR ANYBODY ELSE. WHO WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION ON THIS ISSUE? PLEASE COME FORWARD.

BEING NO ONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND TAKE IT BACK

TO THE COMMISSION. >> MADAME MAYOR, THE STAFF, MR. FREEMAN, THIS PROCESS OF WHERE WE ARE NOW, HAVE YOU GUYS SEEN

THE TRAFFIC STUDY? YOU HAVE? >> THE TRAFFIC STUDY WAS SUBMITTED, IT WAS SENT OUT DURING THE TLC, AND THEN IT IS

REVIEWED DURING THE COUNTY. >> THE COUNTY IS AWARE OF THIS? I GUESS, COMMISSIONERS, HOW MANY UNITS ARE GOING IN THIS

THING? >> THIS IS 206.

>> SO YOU AVERAGE TWO CARS, 2 1/2 CARS. RIGHT? IN SOME OF THESE ARE THREE-BEDROOM UNITS TOO. SO AT LEAST 2.5 CARS.

YEAH, I GUESS YOU ARE LOOKING AT, YOU KNOW, COMMISSIONER JOHNSON, REMIND ME ALSO. DIDN'T WE LOOK AT JENKINS? WASN'T THAT IN A LONG-RANGE PLAN FOR SOMETHING, TO WIDEN AND CONNECT ALL THE WAY UP TO MIDWAY?

>> YES. WE FORCED THAT CONVERSATION AND GOT INPUT FROM THE COUNTY, BOTH CITIES, AND BOT. WE ARE DOING A STUDY RIGHT NOW, WHICH IS THE PG ND, SO THEY CAN LOOK AT THE LONG-TERM IMPACT, THE MITIGATION, RIGHT OF WAYS, ALL THAT STUFF.

>> OKAY. IT IS A LONG WAY AWAY, BUT I JUST KNOW WE WERE GETTING

TO IT. >> MR. MIMS HAD A MORE IN-DEPTH

CONVERSATION. >> I HAD A CONVERSATION WITH THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS, AND ALSO THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR. WE ARE LOOKING AT AT LEAST, I AM GOING TO SAY A MINIMUM OF EIGHT YEARS. I WILL SAY, MORE THAN LIKELY 10 TO 2 YEARS BEFORE IMPROVEMENTS ARE GOING TO HAPPEN ON JENKINS ROAD. I DID NOT EVEN MENTION EDWARDS. OKAY? BUT ON JENKINS ROAD, THAT IS WHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT. I THINK THAT IS A VERY LONG PERIOD OF TIME TO NOT HAVE A SAFE PEDESTRIAN ACCESS.

FOR CHILDREN'S AND FAMILIES THAT ARE GOING TO BE LIVING IN

[02:50:01]

THIS AREA. WE HAVE A CHARTER SCHOOL, A PRIVATE SCHOOL. AND WE HAVE A VERY HIGHLY TRAVELED AREA. IN TRUTH, I WILL JUST BE HONEST. I JUST DO NOT SEE A SAFE MECHANISM FOR ANYBODY LIVING AT VIVA WEST TO GET TO VIVA EAST. I DO NOT SEE IT.

>> I HEAR YOU, MR. MAYOR. MY CONCERN IS NOT EVEN TRYING TO GET TO VIVA EAST OR WEST, IT IS TRYING TO GET OUT OF VIVA WHATEVER THIS IS RIGHT HERE ON THE SCREEN. I KNOW WHAT THAT MANY CARS TRYING TO GET IN AND OUT AT A CERTAIN TIME OF DAY, AND WHEN I TRAVEL EDWARDS ROAD, TRYING TO GET THE BACK CUT WAY TO GO ON SOUTHWEST AND GET AROUND THROUGH THERE, I KNOW WHAT TRAFFIC LIKE WITH TRUCKS COMING THROUGH THERE. BECAUSE THAT IS THE TRUCK ROUTE. THEY COME IN AS WELL AS THE SCHOOL BUSES THAT LEAVE OUR COUNTY AND GO OUT THAT WAY. SO I AM JUST TRYING TO GET MY HEAD AROUND THIS. IF THERE IS NO ALLEVIATION OR EVEN ADDRESSED IN THIS FOR EIGHT YEARS AWAY , THAT I AM LOOKING AT AN IMPACT OF PUTTING RESIDENTS, NOT ONLY HERE, BUT LITERALLY ACROSS THE STREET. SO NOW I AM PUTTING THAT MANY RESIDENTS IN ONE AREA, AND A ROAD THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN CHALLENGED, IN MY OPINION. THAT IS WHERE I AM AT.

OUT TO YOU. WHAT YOU ARE SAYING ABOUT THIS TRAFFIC. MOST OF THESE KIDS THAT MOVE IN HERE, THEY PROBABLY WILL BE ZONED FOR GAINES ACADEMY, RIGHT UP THE STREET. AND THAT WILL FALL WITHIN THAT THREE MILE RADIUS. THE THREE MILE RADIUS, TWO-MILE RADIUS. IT IS A 2 MILLION LIVES IS A TWO-MILE RADIUS THAT THOSE PARENTS OR KIDS ARE GOING TO HAVE TO WALK. OR THEIR PARENTS ARE GOING TO HAVE TO DROP THEM, WHICH INCREASES TRAFFIC IN THE MORNING TIME AND THE AFTERNOON. I UNDERSTAND WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE WALKING AND WHATEVER, BUT WE ARE GOING TO HAVE, IF THIS COMES , THEY PROBABLY WILL BE ZONED FOR GAINES ACADEMY

RIGHT ACROSS FROM OKEECHOBEE. >> THE PRIVATE CHARTER.

>> YOU WILL EITHER HAVE KIDS WALKING, OR YOU WILL HAVE PARENTS IN THE MORNING ADDING TO YOUR CONCERNS OF CONGESTION TRYING TO GET IN AND OUT, OR WHATEVER. IT IS TOO FAR FOR THE BUS TO PICK UP A CHILD. IF YOU DRAW THE CIRCLE AROUND, I DO BELIEVE THIS IS GOING TO BE OUR SIDE. I COULD BE WRONG. BUT

I DO BELIEVE IT IS. >> IT IS ON .2 MILES.

>> 1.2 MILES, THEY'VE GOT TO GET THERE ON THEIR OWN. I AM

JUST BEING HONEST WITH YOU. >> MADAME MAYOR, HAD ONE, TWO COMMISSIONER GAINES'S COMMENT. THE DECK NEEDS TO BE RESHUFFLED IN MOVING THIS PROJECT UP IN PRIORITY. WE HAVE A JOINT MEETING COMING UP AT SOME POINT IN TIME WITH THE COUNTY COMMISSION. I BELIEVE THIS NEEDS TO BE A HIGH PRIORITY ON THAT AGENDA, TO ENLIGHTEN THEM AS TO, AND THIS INFORMATION COULD PROBABLY COME TO PLANNING. THIS AREA, IT IS THE FURTHEST SOUTH WE HAVE GONE SO FAR WITH THE MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT, ALL THE WAY UP TO WHEREVER. YOU KNOW? THE IMPROVEMENTS NEED TO BE MADE BECAUSE THERE ARE HUNDREDS IF NOT THOUSANDS OF UNITS THAT HAVE BEEN APPROVED IN THAT ORDER, PLUS COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT. I BELIEVE THAT CONVERSATION NEEDS TO TAKE PLACE BETWEEN THESE TWO BODIES.

YOU KNOW, THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION IS SAYING, WELL, IT IS 10, 12 YEARS, SIMPLY ACCEPTABLE. THE STUDY WILL BE DONE , I HEARD THE STUDY STARTED TWO YEARS AGO. MAYBE NOT. IT IS ON THE WAY CURRENTLY, MAYBE NOT. IT IS NOT OUR STUDY. IT IS JUST THE COUNTY. THAT NEEDS TO BE COMPLETED IMMEDIATELY. IT SHOULD'VE BEEN COMPLETED FIVE YEARS AGO, IN MY OPINION. BECAUSE I WAS PLANNING THIS ON THE PLANNING BOARD FOREVER. IF WE COULD GRAB ALL THAT DATA AND BRING IT TO THOSE MEETINGS AND IMPRESS UPON OUR COUNTERPARTS, THE IMPORTANCE OF THIS , AND THEY ARE GETTING INTO CHILD SAFETY OR KIDS GAVE YOU. THIS IS A CRITICAL ISSUE. I THINK IF WE HAVE A LOGICAL DISCUSSION WITH OUR COUNTY COUNTERPART, THAT LOGIC WILL PREVAIL AND WE CAN GET THIS THING PRIORITIZED SIGNIFICANTLY SOONER THAN 2 TO 4 YEARS. NONE OF US WILL BE

[02:55:04]

HERE INTENDED TO 2 YEARS WHEN THIS WILL BE DONE. THAT IS INSANITY. IT SIMPLY DOES NOT WORK. WE NEED COOPERATION FROM THEM. YOU NEED TO COMMUNICATE AT THE HIGHEST LEVELS. I APPRECIATE THAT GOING TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE PEOPLE AND TELLING HIM THANKS, NO THANKS. THIS NEEDS TO BE KICKED UP A

NOTCH. >> WE HAVE BEEN ASKING FOR HOUSING, RESIDENTIAL SERVICES, ALL OF THAT STUFF, TO THE TO PUBLIC AND THE DEVELOPER. I UNDERSTAND THAT I HAVE BEEN QUIET DURING THIS PROCESS, BUT I CANNOT SIT HERE KNOWING THAT WE ARE GOING TO PUT IN ONE DEVELOPMENT, 267? 276. AND ANOTHER ONE IS COMING, 206? AND WE DON'T HAVE ANY TYPE OF WALKWAY. EVEN IF WE PUT THE KIDS ASIDE, SOMEBODY IS TRAINED TO WALK THE DOG. FOR ONE THING THAT WILL NOT HAPPEN, JUST BECAUSE THESE HOUSES ARE COMING OR THESE APARTMENTS, WHATEVER THEY ARE, THOSE TOPPERS WILL NOT STOP USING JACOBS ROAD TO GET TO THE 95. SO WE HAVE A DECISION TO MAKE. I WANT HOUSING, BUT YOU NEED A PLACE FOR PEOPLE TO WALK. I DID UNDERSTAND THAT DEVELOPMENT DOES NOT WANT TO BECAUSE 10 TO 12 YEARS, THE ROADWAY WILL BE EXPENDED, AND IT WILL BE TORN UP. HOWEVER, UNTIL THEN, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A DUTY TO ANYBODY WHO IS MOVING IN THERE TO MAKE SURE THEY HAVE SAFE, OR A PASTORS WEIGHT TO WHATEVER. NOW, CONSIDER, YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT -- AND JENKINS. A LOT OF PEOPLE STILL GOT OFF 95 TO COME DOWN JENKINS TO GO TO EDWARDS, TO GET TO EAST, TO GET TO THE KIDS TRYING TO GO TO FORT PIERCE CENTRAL. THE KIDS ARE

TRYING TO GO TO FOREST GROVE. >> 25TH STREET.

>> YES. THERE HAD TO 25TH STREET INSTEAD OF GOING DOWN OKEECHOBEE. THEY COULD'VE GONE THAT WAY AND THAT WAY TO TRY TO GET THERE TO BEAT THE TRAFFIC. WE'VE GOT TO THINK ABOUT THIS.

YES, WE NEED THE HOUSING. HOWEVER, I'M CURIOUS TO READ, AND I WILL LOOK AT IT. TRAFFIC STUDIES THAT SAID IT IS NOT GOING TO CHANGE OR BE THE NORMAL THING. IF I HAD 412 RESIDENCE. SHE SAID, MOST PEOPLE HAVE TWO CARS, OR HE SAID 2.5. SO YOU SAY TWO CARS, WELL, THAT IS 800 CARS?

SOMETHING LIKE THAT. >> YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT THE TRIM COUNT IS REALLY WHAT NUMBER YOU ARE LOOKING AT.

>> THE THING IS, IF ANY OF THOSE ARE FAMILIES, IF ANY OF THOSE ARE FAMILIES, THEN THEY HAVE THOSE MIDDLE SCHOOL KIDS, YOU KNOW, K THROUGH 8. THEY'VE GOT TO DRIVE. SO I DID NOT MIND THE PROJECT. I WAS CONCERNED ABOUT THESE SIDEWALKS. I DO NOT WANT TO BE IN A SITUATION WHERE WE LET SOMEBODY PAY FIRST FROM SIDEWALKS THAT WE KNOW ARE NOT

COMING FOR 10 YEARS. >> YOU HAVE A VERY UNIQUE BALANCE HERE, AND THAT MULTIFAMILY HOUSING IS SPECIFICALLY FOR WHAT WE NEED TO SUPPORT THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION TO THE WEST. WITHOUT THIS TYPE OF HOUSING, WE CANNOT PROVIDE THE LABOR FORCE THAT THESE EMPLOYERS NEED, AND I AM HEARING ABOUT THAT NOW. THAT THEY ARE NOT LEASING SPACE BECAUSE THEY CANNOT GET THE HELP THAT THEY NEED HERE LOCALLY. PRIMARILY ONE OF THE REASONS IS HOUSING. AND COMMISSIONER GAINES, THE ONLY COMMENT I WOULD MAKE ON THEIR PARTICULAR PORTION OF THE SIDEWALK, THERE SIDEWALKS ARE SIDEWALKS TO NOWHERE. SO THE KEY, IN MY MIND, WE NEED TO GET JENKINS ROAD ON THE MOVE TO SUPPORT ALL OF THIS DEVELOPMENT THAT WILL BE TAKING PLACE. I KNOW IT IS NOT US, SO EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS, THIS IS NOT A CITY OF FORT PIERCE PROJECT. THIS IS COUNTY. BUT WE NEED TO MOTIVATE OUR COUNTY PROJECTS HERE TO GET MOTIVATED. WE COULD TALK THAT JOINT MEETING FOR AN HOUR UNTIL WE GET THE RESOLUTION ON THIS. BUT 12 YEARS FROM NOW , THAT JUST DOES NOT WORK. WE NEED TO FIX THAT ENTIRE DISCUSSION.

>> COMMISSIONER, I HEAR YOU. IN YOUR TWO COMMISSIONERS HAVE MOVED THIS AGENDA FORWARD, IN CONJUNCTION WITH A COUPLE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND THE CITY OF PORT SAINT LUCIE,

[03:00:02]

FOLKS, THEY ACTUALLY RECOGNIZE WHAT AN ASSET THIS NORTH / SOUTH CONNECT OR IS. FROM MIDWAY TO ORANGE. SO YOUR TWO ADVOCATES SITTING IN THIS COMMISSION WENT TO BAT FOR THAT. THE ANSWER IS, TO YOUR QUESTION, IF THERE IS A QUESTION, IT IS MONEY. IT IS FUNDING. THEY SAY, THAT IS FINE, I WILL BE GLAD TO EXPEDITE AND GET OUR D.O.T.

PARTNERS, WHICH ARE ON BOARD, BECAUSE IT IS IN OUR LONG-RANGE TRANSPORTATION PLAN, TO GET ON BOARD WITH THE STATE, YOU HAVE TO HAVE IT IN YOUR LONG-RANGE PLAN. SO NOW HAVE IT ON OUR PLAN. FOUR YEARS AGO, IT WAS NOT ON THE RADAR. HERE IT IS ON THE RADAR. IN ADDITION TO THAT IS THE COUNTRY SAYING, WHEN CAN I MAKE MONEY? LET'S PUT A BUDGET TOGETHER. THEN THEY TURNED TO US AND SAY, OH, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR BEING ATTHE TABLE. HOW MUCH WE CONTRIBUTE? IN THE ROOM GOES SILENT, BECAUSE HE AND I ARE SAYING, WELL, WE HAVE NOT TALKED ABOUT IT WITH YOU GUYS. BY THE WAY, THIS GENTLEMAN AND HOW MANY MILLIONS DO WE HAVE THAT DEDICATE TO THIS? OH, I THINK WE ALL KNOW WHAT OUR BUDGET LOOKS LIKE. WE HAVE MENTIONED IT A COUPLE TIMES TONIGHT. AND THIS IS CRITICAL. IT IS THE -- EDWARDS ROAD, THE EXACT SAME SCENARIO. THAT IS OUR EAST / WEST CONNECTOR THAT WILL HAVE A MINIMUM OF, I DON'T KNOW, 120 TO 160 RAMP UP RIGHT AWAY MOVEMENT. IT WILL MIRROR IMAGE IN THE NEXT 20 YEARS. IT WILL NOT BE AS GRANDIOSE, BUT IT IS OUR CROSSTOWN PARKWAY. IT IS OUR CROSSTOWN. IT WILL HAVE TO LOOK AT THAT AT SOME POINT. MAYBE NOT SIX LANES IN A SUPERHIGHWAY, BUT FOR LANES, IT WILL NEED. JUST BY TRAFFIC ANALYSIS, BASED ON THE APPLICATIONS COMING TO US THIS IS THE ONLY CONNECTION THAT TRUCKS USE FROM OUR CORRIDOR, OUR INDUSTRIAL CORRIDOR FROM JENKINS TO THE TERMINAL. AND THE TURNPIKE IS FAILING NOW, THE INTERSECTION OF KINGS HIGHWAY, OKEECHOBEE ROAD, THE TURNPIKE. THAT IS FAILING NOW.

SO, YOU KNOW, YOU'VE GOT ALL THESE SITUATIONS HERE AT THIS CENTRAL SPACE GOING ON. NOT ONLY THAT, I FORGOT TO ASK THE APPLICANT, BUT IS OKAY, AND WITH THE AMPERAGE -- ANSWER WAS. RHETORICAL QUESTION. YOU KNOW CONGRESSMAN MAST CALLED MY CELL PHONE ABOUT EVERY TWO OR THREE WEEKS AND SAYS, HEY, WHEN WILL YOU FINISH THE SIDEWALKS AND JENKINS ROAD ? BECAUSE WHY? THERE IS A SCHOOL SHOWN ON THIS MAP THAT WE DO NOT TALK ABOUT MUCH, WHICH IS A CHARTER SCHOOL, FUNDED BY PRIVATE DOLLARS, EXCUSE ME, PUBLIC DOLLARS, ICA. SO THERE ARE CHILDREN GOING TO SCHOOL THERE WALKING TO SCHOOL WITHOUT SIDEWALKS. THESE FOLKS ALSO NEED TO GET TO GROCERY STORES, WHICH THANKFULLY WE HAVE NOW. SO THEY NEED AMENITIES. BUT THERE IS NO WAY FOR THEM TO GET THERE. POSSIBLY, IF THEY WOULD LIKE TO WALK, THERE IS NO WAY TO GET THERE. SO WHEN WE HAVE THESE DEVELOPED APPLICATIONS, AND THIS IS WHY I ASKED THE QUESTIONS I ASK THAT ARE BORING, LAME, WHATEVER THEY ARE. BUT THEY ARE IMPORTANT TO ME BECAUSE I HEAR ABOUT HOW PEOPLE CANNOT TRAVERSE THROUGH THEIR CITY. SO WHEN WE HAVE THESE APPLICATIONS, THIS IS VERY SENSITIVE. BECAUSE HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELLNESS OF THE PUBLIC AS NUMBER ONE. NO MATTER IF IT IS CAUSED BY, WHATEVER. THAT IS NUMBER ONE. IT IS IN OUR CODE, IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN IN OUR CODE AND WILL ALWAYS BE IN OUR CODE. SO THESE ARE VERY TRICKY TOPICS OF CONVERSATION.

IT IS VERY TRICKY TO BALANCE WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT WITH WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT, IN ADDITION TO THE TRANSPORTATION NEEDS OF OUR COMMUNITIES. SO IF WE CAN DIG IN OUR BUCKET TO SPEND $10 MILLION OR $15 MILLION TO HELP THE COUNTY AND BUILT THE ROADS, I GUESS WE WILL BE OKAY. I AM PRETTY SURE IT WOULD BE A VERY SHORT-LIVED CONVERSATION FROM THIS DANCE

RIGHT HERE. >> YES.

>> IT IS TOUGH. >> YES. AND EVEN IF I WANTED TO REINFORCE, EVEN IF THIS DEVELOPER BUILT THE SIDEWALKS FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT, THE SIDEWALKS ARE STILL DEFICIENT IN OTHER PARTS OF JENKINS. LIKE YOU SAY, IT IS A SIDEWALK TO

NOWHERE. YEAH. >> META-MAYOR, YOU KNOW, DEVELOPERS ARE ALLOWED TO BE INNOVATIVE. I HAVE SEEN APPLICATIONS IN THE PAST, I HAVE HEARD SOME TESTIMONY

[03:05:01]

TONIGHT ABOUT, WE CHOSE THIS OPTION IN LIEU OF THIS OPTION.

AND I THINK THAT IS THEIR PREROGATIVE, AND IT IS.

HOWEVER, I THINK WE WILL SEE FUTURE APPLICATIONS WHERE THERE ARE DEVELOPERS THAT ARE INNOVATIVE . THEY COME OUT THE BOX AND SAY WE WANT OUR PROJECT TO BE SUCCESSFUL, WE WANT TO BE A GOOD PARTNER. I'M NOT SAYING TODAY THAT THEY HAVE SAID TODAY THEY WANT TO BE A GOOD PARTNER ABOUT PARTNER, THEY HAVE NOT.

THEY WANT TO BUILD A PRODUCT THAT IS CONDUCIVE TO THE ZONING DISTRICT. AND I UNDERSTAND THAT PART. HOWEVER, THERE ARE OTHER ELEMENTS OF THE APPLICATION PROCESS WHERE THE CONVERSATION GOES EXACTLY THE WAY WE ARE TALKING ABOUT TODAY, BUT THEY CHOOSE NOT TO ENGAGE IN THAT CONVERSATION.

>> YES, RIGHT. RIGHT. >> I KNOW THAT THE PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY HAS THAT OPTION. THEY HAD THAT OPTION.

TONIGHT, I DID NOT HEAR THAT THEY CHOSE AN OPTION TO PROVIDE FOR, EXCEPT THAT THEY HAD TWO DEVELOPMENTS THEY WERE GOING TO CONNECT. AND THEY SAID, WELL, A SIDEWALK IN LIEU OF. A SIDEWALK PAYMENT IN LIEU OF. I MEAN, I STRUGGLE WITH THAT. I STRUGGLE

WITH THAT INTENSELY. >> ME TOO, COMMISSIONER. I UNDERSTAND SIDEWALK GOES TO NOWHERE. BUT TO ME, THE SOUTH SIDEWALK IS BETTER THAN NO SIDEWALK. AND IF WE HAVE TO START , IF IT GOES IN AND THEN WE CAN COME BACK AND SAY, LOOK HERE, GUYS, THEY PUT THIS SIDEWALK IN, RIGHT? ALL RIGHT, COUNTY. ALL RIGHT, WHOEVER. LET'S START CONNECTING SIDEWALKS BEFORE WE HAVE A TRAGEDY.

>> I HEAR YOU. >> SO I JUST. EITHER, I DON'T

KNOW. ME THINK ON IT FOR NOW. >> WELL, WE NEED TO COME TO GRIPS WITH THIS AND WHAT WE ARE GOING TO DO WITH IT.

>> I THINK IT MIGHT BE TO REMIND US THAT WE ARE IN A QUASIJUDICIAL HEARING WITH THIS. SO WE HAVE HEARD TESTIMONY FROM THE DEVELOPER. WE HAVE HEARD FROM OUR STAFFING. THIS WENT THROUGH SOME APPROVALS. I GUESS TO THE COUNTY, ET CETERA. THE TRAFFIC STUDY WENT THROUGH THEM AS WELL. BUT IT STILL COMES DOWN TO, YOU KNOW, THE TRAFFIC IS A VALID AND COMPETENT ARGUMENT. IT IS PRESENTED BY ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS, THAT IS WHAT THEY DO, TRAFFIC STUDY. MR. FREEMAN, AGAIN, YOU HAVE NOT SEEN ANYTHING IN THE TRAFFIC STUDY THAT IS CAUSING ANY EYEBROWS OR CHALLENGE WITH

THIS? >> WE ARE NOT TRAFFIC ENGINEERS. HOWEVER, WE RELY ON THE PROFESSIONAL. THE COUNTY ARE PROFESSIONALS. I BELIEVE THEY CONSULT EXTERNAL CLASSIFICATION EXPERTS AND GET FEEDBACK FROM THOSE. AND THAT IS RELATED TO THE APPLICANT'S, IT IS RELAYED. FROM OUR SHOP, WHAT WE HAVE SEEN ADDRESSES WHAT PEOPLE SHOULD PROVIDE US.

AND THEN WE ROUTE IT THROUGH VARIOUS AGENCIES, IN RETURN, THEY COME TO IF IT IS ACCEPTABLE. IF I COULD AND I HEAR THE COMMISSION, THE CITY MANAGER REGARDING THE SIDEWALK CONNECTIVITY, IF I COULD , COULD I ASK THE APPLICANT TO

QUESTION THIS? >> SO, WE WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING BACKUP AND ASKED THE APPLICANT TO COME FORWARD,

PLEASE. >> META-MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COMMISSION, WHILE THE APPLICANT IS COMING UP, I WANT YOU ALL TO JUST REMEMBER THAT HE DID STATE THAT THE TRAFFIC STUDIES SHOW THAT THE ROADWAY WOULD OPERATE AT THE SAME LEVEL OF SERVICE. HE DID NOT SAY THAT THERE WERE NOT GOING TO BE IMPACT. SO LET'S ASK HIM, WHAT IS THE LEVEL OF SERVICE.

>> IS THAT YOUR QUESTION, MR. FREEMAN?

>> IT IS ONE OF THEM. >> AHEAD, MR. FREEMAN.

>> WITH THE TRAFFIC REPORT SHOWS IS THAT WE WILL BE ADDING A TOTAL OF 1396 NEW DAILY TRIPS TOTAL OVER THE COURSE OF THE DAY. OF THOSE, 87 TRIPS ARE A.M. PEAK HOUR TRIPS, WITH 21 ENTERING AND 66 EXITING THE PROPERTY. AND 109 P.M. PEAK HOUR TRIPS, WITH 69 ENTERING AND 40 EXITING. DOES THAT

ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? >> ARE ALLOWED TO ASK QUESTIONS AT THIS POINT? I HAD ONE FOLLOW-UP QUESTION. UNLESS THE DEVELOPMENT. WHAT DO WE DO WITH THE SIDEWALKS THERE?

>> THE SIDEWALKS, WE ARE REQUIRED TO INSTALL THE ACTUAL SIDEWALK FOR THE DEVELOPMENT ITSELF. THAT IS NOT A QUESTION HERE. WE'RE MORE THAN HAPPY TO INSTALL THE SIDEWALK ALONG EDWARDS ROAD. THE ONLY SIDEWALK IN QUESTION IS THE EXTENSION

[03:10:02]

BETWEEN WEST, SOUTH OF OUR TREASURE COVE WEST PROPERTY, AND TREASURE COAST EAST. SO WE WILL INSTALL THE SIDEWALKS HERE ALONG EDWARDS, WE WILL INSTALL THE SIDEWALKS AT TREASURE COVE WEST ALONG JENKINS. WE ARE JUST TALKING ABOUT ANOTHER, LET'S SAY, 600 TO 1000 FEET OF SIDEWALK EXTENSION BETWEEN THE

TWO PARTIES. >> I THOUGHT THAT IS WHAT THE PAYMENT IN LIEU IS? IT IS NOT FOR THE PROPERTY ON THE PROPERTY. THEY HAVE TO BUILD THAT.

>> WE ARE PROVIDING AN IN PAYMENT IN LIEU FOR OFF-SITE.

>> I AM TALKING ABOUT THE INTERIOR. EXTERIOR SIDEWALKS IN THAT PLAN, DID WE DO PAYMENT IN LIEU? OR DO WE REQUIRE

SIDEWALKS? >> WE REQUIRE THEM.

>> THAT ANSWERS MY QUESTION. >> YOU ARE USING TREASURE COAST. DEEMING VIVA? OR IS AT THE SAME THING? SAME THING?

OKAY. >> WE REQUIRED ON THE FIRST ONE, WHY WOULD WE NOT REQUIRE IT ON THE SECOND ONE.

>> THIS IS A QUESTION I WOULD LIKE TO ASK. IS THE EXPLANATION PROVIDED AT THE PLANNING BOARD RELATED TO THE NARROWNESS, OR THE LACK OF RIGHT-OF-WAY BETWEEN THE TWO PARTIES? COULD YOU CONFIRM THAT IS THE CASE WHY, IN YOUR CALCULATIONS, YOU ARE NOT ABLE TO PROVIDE THAT LINK BETWEEN THE TWO

DEVELOPMENTS? >> YES, SIR. YES, SIR. IT IS A COMBINATION OF FACTORS. THE LACK OF ANY STORMWATER INFRASTRUCTURE AND THE COST TO INSTALL THE STORM WATER IF A STRUCTURE TO FACILITATE OF ELEMENT OF THE SIDEWALK ITSELF.

IN ADDITION TO THAT, I BELIEVE WE ARE DEDICATING ROUGHLY 70 FEET OF RIGHT-OF-WAY ALONG JENKINS WROTE FOR THE VIVA WEST PROPERTY. AND WE JUST DO NOT KNOW FOR A FACT WHETHER OR NOT ST. LUCIE COUNTY HAS A RIGHT-OF-WAY SOUTH OF A PROPERTY TO ALLOW US TO INSTALL THAT SIDEWALK. IF THEY DO HAVE THE RIGHT-OF-WAY, IF IT HAS BEEN DEDICATED IN THE HAVE THE ADDITIONAL WIDTH, WE WOULD WORK TO THE PROCESS WITH ST. LUCIE COUNTY ONCE WE WORKED ON TO DEVELOP INTERVIEW AND SUBMITTED A SITE PLAN APPLICATION TO THE COUNTY FOR THIS PROJECT , BUT IF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY IS THERE, YOU KNOW, AND WE COULD FIGURE OUT A WAY TO MAKE THE STORMWATER IMPROVEMENTS WORK WITHOUT BREAKING THE BANK, WE WOULD NOT BE OPPOSED TO PUT IT IN. FRANKLY, WE WOULD RATHER HAVE IT INSTALLED TO ENJOY THE BENEFIT OF THE SIDEWALK AND CONTRIBUTE TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SIDEWALK, LIKE YOUR GAZE ARE SAYING, MIGHT NOT HAPPEN FOR 15 YEARS. THAT IS WHEN THOSE ISSUES WOULD BE RESOLVED,

FOR MY UNDERSTANDING. >> META-MAYOR? THANK YOU FOR THAT ON THE SIDEWALK CONVERSATION. SO, WHY WOULD WE NOT USE THE SIDE OF JENKINS ROAD, WITHERS ALREADY DEDICATED RIGHT-OF-WAY WHEN YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE A CROSSWALK ASSOCIATED WITH CUSSING JENKINS, NO MATTER WHERE YOU ARE CROSSING. WHY NOT USE THE EAST SIDE OF JENKINS ROAD TO BUILD A SIDEWALK? WAS ALREADY DEDICATED BY THE KOA. WE ARE ALSO GOING TO HAVE A CROSSWALK TO CROSS JENKINS ROAD FROM VIVA WESTOVER TO THE EAST SIDE , WHATEVER AMENITY YOU ARE TRYING TO GET TO. IN ADDITION TO THAT, YOU WOULD HAVE TO HAVE A CROSSWALK AT EDWARDS AND JENKINS, WHICH IS A THREE WAY INTERSECTION, BUT ONE STOP SIGN

AT THAT INTERSECTION. >> THAT IS A GREAT SOLUTION.

>> THAT HAS POTENTIAL. THAT IS SOMETHING WE CAN LOOK INTO.

>> I MEAN THE CHALLENGE IS STILL GOING TO BE A CROSSWALK.

I CAN PROMISE YOU THAT. BUT AT LEAST YOU HAVE CONNECTIVITY AND SIDEWALKS . A CROSSWALK IS AN ISSUE REGARDLESS OF WHAT YOU DO. DECENT WEST PROPERTIES. THE QUESTION I HAVE THOUGH IS, HOW DO WE MOVE THIS FORWARD WITH THAT QUESTION MARK STILL

SITTING OUT THERE? >> THAT IS WHAT I WAS GOING TO ASK. THERE ARE A LOT OF UNKNOWNS. THEY ARE ASKING FOR

SOMETHING TONIGHT. >> CAN WE ADD A CONDITION?

>> WE COULD DO A CONDITION. COMMISSIONER, OBVIOUSLY, YOU'VE GOT SIDEWALKS. THAT IS A POSSIBLE SOLUTION. RIGHT? TO CONNECT. BUT I SEE TWO DIFFERENT CROSSWALKS THAT WE NEEDED. YOU NEEDED ONE TO GET INTO VIVA, AND THEN WANTED TO GET IN HERE. ACROSS JENKINS ROAD. RIGHT NOW, TECHNIK WE , THE ONLY STOP SIGN IS THE ONE THAT IS HERE ON THIS CORNER WHEN YOU COME FROM EDWARDS TO JENKINS. THAT IS THE STOP SIGN, THAT IS IT. BECAUSE THERE IS NO STOP SIGN OFF JENKINS TURNING

INTO EDWARDS. >> RIGHT.

>> THAT WOULD BE A LOGICAL SPOT FOR IT THEN.

>> IT WOULD BE LOGICAL IF WE COULD STOP THE TRAFFIC, WHICH IS WHY I WAS LOOKING AT SOME TYPE OF SIGNALING SOMEWHERE.

THAT IS WHAT I'M AYE GET IT WITH THE TRAFFIC STUDY. YOU KNOW , THERE NEEDS TO BE A TRAFFIC BREAK THERE, THE TRAFFIC THAT COMES OFF MCNEIL AND THEY TRY TO CUT AND CIRCUMVENT THERE, THERE IS A HARD TIME TURNING LEFT THERE,

[03:15:02]

THERE IS A HARD TIME TURNING RIGHT THERE, ESPECIALLY AT 4:30 OR 5:00 IN THE AFTERNOON. YOU'VE GOT A LOT OF PEOPLE LEAVING KIRBY LOOPBACK HEAR FROM THE TRAINING CENTER, THE COLLEGE, A LOT OF PEOPLE TAKE THAT AS A SHORTCUT TO HEAD BACK TO POINT ST. LUCIE. SO, YOU KNOW, THERE MAY BE A COUPLE CONDITIONS HERE. AGAIN, ONE OF Y'ALL CAN ANSWER THIS. I AM STILL STUCK ON SIGNAL LYSING THIS CORNER. I THINK WE HAVE NOT EVEN EXPLORED THAT. IT IS THE ONLY WAY YOU WILL GIVE A LEGITIMATE BREAK FOR ANYBODY TRYING TO CROS THAT ROAD SOME KIND OF WAY. YOU'VE GOT TO STOP TRAFFIC OR PUT A TRAFFIC LIGHT. THERE WILL BE NO OTHER WAY. LET'S NOT EVEN TALK ABOUT NIGHTTIME. BECAUSE IT IS NOT WELL LIT BACK THERE RIGHT NOW.

I DO NOT KNOW WHERE THE COUNTY STAND ON LIGHTING BACK THERE, BUT IT IS NOT THAT GOOD. AND NOW YOU WILL HAVE PEOPLE TRYING TO WALK FROM EAST TO WEST, PERHAPS. SO IT IS A CONCERN

THAT I HAVE. >> COMMISSIONER JOHNSON, I BELIEVE IT IS UP TO THE ENGINEERS. WHAT ABOUT A FOUR-WAY STOP OR THREE WAY STOP? A FOUR-WAY OR THREE WAY STOP AT THIS AREA OF EDWARDS AND JENKINS.

>> WE WOULD NOT BE OPPOSED TO ADDING A FOUR-WAY STOP AT THAT INTERSECTION. CYCLIZATION WOULD NOT , WELL, IT WOULD BE TRICKIER. BUT WE ARE NOT OPPOSED TO ADDING STOPS.

>> THAT WOULD BE ONE. OBVIOUSLY, YOU HAVE TO HAVE A SIGNALIZED CROSSWALK. THERE IS NOTHING BACK THERE. THIS IS

COUNTY, RIGHT? >> ST. LUCIE COUNTY MUST AGREE TO THIS. WE CANNOT PUT THIS CONDITION UPON THE DEVELOPER IF THE COUNTY IS NOT AGREEABLE. MAYBE THIS NEEDS TO COME BACK.

>> THAT IS WHAT I AM THINKING. YOU'VE GOT THIS ISSUE, BUT YOU HAVE J JOHNSON'S SUGGESTION ON THE SIDEWALK, THE BEST WE HAVE YET. I THINK IT WOULD NEED TO COME BACK. I HATE TO DELAY, BUT THIS IS OF CRITICAL IMPORTANCE. I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE ASK THE DEVELOPER TO INVESTIGATE THESE MATTERS WITH THE COUNTY.

>> HAPPY TO DO IT, NOT SURE HOW TO GO BAD ABOUT IT. WE HAVE GOTTEN NO FEEDBACK FROM THE COUNTY. WE HAVE REACHED OUT TO THEM IN A COUPLE DIFFERENT OCCASIONS ASKING FOR FOLLOW-UP FEEDBACK. I MEAN, I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE PATH FORWARD IS HERE.

DIRECTLY. DO YOU HAVE CONTACT INFORMATION?

>> DIRECTOR FREEMAN, WOULD THAT BE SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD

MAKE THE INQUIRY ON? >> WE WOULD MAKE THE INTRODUCTION. AND RELAY THE COMMISSIONS ISSUES.

>> AND SEE IF THEY WOULD BE COOPERATIVE?

>> OF A SPECIFIC TASK AT HAND. IT WOULD BE EASIER THAN REVIEWING A WHOLE TRANSPORTATION.

>> WE ARE NOT LOOKING TO REVISIT A SITE PLAN. THIS ONE

ON CROSSWALKS AND ET CETERA. >> A TRAFFIC BREAK. THREE-WAY, FOUR-WAY, WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT.

>> ARE WE ASKING TO POSTPONE A DECISION TONIGHT? IS THAT WHAT

WE ARE TALKING ABOUT? >> META-MAYOR, I WOULD FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH THAT. I THINK THAT IS SIMPLE STUFF WE HAVE TO GET ANSWERED HERE. I THINK IT IS ONLY FAIR TO THE APPLICANT

AS WELL. >> HOW QUICKLY CAN WE GET THIS ACCOMPLISHED WITH THE COUNTY TO GET A RESPONSE I GET THIS GENTLEMAN BACK IN FRONT OF US TO FINALIZE THIS?

>> MR. MIMS? >> DIRECTOR FREEMAN AND I, RYAN, WE WILL CALL THE COUNTY DIRECTOR FIRST IN THE MORNING.

THIS IS IMPORTANT TO US AS WELL. SO WE CAN TRY FOR THE NEXT MEETING. BUT REALISTICALLY, I WILL SAY,

AGAIN, 30 DAYS. >> 30 DAYS. WE SOLVED A LOT OF PROBLEMS HERE. META-MAYOR, WE ARE ASKING FOR YOUR COOPERATION

IN HELPING THAT. >> MR. RIVERA, I HAVE YOU HERE IN THE PUBLIC RECORD. I KNOW THIS WILL BE A CHALLENGING QUESTION, BUT I WILL ASK ANYWAY. THE QUESTION WAS POSED TO YOU EARLIER ABOUT THE CONNECTION OF JENKINS ROAD IN LIEU OF EDWARDS ROAD. I THINK SOME OF YOUR PROBLEMS WERE COMING IN THE FACT OF YOU PINPOINTING YOUR EXIT AND ENTRANCE ON EDWARDS ROAD. IF YOU WERE TO REALLY ANALYZE THE ENTIRE ASPECT OF THE DESIGN. HERE IS WHY I SAY THAT. IF YOU LOOK AT THIS PICTURE HERE , I AM VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE WESTSIDE CHURCH, WHICH IS ACROSS FROM YOUR PARCEL THERE.

HAS A LARGE DRIVEWAY ENTRY. IF YOU WERE TO DEVELOP THIS OR RECONFIGURE A LITTLE BIT SO THAT YOU ARE ROAD DISCHARGE WOULD BE ON THAT SIDE , THEN YOU COULD CREATE A PEDESTRIAN THRUWAY NORTH AND SOUTH ON JENKINS TO THE INTERSECTION OF EDWARDS, HAVE A CROSSWALK AT EDWARDS , WHICH IS A STOP SIGN

[03:20:09]

INTERSECTION. IT COULD BECOME A THREE-WAY STOP IF WE NEEDED TO.

THEN HE WOULD HAVE VERY SAFE PEDESTRIAN CROSSING AND CROSSWALK AT THE INTERSECTION OF JENKINS AND EDWARDS. AND HE CAN REMAIN ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD THROUGH THE GRAND KOA, THEN WE HAVE TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO GET ACROSS TO THE OTHER VIVA WEST. THERE ARE SOME ELEMENTS IN THIS. AND THIS IS WHY I TALK ABOUT USING YOUR CREATIVITY IN YOUR PROFESSION TO YOUR ADVANTAGE. YOU HAVE TO ANALYZE THESE THINGS, IN ADDITION TO US ANALYZING THE HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE. THESE WILL BE FUTURE CITY RESIDENCE. WHEN THEY MOVE INTO HER DEVELOPING PROJECT. RIGHT? WE WILL HEAR FROM THEM. THEY ARE OUR CONSTITUENTS. IT IS VERY CRITICAL FOR US TO HAVE A SAFE WAY FOR THEM TO GET ABOUT THIS CITY. IN THIS COMPONENT OF TALKING WITH YOU TONIGHT IS NOT ONLY YOUR APPLICATION, AND I DO NOT WANT TO REDESIGN YOUR PROJECT, BUT YOU ARE HEARING LOUD AND CLEAR WHAT OUR CHALLENGES ARE. SO THOSE ARE CHALLENGES. THOSE ARE CHALLENGES ON WHAT VEHICLE MOVEMENTS ARE, THE CONNECTIVITY TO YOUR TWO DEVELOPMENTS, WHICH I HEARD YOU TALK ABOUT. IT WILL MAKE YOUR PROJECT VERY SUCCESSFUL. I HEAR YOUR EXCITEMENT. YOU HAVE SHARED THAT WITH US BEFORE. YOU KNOW? YOUR EXCITEMENT OF CONNECTING THE PROJECT AND HAVING THE AMENITIES ON THE PROJECTS. AND SO WHILE WE DON'T MAKE A DECISION, I CANNOT MAKE A DECISION TONIGHT BECAUSE THERE ARE A LOT OF OPEN-ENDED QUESTIONS. I'M GOING TO NEED YOUR HELP, AND YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE TO GO TO WORK OR SUBMIT IT AND LEAVE IT AS IS AND SAY, YOU KNOW, I PUT MY BEST FOOT FORWARD AND SEE HOW THE TABLES TURNED. SO THAT IS WHERE I AM AT TONIGHT. SO I THANK YOU FOR

YOUR DILIGENCE. >> SIR, WITH RESPECT, COMMISSIONER. I REALLY DO THINK WE PUT OUR BEST FOOT FORWARD HERE. I AM NOT OPPOSED TO FURTHER RESEARCH ON THIS. BUT WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE SITE PLAN, I REALLY DO FEEL WE HAVE GONE ABOVE AND BEYOND. LOOK ABOUT THE ALLOWABLE SITE DENSITY, THIS PROPERTY IS ADEQUATELY ZONED TO ALLOW FOR 10 UNITS PER ACRE. WE ARE ONLY ASKING FOR 5.25. WE HAVE AN ALLOWABLE MAX HEIGHT OF 45 FEET AND ARE ONLY GOING UP TO 25 FEET. WE ARE PRESERVING 27% OF THE SITE. IT IS JUST THAT THE LINCHPIN IS TRAFFIC. TRAFFIC IS A POINT OF CONTENTION, BUT WE ARE TRAPPED IN THIS, I DON'T WANT TO CALL IT PURGATORY. WE ARE TRAPPED IN A LIMBO BETWEEN ST. LUCIE COUNTY AND CITY OF FORT PIERCE.

WHILE WE ARE WILLING TO HELP AND CONTRIBUTE TO A SOLUTION, IT IS VERY DIFFICULT TO RECONCILE THESE TWO LISTS OF DESIRES. AS WE FIND OURSELVES CAUGHT IN THE MIDDLE HERE. AND

WE GET THAT. >> WELL, WITH RESPECT, THE COUNTY NEEDS TO BE AS CONCERNED ABOUT THE THINGS WE ARE TALKING ABOUT AS WE ARE. BECAUSE WE ARE ALL CITIZENS OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY. SO, WELL, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. DO WE HAVE ANYONE ADDING ANY MORE QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS? NOBODY ELSE? ALL

RIGHT. >> CAN WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC

PART? >> SP WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND GET BACK TO THE COMMISSION, AGAIN. AND I NEED A

MOTION. >> TO POSTPONE? OR A MOTION TO

CONTINUE TO THE NEXT? >> YOU WANT TO HELP US OUT

HERE? >> META-MAYOR AND COMMISSIONERS, THE QUASIJUDICIAL RULES DO ALLOW A CONTINUANCE. THE APPLICANT OR STAFF CAN MAKE SUCH A MOTION.

OR TO START SUCH A REQUEST. ANY MOTION TO CONTINUE WOULD NEED TO BE TO A DATE CERTAIN. THE RULES DO REQUIRE A DATE

CERTAIN. >> I WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO CONTINUE UNTIL -- WELL, WE NEED A DATE CERTAIN.

>> THE NEXT MEETING IS APRIL 15TH. I KNOW WE CANNOT MEET THE 15TH DAY ADVERTISING REQUIREMENTS IF WE HAVE TO

RE-ADVERTISE. >> THE DATE AFTER THAT WOULD BE MAY 6TH. THAT WOULD BE THE NEXT DATE.

>> APRIL MAY 15TH OR MAY 6TH.

>> IS A PROBLEMATIC IF WE DO NOT ADVERTISE?

>> WE HAVE TO ADVERTISE. >> THAT IS MAY 6TH TO LEAVE THE MEEK LEGAL THRESHOLD. AND I WOULD ENCOURAGE, THIS IS NOT PART OF THE MOTION, AND MAKING A MOTION TO CONTINUE TO THAT DATE. I WOULD ENCOURAGE THE DEVELOPER TO TAKE TO HEART HEAR THE DISCUSSION TONIGHT AND SPEAK TO THE COUNTY WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF OUR FOLKS TO MOVE THIS ALONG AS RAPIDLY AS POSSIBLE. IF THE DEVELOPER COMES BACK AND SAYS, THEY WILL NOT LET ME DO ANY OF THIS, OKAY. TRIED AND ANSWERED. YOU KNOW, WE HAVE ASKED THE QUESTION AND ON THE BEST WE CAN. IS TO CONTINUE UNTIL MAY 6 TO GET THESE

QUESTIONS ANSWERED. >> I WILL SECOND THE MOTION.

[03:25:01]

>> ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? >> ROLL CALL, PLEASE.

[f. Quasi-Judicial Hearing - Review and approval of an application for a Site Plan (Development and Design Review) by property owner, BGDN LLC, and representative, Leslie Olson, Principal of District Planning Group, to construct a 312-unit multi-family luxury apartments development with a Clubhouse, Barbeque and Pool area, Indoor Gym, Tot Lot, and associated site improvements at or near the SE Corner of Graham Road and S. Jenkins Road and approximately 669 feet south of Graham Road in Fort Pierce, Florida, more specifically located at Parcel Control Number(s): 2418-333-0004-000-0, 2418-333-0003-000-3, 2418-333-0002-000-6, 2418-333-0001-000-9.]

BEING CALLED ] >> OKAY. THE NEXT QUASIJUDICIAL HEARING WE HAVE IS FOR THE REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF AN APPLICATION FOR ESTATE PLAN AND RELEVANT REVIEW BY PROPERTY OWNER BGDN LLC, AND REPRESENTATIVE LESLIE OLSON.

PRINCIPLE OF DISTRICT GROUP TO CONSTRUCT A 312 UNIT MULTIFAMILY LUXURY APARTMENTS DEVELOPMENT WITH A CLUBHOUSE, BARBECUE, AND POOL AREA, AND DOORJAMB, TOT LOT, AND ASSOCIATED SITE IMPROVEMENTS AT OR NEAR THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF GRAHAM ROAD IN SOUTH JENKINS ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 669 FEET SOUTH OF GRANDMA ROAD IN FORT PIERCE, FLORIDA.

>> HAVE WE MET THE ADVERTISING AND NOTICE REQUIREMENTS?

>> THE REQUIREMENTS HAVE BEEN MET.

>> WILL YOU ASK COMMISSIONERS ABOUT ? COMMUNIQUÉS?

>> YES, MA'AM.

>> COMMISSIONER JOHNSON? >> YES, MA'AM. I MET WITH THE DEVELOPERS EARLY ON. THIS IS RIGHT NEXT TO SAMUEL GAINES ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, RIGHT? YES.

>> COMMISSIONER J JOHNSON? >> YES, MA'AM. I HAVE MET WITH

RESIDENCE. >> MAYOR HUDSON?

>> NO, MA'AM. >> WE WILL COME BACK TO COMMISSIONER BRODERICK. WOULD YOU LIKE TO SWEAR IN THE

WITNESSES? >> ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, JUST AND AND RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH? THANK YOU VERY MUCH. PROCEED.

>> GOOD EVENING, META-MAYOR, COMMISSIONERS. BEFORE YOU, WE HAVE A SITE PLAN DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION FOR THE LUXURY APARTMENTS LOCATED AT SOUTHEAST CORNER OF GRAHAM ROAD AND SOUTH JENKINS ROAD IN APPROXIMATELY 669 FEET SOUTH OF GRAHAM ROAD. PARCEL I.D. IS 2418 CASH 333 JOSH 0004 DASH 000 DASH ZERO, 2418 DASH 0333 DASH 0003 DASH 000 E- THREE, 2418 DASH 333 DASH 0002 DASH 000 E- SIX, AND 2418 DASH 333

DASH 001 DASH 000 DASH NINE. >> IF I CAN INTERRUPT YOU A QUICK, I WILL ASK COMMISSIONER BROADLY BRODERICK IF HE HAD ANY

EXTRA MEDICATIONS. >> THANK YOU .

>> THE REPRESENTATIVE FOR THIS PROJECT IS LESLIE OLSON. AND THE AFFIRMATION PERSON -- PARCEL I.D.S. THIS APPLICATION IS REQUESTING APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT 312 UNIT MULTIFAMILY LUXURY APARTMENTS WITH A CLUBHOUSE, BARBECUE AND POOL AREA, AND DOORJAMB, TOT LOT, AND ASSOCIATED SITE IMPROVEMENTS. THE UNDERLYING FUTURE LAND USE UPS TO A DENSITY OF -- PER UNIT. THE ADOPTED ZONING OF THE RESIDENTIAL PERMITS UP TO 15 UNITS PER ACRE FOR A CONVENTIONAL DEVELOPMENT BEFORE THE APPLICATION OF DENSITY

BONUSES IS PROVIDED. >> THE CITY DOES ALLOW FOR DENSITY BONUSES IF THE DEVELOPER PROVIDES OR MAKES CONTRIBUTIONS ABOVE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS TO FACILITIES AND THAT PROVIDE THE PUBLIC BENEFIT. SUCH CONTRIBUTIONS SHALL INCLUDE PARKLAND DEDICATION, FOR -- PARK FACILITIES AND FISHING PIERS. WHAT MUST BE CONSIDERED IS A, HARD COSTS, B, SOFT COSTS, OR C, LAND COSTS. THAT IS SECTION 1.19. THE DEVELOPER OF THE LUXURY APARTMENTS PROPOSES TO CONSTRUCT A SIDEWALK ON THEIR SITE, CONNECTING TO SAMUEL S GAINES SCHOOL TO THE SOUTH, AND THEN COMPLETE THE OFF-SITE SIDEWALK CONNECTION GAPS ON THE STREET TO THE EAST SIDE OF JENKINS ROAD BETWEEN THE SUBJECT SITE AND OKEECHOBEE ROAD IN EXCHANGE FOR AN ADDITIONAL 2.33 UNITS IN DENSITY. THE APPLICANT ALSO STATES THAT THE APPLICANT -- UP TO AN ADDITIONAL THREE UNITS OF DENSITY. BUT THE APPLICANT AND

[03:30:02]

DEVELOPER HAS NOT REQUESTED THAT DESIGNATION. THE APPLICANT HAS SUBMITTED THE HARD COST OF THE PUBLIC BENEFIT FACILITIES THAT EXCEED THE CITY CODE REQUIREMENTS. THE STAFF RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE DENSITY INCREASED BY 3.33 UNITS PER ACRE. FOR YOU, THE HARD COSTS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PUBLIC BENEFIT INFRASTRUCTURE, WHICH WOULD BE A TOTAL OF $48,520.80. THIS IS AN EXHIBIT OF THE PROPOSED SIDEWALK LINKAGE. ON THE TOP, YOU CAN SEE IN THE SOUTHEAST CORNER, IT IS THE SUBJECT SITE. AND THAT IS THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE SUBJECT SITE. THE APPLICANT WILL CONTINUE THAT THE PROPOSED SIDEWALK CONNECTION IS FROM THEIR SITE, AND THEN ON THE SOUTH, THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF WHAT YOU ARE LOOKING AT IS THE CONNECTION THAT WILL CONNECT THEIR PROJECT TOWARDS OKEECHOBEE ROAD. SO THE APPLICANT BASICALLY PROPOSE TO INFIELD THAT ENTIRE SECTION ALONG THE FRONT OF THE EXISTING APARTMENT. THERE IS RESIDENTIAL AND SOME COMMERCIAL ZONING, ACTUALLY WHAT YOU WERE JUST SPEAKING OF IN THE PREVIOUS APPLICATION . THE APPLICANT IS ALSO PROPOSING A SECOND PUBLIC BENEFIT, WHICH IS A PROPOSED TRANSIT STOP. WHICH THEY ARE CURRENTLY WORKING ON THAT WITH THE SAINT LUCIE TRANSIT. THIS IS THE SITE LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. IT IS APPROXIMATELY, PLUS OR MINUS 17.8 ACRES. THE CURRENT FUTURE LAND USE IS HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL. IN A SITE PLAN, THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING GRILLS, STATION AREAS, A SPA, POOL, CLUBHOUSE, AND A WALKING PATH WITH BENCHES ALL SURROUNDING THE RETENTION POND.

THIS IS A LANDSCAPE PLAN. A PROPOSED LANDSCAPE PLAN. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING JAPANESE BLUEBERRY TREES, SOUTH FLORIDA PINE, OAKS, CYPRUS, AS WELL AS PALM TREES, FLORIDA CUBAN ROYAL PALM, SABLE POEMS, AND SINGLE COCKTAIL POEMS. THIS IS A TYPICAL BUILDING LANDSCAPE PLAN. AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE ARE ALSO FOUNDATION PLANTINGS ALONG THE BUILDING. BEFORE YOU, THIS IS A FRONT ELEVATION OF A TYPICAL APARTMENT THAT WILL BE IN THE DEVELOPMENT. FOR DESIGN REVIEW, THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING METAL SEEMED PANELS, STUCCO BAND, ALSO , SHUTTERS. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING THE COLORS OF CHARCOAL GRAY, HIGH REFLECTIVE WHITE, HONORABLE BLUE, AS WELL AS CRUSHED ICE AND LAKESIDE. THE APARTMENT HAS REVIEWED THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLANS IN REGARDS TO CONSISTENCY WITH THE ESTABLISHED ORDINANCES AND REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY CODE.

THE PLANNING BOARD UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THE APPLICATIONS . WITH THE SIX CITY STAFF RECOMMENDING CONDITIONS. WITH THE ADDITION OF TWO CONDITIONS AT THEIR FEBRUARY 12, 2024 MEETING. THE ADDITIONAL COULD CONDITIONS WERE, NUMBER ONE, PREPARATION FOR A SCHOOL BUS SHELTER WITHIN THE MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT WOULD NEED TO BE DISCUSSED WITH THE SCHOOL BOARD, AND OVER TWO WOULD BE THE ELECTRIC VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE GETTING INSTALLED AS PART OF THE PROPOSED PLAN. STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED 300 UNIT MULTIFAMILY UNIT WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS. EIGHT CONDITIONS, THAT IS. ONE, A COMPLETION CERTIFICATION BY A LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT, COST ACCENTS LANDSCAPE. IT SHALL BE REQUIRED -- OCCUPANCY IS APPROVED FOR THE SITE. TWO, PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF CLEARING PERMITS, THE APPLICANT SHALL PROVIDE A TREE MITIGATION SURVEY AND COORDINATE WITH THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE ARBORISTS FOR CITY

[03:35:01]

REGULATOR TREES. PROPOSE TO BE REMOVED TO THE SITES CONSTRUCTION. THREE, IF IT MIGHT EMIT SINUS PROPOSED, CONSIDER INSTALLING EIGHT LANDSCAPED AREA AROUND THE MONUMENT SPACE. FOUR, A UNIT TITLE WITH THE CLERK OF COURTS, AND A PARCEL COMBINATION WITH THE PROPERTY SHALL BE COMPLETED TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY BUILDING PERMIT. FIVE, AFTER UNITY OF TITLE IN THE LOT COMBINATION, A GENERAL ADDRESS REQUEST FORM FOR THE NEWLY CREATED HRSA LADY AND EACH PROPOSED BUILDING AN RESIDENTIAL UNIT SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. SIX, ALL REQUIRED RIGHT AWAY PERMITS MUST BE APPROVED AND INSTALLATION OF THE PROPOSED SOUTHERN SIDEWALK EXTENSION TO OKEECHOBEE ROAD MUST COMPLETED PRIOR TO THE PURCHASE OF THE FINAL CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY THAT IS APPROVED FOR THE SITE.

SEVEN, PREPARATION FOR A SCHOOL BUS / SHELTER WITHIN THE MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT BE DISCUSSED WITH THE SCHOOL BOARD. AND EIGHT, ELECTRIC VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE BE INSTALLED AS A PART OF THE PROPOSED PARKING. STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL WITH THE EIGHT CONDITIONS. IN ALTERNATIVE MOTIONS, MODIFIED APPROVAL, OR DISAPPROVAL. THANK

YOU. >> QUESTIONS FOR STAFF?

QUESTIONS OF STAFF? >> MEHTA MAYOR, CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE SITE PLAN, PLEASE? OKAY. LET ME GET MY BEARINGS HERE.

IT JENKINS ROAD ON THIS, JENKINS ROAD IS HERE. OKAY.

THAT LINE THERE, IS ANY SHRUBBERY LINE OR SOME TYPE OF

BORDER BETWEEN THE UNITS? >> IS A SIDEWALK.

>> OKAY. IF I AM GOING DOWN JENKINS, MAYBE THIS IS A QUESTION FOR THE DEVELOPERS, WHAT DO I SEE GOING DOWN JENKINS ROAD? RIGHT? AS FAR AS THEIR PROPOSAL FOR BUILDINGS, ET CETERA. ALL FRONT FACING? SO MAYBE THAT IS NOT FOR YOU, BUT I DO NOT THINK WE HAVE ANY PICTURES THAT SHOW THAT.

WHATEVER DEVELOPERS WANT TO KNOW THAT. TALK TO ME ABOUT THIS MULTIMODAL BUS STOP PROPOSAL THAT THEY ARE PUTTING AN APPLICATION IN WITH TRANSIT. WHAT MY CONCERN IS, KNOWING WHERE CAMPING WORLD COMES OUT, WHERE THEY ARE GOING, GIVE ME A PROXIMITY. IS THAT PART OF THEIR PLANT ALSO WENT PROPOSING THE BUS ROUTE STOP, THE TRANSIT STOP?

>> CORRECT. IN THIS SPECIFIC AREA. AND THIS DRIVEWAY, THE ENTRYWAY IS RIGHT ACROSS FROM CAMPING WORLD.

>> SO THIS WILL BE JUST SOUTH OF THAT?

>> CORRECT. JUST SOUTH. >> SO, AND THERE IS NO PROPOSED EASEMENT OF THAT? THAT WILL STOP IN THE MIDDLE OF JENKINS WITH A BUS STOP, WHATEVER, RIGHT THERE? AND THEN GET ON THE BUS? SO THAT TRAFFIC IN THAT LANE, RIGHT NOW, IT IS A TWO LANE, EXCEPT FOR THE TURNING LANE.

>> I CANNOT SPEAK ON THAT, BUT I DO NOT KNOW, I DO KNOW THAT THERE WILL BE RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION.

>> I WANT TO CLARIFY THAT. THAT IS MY CONCERN. A BUS STOP, THE PEOPLE GET ON AND OFF IN THE MIDDLE OF JENKINS. OKAY.

CAMPING WORLD IS DIRECTLY ACROSS FROM WHERE THEY ARE PROPOSING YOU ENTER. THIS AREA HERE TO THE TOP, THIS IS THE

PROPOSED SCHOOL BUS AREA? >> IT WOULD BE IN THIS AREA,

THE TURNABOUT. >> AND PEOPLE THAT LIVE HERE WOULD HAVE TO MAKE THEIR WAY FROM WHEREVER HERE UP TO THIS

POINT TO CATCH THE BUS? >> CORRECT.

>> OKAY. I AM CLEAR. ONE LESS THING. HARD SCAPE LANDSCAPE PARTICULARLY TO THEIR BORDERS. THE ONE THAT IS TO THE SOUTH, WHICH IS NEXT TO SAMUEL GAINES ACADEMY. I THINK I SEE IT, BUT

I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE. >> THERE IS A LANDSCAPE BUFFER.

THE CITY REQUIRES A 10 SCAPE -- 10 FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER.

THE APPLICANT HAS PROVIDED THAT.

>> DO I SEE SOMETHING HERE THAT WOULD ALLOW ACCESS TO THAT

SCHOOL GATE? >> NO.

>> OKAY. VERY WELL. IT WOULD HAVE TO COME OUT AND GO DOWN THE SIDEWALK TO GET TO SAMUEL GAINES. IN THE BUFFER IS A LANDSCAPE. NO BEATING OR ANYTHING? NO IRON FENCE OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT? JUST TREES AND SHRUBBERY?

>> I WOULD HAVE TO DEFER THAT TO THE APPLICANT.

>> VERY WELL, I AM DONE. >> REALLY QUICK. THE BUS STOP WAS ADDED DUE TO LIQUIDATION OF THE PLANNING BOARD. THIS WAS

NOT HAD PREVIOUSLY? >> THERE MAY BE SOME CONFUSION.

THE PROPOSED TRANSIT STOP IS ONE OF THE PROPOSED BENEFITS IN ORDER FOR THEM TO GET THE DENSITY. BUT THE SCHOOL BUS IS

[03:40:01]

A CONDITION THAT THEY NEED TO HAVE TO TALK TO THE SCHOOL BOARD FOR THE TURN RADIUS FOR THE BUSES ON THE ROUNDABOUT IN

THIS SPECIFIC AREA. >> THAT IS NOW MANDATED IN THE SITE PLAN THAT WE APPROVED TONIGHT?

>> CORRECT. >> THEY HAVE TO ENTER THE PROPERTY, MAKE THE PICK UP OR DROP OFF, AND EXIT THE

PROPERTY. >> OKAY. AT ANOTHER QUICK QUESTION. THE ELECTRICAL VEHICLE CHARGING STATIONS, IS THAT IT QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT?

>> THE PLANNING BOARD WAS ADAMANT ABOUT THE ELECTRIC

VEHICLE . >> THAT WAS THE LAST ONE. THANK

YOU. >> QUESTION?

>> THANK YOU. I'M NOT SURE IF YOU HAVE AN AERIAL VIEW, BUT IT MIGHT CLARIFY THAT SOUTHERN PROPERTY LINE, IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE SCHOOL PROPERTY. YOU MIGHT SHOW IT ON YOUR SITE PLAN THERE. OKAY. THERE IT IS. YOU ARE SEEING GAINS, RIGHT WHERE YOUR CURSOR IS, IS THAT A CANAL JUST NORTH OF SAMUEL GAINES?

THAT IS A RIGHT AWAY. >> OKAY. THE REASON FOR MY QUESTION IS BUFFERING BETWEEN THE SCHOOL PROPERTY IN THAT. I THINK THAT WAS HELPFUL QUITE A LOT. AND THEN THE PHOTOMETRIC PLAN FOR THE PROPERTY, IF YOU GO BACK TO THE SITE PLAN, I BELIEVE, THE APPLICANT, I DO NOT THINK YOU SHOW THE PHOTOMETRIC. BUT PER CITY STANDARDS, WE WILL NOT ENCROACH WITH ANY LINING OR WHATNOT ONTO THE ADJACENT?

>> CORRECT. CORRECT. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM STAFF? I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. STATE YOUR NAME, WE KNOW WHO YOU ARE, WHAT YOU HAVE TO SAY IT FOR THE RECORD.

>> FOR THE RECORD. DD PAYING. MEHTA MAYOR, MEMBERS OF THE CITY COMMISSION, MY NAME IS LESLIE OLSON. I AM PRINCIPAL WITH DISTRICT PLANNING GROUP I AM LIVE IN THE HERE DOWNTOWN FORT PIERCE. YES, IT IS A PLEASURE TO BE HERE WITH YOU TONIGHT. AND IT IS A PLEASURE TO REPRESENT THE GROUP FOR THIS REALLY GREAT PROJECT. WE ARE REALLY HAPPY ABOUT THIS PROJECT. FOR A NUMBER OF REASONS. WE FEEL LIKE IT PROVIDES A REALLY EXCELLENT OPTION FOR MULTI FAMILY HOUSING IN THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE. WE ARE VERY PLEASED TO OFFER THE CITY THE EXTENSION OF A SIDEWALK BETWEEN OUR SITE ALL THE WAY TO OKEECHOBEE ROAD, CONNECTING THIS SITE FOR BOTH PEDESTRIANS AND BICYCLISTS TO GET TO SCHOOL, TO HOME DEPOT, TO WALGREENS, TO WALMART, TO ALL THE, TO CHICK-FIL-A. THIS PROJECT WILL BE CONNECTED NOT ONLY TO SERVICES, BUT EMPLOYMENT CENTERS. AND IT IS VERY CLOSE TO THE STATE CENTER MOBILE SYSTEM. IF PEOPLE ARE HOPPING ONTO I-95 OR THE TURNPIKE TO LEAVE ST. LUCIE COUNTY IN ORDER TO GO TO WORK SOMEWHERE ELSE, THEY WILL BE ABLE TO DO THAT. BUT I KNOW ALL OF OUR JURISDICTIONS ARE WORKING VERY HARD TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE PROVIDING THE KINDS OF JOBS THAT KEEP THEM HERE.

AND YOU ARE RIGHT, COMMISSIONER JOHNSON. TO THE SOUTH OF THIS PROPERTY IS A VERY LARGE CANAL. SO WE WILL BE BASICALLY BUFFERING THE BRAZILIAN PEPPERS THAT GROW UP ALONGSIDE OF THE CANAL. YOU CANNOT REALLY SEE SAM GAINS FROM THIS PROPERTY.

YOU WERE ASKING COMMISSIONER JOHNSON, I THINK, WAS ASKING WHAT YOU SEE WHEN YOU DRIVE DOWN JENKINS ROAD, WHICH IS A GREAT POINT. NOBODY LIKES LOOKING AT THE BACK OF A BUILDING. WHEN YOU ARE DRIVING DOWN THE ROAD, IT IS NOT GREAT FOR THE RIGHT AWAY APPEARANCE. THE DEVELOPER HAS COMMITTED TO TREATING THE BACKSIDES OF THESE TWO BUILDINGS LIKE THE BACK, LIKE THE FRONT, IN TERMS OF THE ADDITION OF BAHAMA SHUTTERS AND ALL THOSE THINGS THAT YOU SAW. SO THOSE ARE COMPLETELY ACCEPTABLE AND APPROPRIATE. YOU WILL ALSO NOTICE IN THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE SITE PLAN , THERE IS A BIO SWELL THERE. THAT WAS GOING TO BE A WET POND, BUT THERE IS A SECTION OF CODE THAT DOES NOT ALLOW WHAT PONDS AT THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY. AND SO IT WILL BE MORE EXPENSIVE TO DO A BIO SWELL, BUT IT REALLY WILL TURN INTO A BEAUTIFUL LANDSCAPE

[03:45:01]

AMENITY. YOU DO NOT SEE THE LANDSCAPING HERE, THE FIRST THING YOU SEE WHEN YOU ARE NORTHBOUND ON JENKINS ROAD, YOU WILL SEE A BEAUTIFUL BIO SWELL WITH ROCKS IN THE BOTTOM, TREES INTERSPERSED THROUGHOUT , AND LOTS OF NATURAL GAS GRASSES. WE ARE ALSO MAKING OTHER AREAS INTO BIO SWELLS. INSTEAD OF BEING -- THEY WILL BE A MUCH MORE BETTER UPTAKE FOR NITROGEN WITH THE KINDS OF GRASSES , THE NAMES OF WHICH ELUDE ME AT THE MOMENT, BUT IT WILL BE MUCH BETTER FOR WATER QUALITY AS WELL. I AM AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS.

>> QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT?

>> MEHTA MAYOR? >> YES, SIR.

>> THANK YOU, MS. OLSON. TALKING ABOUT THE BUS STOP, THE ST. LUCIE TRANSIT STOP, SO YOU ARE DEDICATING RIGHT-OF-WAY.

THAT WOULD ALLOW TO ACCOMMODATE --

>> RIGHT. COUNTY TRANSIT REQUESTED A TRANSIT STOP HERE DURING OUR REVIEW PROCESS. AND OUR APPLICANT AGREED TO THAT, AND CORRELATING WITH TRANSIT, THEY ARE NOT SURE WHAT THEY WANT EXACTLY YET. WE ARE SIMPLY SAYING, WE WILL DO IT WHEN YOU ARE READY. BUT THERE IS NO BUS ROUTE ALONG THIS YET. AND SO THIS IS A PLACEHOLDER FOR A FUTURE TRANSIT STOP. WE CORRELATED WITH NICOLE FOR GOODIE AT THE ST. LUCIE SCHOOL BOARD ABOUT WHERE THEY WOULD WANT THEIR BUS STOP. THEY WOULD WANT IT CO-LOCATED WITH THE TRANSIT STOP, SEPARATE, ON-SITE, OFFSITE. WE WENT BACK AND FORTH A LITTLE BIT ON JUST MAKING SURE WE KNEW WHAT THEY WANTED. AND THEY ENDED UP SAYING WE WOULD LIKE TO COME IN, TURN AROUND, AND LEAVE. SO OUR ENGINEER, WHO IS IN THE AUDIENCE IN CASE YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, DID AN AUTO TURN ANALYSIS. THAT WILL, IN FACT, HANDLE A SCHOOL BUS. SO THAT IS WHERE IT WILL BE.

>> THINK YOU FOR THAT. TO BUILD ON THAT, WE HAVE HAD SOME CONVERSATIONS ABOUT JENKINS ROAD FOR THE LAST TWO DECADES.

BUILT OUT, ULTIMATELY, OBVIOUSLY THE PROPOSED TRANSIT STOP IS SHOWN GRAPHICALLY IN THE LOCATION. IS YOUR CLIENT AMENABLE IF THEY NEEDED TO STUDENT TOWARDS THE PROPERTY BECAUSE JENKINS ROAD NEEDED TO BE BUILT OUT? AND ALL OF A SUDDEN, WE HAVE NO BUS TURNOFF? DO YOU SEE WHERE I'M GOING WITH THAT? IF JENKINS ROAD WOULD HAVE TO BE EXPANDED, IS THERE ENOUGH ROOM PHYSICALLY?

>> YES. WE HAVE ALREADY DEDICATED THE RIGHT-OF-WAY.

WHAT YOU ARE SEEING HERE IS THE ULTIMATE RIGHT-OF-WAY AS REQUESTED BY ST. LUCIE COUNTY. SO THAT SHOULD TAKE CARE OF ALL OF THAT. BUT IF IT DOES NOT AND ADDITIONAL RIGHT-OF-WAY IS REQUIRED FOR THE TRANSIT STOP, I BELIEVE THAT WOULD BE FINE.

INTO THE MIC IF HE IS GOING TO SPEAK. WERE YOU SWORN IN, SIR? OKAY, GREAT. THANK YOU. IDENTIFY YOURSELF FOR ME,

PLEASE. >> BLAINE BURKE SESSER, ENGINEER FOR THE PROJECT. EARLY ON, WE COORDINATED WITH ST.

LUCIE COUNTY ON THE OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS THAT WOULD BE NEEDED HERE. WE ARE DEDICATING 14 FEET OF RIGHT-OF-WAY TO GET AN ULTIMATE RIGHT-OF-WAY OF 160 FEET FOR THE COUNTY. AS OF RIGHT NOW, THAT GIVES US ADEQUATE ROOM TO PUT A RIGHT TURN LANE IN. BUT ALSO, WE HAVE ENOUGH ROOM BETWEEN WHERE THE END OF ARE CURBING FOR OUR RIGHT TURN LANE IS IN A PROPERTY LINE THAT WE COULD FIT A TRANSIT STOP OR DO ANY OTHER

OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS. >> THAT MAKES SENSE. I AM NOT ASKING FOR MORE, I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE ARE PLANNING FOR THE FUTURE. THEY LOSE THE COUNTY AND THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE, WE COME UP WITH THIS NEST EGG OF MONEY AND WE ARE ABLE TO BUILD JENKINS ROAD, YOU HAVE LETTER HEARD A LOT OF CONVERSATIONS ABOUT JENKINS ROAD. IS THAT TRANSIT STOP IN THE WAY OF A FUTURE ROAD? THAT IS MY POINT. AGAIN, PLANNING FOR THE FUTURE.

IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE? WHEREVER YOU PLAN IT IS OKAY WITH ME AND I AM THANKFUL YOU ARE PUTTING IT IN. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE TO SEE IF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION IS INCORPORATING FUTURE BUILDOUT. THAT IS ALL.

>> I SEE YOUR QUESTION. >> THE STRUCTURE ITSELF OF A

TRANSIT STOP. >> SO IF THERE WAS IMPROVEMENTS ALONG JENKINS ROAD, IT WOULD BE AN ADDITIONAL THROUGH LANE , WHERE THE TRANSIT STOP IS. SO WE WOULD HAVE TO MOVE FURTHER TO THE EAST. BUT WE WOULD STILL HAVE ADEQUATE ROOM TO FIT A NEW THROUGH LANE AND A TRANSIT STOP.

>> ONE OF MY COLLEAGUES SAID, WILL IT BE OUT THERE IN THE ROAD? WILL THEY BE STOPPING IN THE ROAD? IT IS THE SAME CONCERN I HAVE FOR THE FUTURE.

[03:50:01]

>> RIGHT. I THINK YOU WILL HAVE ANYWHERE FROM 30 FEET TO 40 FEET FROM THE EXISTING JENKINS ROAD TO THE SIDEWALK.

OBVIOUSLY, THE TRANSIT STOP WOULD BE CLOSER TO THE SIDEWALK THAT THE PEDESTRIANS WOULD BE USING, AS OPPOSED TO THE ROAD.

>> COMMISSIONER BRODRICK? >> A RUSSIAN AND A COMMENT. ONE ON THE SCHOOL BUS STOP. IS IT COVERED?

>> WE DO NOT CURRENTLY HAVE A COVERED ENTRY SHOWN BECAUSE IT WAS AFTER PLANNING THAT WE ACTUALLY FOUND OUT WHAT THE SCHOOL BOARD WANTED. SO IT IS NOT INCORPORATED INTO THE SITE PLAN, BUT IF THAT IS SOMETHING THAT THE COMMISSION WANTS TO

SEE, YOU CAN CONDITION IT. >> WE GOT THE STOP, IT IS INTERIOR TO THE COMPLEX. LET'S KEEP THE KIDS OUT OF THE RAIN.

AND TWO , YOUR SIDEWALK PLAN IS INNOVATIVE. IT IS A PHENOMENALLY GREAT THING TO DO. I, FOR ONE TO, AND I AM SURE I SPEAK FOR EVERYBODY, THANK YOU FOR LOOKING TO TAKE THAT ON. I KNOW THERE IS A COST FACTOR TO THAT. IT IS NOT INSIGNIFICANT BY ANY MEANS. BUT THE VALUE OF WHAT YOU ARE PROVIDING WILL BE APPRECIATED BY LITERALLY HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE. IT IS A VERY POSITIVE THING TO BRING TO THE CITY COMMISSION, TO ADD TO THE ELEMENTS OUT THERE. AND YOU OBVIOUSLY UNDERSTOD THE PROBLEMS HERE. SO, I THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. >> MS. OLSON, ON THIS, CAN YOU HELP ME UNDERSTAND HOW MAIL WILL BE HANDLED? DELIVERY OF THE MAIL FOR THE RESIDENCE. IS IT A CENTRAL AREA? A KEYED

AREA? >> OKAY. THERE IS A LITTLE RED AREA. WHY MY POINTING? YOU CANNOT SEE THAT.

THANK YOU. RIGHT THERE. >> WILL CASTIGATE AND WILL NOT INTERFERE WITH ANYBODY COMING IN. OKAY, THANK YOU.

>> I'M SORRY. YOU BROUGHT UP A COUPLE GOOD POINTS. IT REMINDED ME SOMETHING THAT I DID NOT SAY ANYTHING ABOUT. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE ARE DOING TO BOTH ALLEVIATE FUTURE TRAFFIC CONGESTION ON JENKINS ROAD, WHICH WE ALL KNOW IS AN ISSUE, AND ALSO , CREATE MORE INTERCONNECTIVITY, YOU WILL SEE THAT WE ARE LOCATED ON THE VERY NORTHERN END OF THE SITE.

DENNIS, WOULD YOU MIND GOING BACK TO THAT LANDSCAPE AND THAT YOU WERE JUST ON? THERE WE GO. IT IS LINED WITH ROYAL PALMS. THE DEVELOPER WANTS THIS TO BE A BEAUTIFUL, GRAND ENTRANCE THAT WILL REALLY IMPROVE JENKINS ROAD. YOU WILL SEE THAT IT ALSO GOES TO THE NORTH. TO THE NORTH IS THE SITE PLAN WAYPOINT THAT WAS APPROVED BY THIS COMMISSION A FEW YEARS AGO. ALSO, MULTIFAMILY HOUSING COMMUNITY. THIS WILL BE EITHER THEIR SECOND, YOU KNOW, WE ARE STILL COORDINATING WITH THEM IN THE COUNTY, AND WE ARE DOING ALL OF THAT WORK. BUT THE IDEA IS FOR THIS TO EITHER BE A PRIMARY OR SECONDARY ENTRANCE FOR THEM. AND PERHAPS IT WOULD BE EASIER FOR THE SCHOOL BOARD TO HAVE ONE STOP. AND FOR THE KIDS TO ALL GATHER. THAT MIGHT BE AN OPTION. BUT I JUST WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT THAT IS YET ANOTHER THING THAT THIS DEVELOPER IS COORDINATING TO DO

FOR PUBLIC BENEFIT. >> MADAME MAYOR. I DO NOT HAVE A QUESTION, JUST A STATEMENT. I APPRECIATE THE APPLICATION HERE AND WHAT I AM SEEING ON THE SCREEN BASED ON INNOVATIVE DEVELOPMENT, THINKING OUTSIDE THE BOX, GETTING OFF-SITE AND MAKING SOME IMPROVEMENTS. YOU MENTIONED ALL THOSE THINGS.

INCLUDING THE WATER QUALITY. NOT MANY FOLKS DIAL IN ON THAT.

I'M VERY APPRECIATIVE OF THE WATER QUALITY ELEMENT HERE.

BECAUSE IT IS VERY IMPORTANT. THOSE TRIBUTARIES GO RIGHT TO THE LAGOON. IN SOME FORM OR FASHION. THAT IS WHY I WAS TALKING ABOUT THE CANAL EARLIER. SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH

FOR THAT. >> ANYTHING ELSE FOR THE APPLICANT? ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE, PLEASE COME FORWARD. ANYONE ELSE? OKAY. WE WILL CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING, I WILL ENTERTAIN A DISCUSSION OR A MOTION.

>> MAY I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE?

>> I WILL SECOND. >> THERE ARE A BUNCH OF

CONDITIONS. >> DO YOU WANT TO ADD IN?

>> I GOT YOU. >> OKAY. I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE. WITH CONDITIONS IN THE REPORT WITH THE ADDITIONAL CONDITION OF A COVERED AREA, A SCHOOL PICKUP AREA.

[03:55:02]

>> IS A COVERED? IT SAYS / SHELTER. COMMISSIONER?

>> THEY SAID IT WAS NOT. SO JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT IT IS REQUIRED. MS. OLSON SAID THAT WAS NOT CONTEMPLATED. BUT I JUST WANT, LET'S JUST PUT IT IN THERE.

>> IT IS FINE. >> ALL EIGHT CONDITIONS PLUS -- WHERE THE BUS STOP CAN COME TO SCHOOL PICKUP.

>> I WILL CALL IT SCHOOLBUS SO THAT IT IS NOT CONFUSED WITH

THE TRANSIT. >> A SCHOOL BUS STOP.

>> I SECOND THAT MOTION. >> OKAY. LET'S VOTE. WE ALREADY HAD A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER J JOHNSON. WE HAVE

A MULTITUDE OF SECONDS. >> HERE IS A THIRD.

BEING CALLED ]

[g. Quasi-Judicial Hearing - Review and approval of a conditional use with no new construction application submitted by One Eleven Orange, LLC, in respect of a proposed 'Family Amusement Center' to be located within the full main level in the Second Generation Space at 111 Orange Ave. Parcel ID: 2410-509-0002-000-1.]

NOTICE REQUIREMENTS BEEN MET? >> THEY HAVE BEEN MET FOR THIS

ITEM. >> DID YOU ASK ABOUT X PARTAKE

COMMUNICATION? >> YES, WITH THE APPROPRIATE

HONORS. >> COMMISSIONER GAINS.

>> IS THIS THE ONE THAT CAME BEFORE US BEFORE? I JUST TALKED

TO HIM, SO, NO. >> SO THAT'S A NO?

>> NO. >> MISSION OR JOHNSON?

>> WE CAN RECEIVE EMAILS ABOUT THIS.

>> MAYOR HUDSON. >> ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, PLEASE STAND AND RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. THANK

YOU. >> PROCEED.

>> YOU MAY RECALL A DISCUSSION THAT WAS HELD AT THE CITY COMMISSION. IT WASN'T THAT LONG AGO WERE A PROPERTY OWNER AND A POTENTIAL OCCUPANT OF A PROPERTY ON 111 ORANGE AVENUE WERE REQUESTING THAT THE COMMISSION WOULD ALLOW THEM TO APPLY FOR A CONDITIONAL USE FOR A FAMILY AMUSEMENT CENTER. NOW, THE SITE THAT THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT IS LOCATED WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN. IT IS 111 ORANGE AVENUE, WHICH ENCOMPASSES QUITE A LARGE AREA. IT'S GOT A PARKING LOT IN THE REAR, AND THERE ARE OTHER USES IN THE BUILDING. THIS PROPOSES THE USE OF THE FIRST FLOOR. THE PROPERTY IS ZONED C4, CENTRAL PROPERTY ZONE, AND IT USES THE CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT. THEY SAY THE PROPERTY IS C4, WHICH ALLOWS PERMITS, MIXED-USE AND ENTERTAINMENT, AS OCCUPANT. BUT THE C4 ZONING DISTRICT DOES NOT CHOOSE THEM AS DEFINED IN THE CITY CODE. HOWEVER, THE PROPOSAL IS A MIXED-USE WITH ANCILLARY EATING FACILITIES PROPOSED. IT WOULD BE BETTER DESCRIBED AS A FAMILY INDOOR ENTERTAINMENT OR FAMILY AMUSEMENT ENTER, AND WE SEE THOSE IN VARIOUS OCCASIONS ON THE COUNTY AND THIS DATE. THE STATE STATUTE ACTUALLY RECOGNIZED THE DIFFERENTIAL BETWEEN AMUSEMENT ARCADE AND AN AMUSEMENT ARCADE CENTER. BY DEFINING IN THE STATE STATUTE A RESTRICTION OF THE TYPE OF GAINES AND MACHINES THAT COULD BE CARRIED ON INSIDE THOSE FAMILY AMUSEMENT CENTERS. WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT TODAY IS CONDITIONAL USE, WHICH WOULD BE PERMITTED IF IT WAS ALLOWED TO ACCOMMODATE SKILL-BASED AMUSEMENT GAMES, OR MACHINES SUCH AS PINBALL, BOWLING, ELECTRONIC VIDEO GAMES, AND

[04:00:01]

CETERA. IT SPECIFICALLY UNDERSTATES STATUTE 546. 10. IT DOES NOT ALLOW THE MACHINES THAT I THINK ARE TYPICALLY ASSOCIATED WITH ARCADE WHEN PEOPLE VISUALIZE WHAT AND ARCADE MEANS. AND IN SOME RESPECTS, THE CITY CODE IS A BIT -- NOT VERY GOOD AT DESCRIBING THE DIFFERENTIALS, WHICH IS MECHANICAL SLOT WHEELS, DEPICTIONS OF SLOT MACHINE WHEELS OR VIDEO SIMULATIONS OR VIDEO REPRESENTATIONS OF ANY OF THE CASINO GAMES. AND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THOSE MACHINES AND SKILL-BASED MACHINES IS THERE ARE THINGS GOING ON BEHIND THE OPERATION OF MECHANICAL SLOT REELS , CASINO POKER GAMES, THAT THE OPERATOR OF THOSE GAMES DOES NOT KNOW WHAT IS GOING ON.

THERE IS NO SKILL INVOLVED. IT IS PURELY BY CHANCE. AND SO IT IS A SKILL-BASED AMUSEMENT GAME. THE PLAYER OF THOSE, SUPPOSEDLY, NOT INCLUDING MYSELF, CAN GET BETTER THE MORE THEY PLAY. SO BEARING ALL THAT IN MIND, WE WENT TO PLAYING BOARD, AND THEY MADE A MOTION TO MOVE THE CITY COMMISSION WITH A CONDITIONAL USE OF THE FOLLOWING FOUR CONDITIONS. ONLY SKILL-BASED AMUSEMENT GAMES AS REQUIRED BY FLORIDA STATUTE 546.10. I SHALL NOT INCLUDE ANY GAME OR MACHINE THAT NORMALLY THESE ARE REFLECTIVE OF WHAT IS CONTAINED IN THE STATE STATUTE AT 546. I DON'T KNOW IF I NEED TO REPEAT ALL OF THOSE, OR IF THE FIRST CONDITION DOES REPEAT. WINDOW TINTING, OR ANY OTHER OBSCURING ELEMENTS, ARE PROHIBITED TO BE INSTALLED ON OR AT ANY DISPLAY WINDOWS CONNECTED. THIS IS PROTECTING THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE DOWNTOWN BY ALLOWING PEOPLE TO BE INVITED IN IF IT'S A FAMILY ENTERTAINMENT CENTER. IT SHOULD BE AVAILABLE AND BE SEEN BY FAMILIES AS THAT SORT OF FRIENDLY ENVIRONMENT. AUTHORIZATION SHALL BE VOID AFTER ONE YEAR UNLESS SUBSTANTIAL INTERIOR RENOVATION OR REFITTING OF THAT BUILDING HAS TAKEN PLACE. SO I THINK IT'S GOOD PRACTICE TO ACTUALLY GET SOMETHING IN AND MEET THIS THING, RATHER THAN HAVING IT STANDING THERE VACANT WITH THE POTENTIAL USE. IF IT CHANGES IN TENDENCY, OWNERSHIP, OR MANAGEMENT, THAT SHALL NOT AFFECT THE STATUS OF THIS CONDITIONAL USE. AND IT'S NOT ANY DEPARTURE FROM THE CONDITIONS THE APPROVAL WAS GRANTED ON. I SHOULD SAY THAT THE APPLICANT DID EMAIL ME EARLIER TODAY. HE APOLOGIZED FOR NOT BEING ABLE TO ATTEND THE MEETING TODAY. HE'S OUT OF TOWN AND EXPECTED TO GET BACK, BUT COULDN'T MAKE IT. HE JUST SENT HIS APOLOGIES. HE ALSO INFORMED ME THAT THE ORIGINAL POTENTIAL OCCUPIER OF THIS SPACE WAS NOW LOOKING AT ELSEWHERE. I THINK THE CONDITIONS WE WERE LOOKING AT HERE ACTUALLY REVEALED THEY WERE PLANNING TINTED WINDOWED ARCADE CENTER RATHER THAN WHAT THEY WERE PROPOSING. AND OBVIOUSLY THEY WERE THEN IN DISAGREEMENT WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER AND ARE CONDITIONS WITH THE PROPOSED TENANT. THE OPPORTUNITY HAS SINCE GONE ON, AND POTENTIALLY SECURED ANOTHER OCCUPANT WHO WOULD ENGAGE WITH THIS TYPE OF USE AS A FAMILY AMUSEMENT ENTERTAINMENT CENTER. SO BEARING THAT IN MIND, PROVIDING THE USE COMPLIES WITH THESE CONDITIONS. WE ARE HUMBLY RECOMMENDING THAT THE CONDITIONAL USE BE GRANTED FOR THIS PARTICULAR USE. THANK YOU.

>> QUESTIONS OF STAFF? YES. >> THANK YOU FOR THE REPORT.

THE CONDITIONS THAT ARE PROPOSED HERE -- THERE YOU GO.

[04:05:01]

SO WE ARE COVERED STRATEGICALLY AND IN OUR CODE. WE DIALED IN YEARS AGO -- THE CITY DIALED IN YEARS AGO ON THE SPECIFIC NATURE OF IN OUR CODE. AND NOW WITH STATUTE 5.6 .10, YOU'RE TELLING US AS A DEFINITION THAT WE ARE PROTECTED IN EVERY SORT OF THE WAY FROM -- WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL THE OTHER ARCADE THAT ARE DEEMED ADULTS STYLE ARCADES.

>> THERE'S A NOTICE ON STAFF TO ENSURE THAT WHEN IT GOES IN AND IT OPERATES, THAT IT OPERATES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THESE CONDITIONS. AND I THINK FROM A PLANNING STAFF POINT OF VIEW, WE ARE VERY AWARE. WE'VE HEARD EARLIER TODAY THAT BUSINESSES DOWNTOWN ARE GOING OUT, AND THE LAST THING WE WANT TO DO IS TO HAVE A DOWNTOWN THAT IS FULL OF LINKED OUT ARCADE WINDOWS, AND THAT SORT OF ACTIVITY. SO THE CONDITIONS HERE ARE SPECIFICALLY TAILORED TO SAY, WE ARE NOT GOING TO DO WHAT WE'VE SEEN CLOSED DOWN ELSEWHERE IN THE CITY AND THE COUNTY. AND YOU'RE GOING TO DO THIS, THAT'S A COMPANION TO OTHER USERS WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN, WHERE FAMILIES CAN COME IN, ENJOY AN EVENT, DO MULTIPLE VISITS TO VARIOUS PROPERTIES. MAYBE THEY HAVE A SNACK HERE AND GO TO A RESTAURANT ELSEWHERE, WHERE THEY COME FROM SOME OTHER ACTIVITY OR WHATEVER. THERE IS A MOVEMENT, AND THIS IS WHAT I WOULD SAY AS A PLANNER, THERE'S A MOVEMENT IN TOWN CENTERS AWAY FROM STANDARD RETAIL ESTABLISHMENTS TO MORE OF AN ENTERTAINMENT, LEISURE, ENJOYMENT, EATING -- THAT SORT OF ENTERTAINMENT BY. AND I THINK THAT'S WHERE WE ARE GOING, UNFORTUNATELY, FOR BUSINESSES WE ARE GOING TO THAT TRANSITION. I THINK IT STARTED WITH COVID AND THE SHUTDOWN AND ONLINE ORDERING . IT HAS TRAINED US ALL TO GO ONLINE RATHER THAN WALKING DOWN THE STREET.

>> MY LAST QUESTION IS REGARDING NUMBER THREE. IS IT CONSISTENT -- YOU WERE VERY SPECIFIC WHEN YOU SAID IT -- THE AUTHORIZATION, UNLESS SUBSTANTIAL INTERIOR RENOVATION. NOW, IS THAT CONSISTENT WITH OTHER

CONDITIONAL USES? >> YOU CAN HAVE THAT CONDITION, AND I THINK IN SOME CONDITIONAL USES -- I'VE USED THE WORDING FOR OTHER CONDITIONAL USES FOR ARCADES IN THERE AS WELL. BUT IN GENERAL, IF YOU ARE TAKING THE TIME TO APPROVE A CONDITIONAL USE, I THINK WE SHOULD BE ENSURING THAT WE ARE NOT WASTING STAFF TIME AND WE ARE NOT WASTING COMMISSIONS

TIME. >> SO WHAT HAPPENS IF WE FAIL AFTER -- WELL -- I DON'T WANT IT TO FAIL. SO MY POINT IS, SUBSTANTIAL IS -- I DON'T KNOW IF THESE FOLKS CAN TALK ABOUT

THAT WORD. >> I WOULD SAY MORE THAN 50% OF THE WORK IS DONE TO INCORPORATE THE USE.

>> THAT'S WHAT I NEEDED TO HEAR. THANK YOU.

>> SO IF I HEAR YOU RIGHT, YOUR LAST COMMENT WAS BASICALLY THAT THE PREVIOUS GUY THAT WAS GOING TO BRING A BUSINESS THAT HE WANTED TO OPEN BETWEEN HIM AND THE PERSON THAT HOLDS THE LEASE FOR THIS BUILDING MAY HAVE SOME TYPE OF DISAGREEMENT, BUT THE LESSOR HAS COME TO YOU AND SAID THERE MAY BE SOMEBODY THAT IS WILLING TO STEP IN AND DO THIS.

>> RELATIVE TO ENSURE THAT GOING FORWARD, HE HAD OTHER

INTEREST. >> RIGHT. BASICALLY, FOR PUTTING THE CONDITION ON THIS PARTICULAR SPACE IN DOWNTOWN, IT WILL STAY THERE UNTIL SOMEBODY CHANGES IT IN CASE IT DOESN'T WORK OUT, BUT IT'S ALWAYS CONDITIONED TO DO THIS.

BUT IT COULD DO OTHER THINGS. >> IF IT DOESN'T TAKE PLACE WITHIN ONE YEAR -- IF 50% OF THAT INTERIOR SPACE IS NOT BUILT OUT TO ACCOMMODATE IT, THEY EITHER HAVE TO COME IN TO RENEW THAT, OR IT GOES AWAY. IF IT IS OCCUPIED, THAT COULD BE LESS THAN A YEAR, THEY COULD BE MORE THAN A YEAR DEPENDING ON HOW THINGS GO. THEN THAT STAYS IN PLACE. SO THE TENANT THEN MOVED OUT, IT WOULD STAY IN PLACE IN CASE SOMEBODY ELSE

WANTED TO COME IN. >> SO TALK TO ME -- WE'VE DONE

[04:10:02]

THESE AMUSEMENT ARCADES, THE DAVE AND BUSTERS, I CALL THEM.

THAT'S KIND OF WHAT WE ARE SAYING HERE. SO THIS CONDITION, IT'S GEARED FOR FAMILIES. BUT JUST LIKE ANY OF THEM, DAVE AND BUSTERS, WHATEVER CONNECTION ZONES, WHATEVER -- THIS WOULD BE THE CONDITION THAT PIZZA, BEER -- WHATEVER.

>> I AM NOT SEEING THE SPECIFICS OF THE OFFERINGS THERE, BUT IT IS MORE LIKE THAT ENVIRONMENT. YOU ARE RIGHT.

>> SO BIRTHDAY PARTIES, JUST GO DO ARCADE GAMES. SO THAT IS THE VISION OF THIS LESSOR , AND OBVIOUSLY A BUSINESS PERSON THAT IS WHAT YOU TAKE ON THIS VENTURE, BECAUSE IT IS A BUSINESS VENTURE. AND THIS IS THEIR BUSINESS. THAT THEY WANT TO BRING TO DOWNTOWN FORT PIERCE. TALK TO ME ABOUT HOURS OF OPERATION RIGHT NOW. IS THERE ANY CONDITION OR CONCERN? IT IS THAT IF YOU HAD A RESTAURANT DOWN THERE OR A THEATER OR ANYTHING, ANYWHERE THAT SOMEONE GOES TO GET ENTERTAINMENT, IT'S NOT A NIGHTCLUB. IT'S NOT A PUB.

IT'S NOT SOMEWHERE WHERE YOU HAVE FULL ADULT STUFF GOING ON.

IT'S THIS BREAKPOINT. IT'S AN ACTIVITY THAT SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO OPERATE AS OTHER BUSINESSES OPERATE DOWNTOWN.

>> OKAY. THE ENVIRONMENT DOWN THERE IS VERY MUCH SO THAT IT ON POINT, THEY HAVE FOOD, THEY HAVE ADULT BEVERAGES, THEY HAVE TVS. PEOPLE CAN WATCH BOWLING EVENTS.

>> I WOULD ASSUME SO. >> ALL RIGHT. I AM DONE.

>> ALL RIGHT. OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY. LET'S SEE. THE APPLICANT IS NOT HERE. SO THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. ANYONE TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE, PLEASE COME FORWARD. AND WERE YOU SWORN IN?

>> WE WILL SWEAR YOU WIN. >> YOU SWEAR AND AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH? THANK

YOU. >> STATE YOUR NAME, YOU HAVE

THREE MINUTES. >> LARRY COYLE, I LET IT 20 ORANGE AVENUE. IT'S VERY NEAR AND DEAR TO MY HEART THAT IT'S GOING TO BE CLOSE. THE ACTS PLACE CLOSED, UNFORTUNATELY.

THIS MIGHT BE A REPLACEMENT FOR. I GUESS MY CONCERN IS, LIKE YOU ASKED, WHAT WERE THE HOURS? FOR FAMILIES, WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? ARE YOU ALLOWED TO BE A 16-YEAR-OLD AND COME IN BY YOURSELF? YOU KNOW, COULD THERE BE A LARGE GROUP OF TEENAGERS JUST GOING THERE? IF SO, WOULD THEY BE SECURITY? WOULD THEY HAVE TO BE SUPERVISED? WHAT AGES ARE ALLOWED TO GO, AND WITHOUT PARENTS? THOSE ARE JUST THE THINGS WE WERE THINKING OF AND DISCUSSING WHERE WE LIVE. SAFETY, SUPERVISION, AND THE

HOURS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> ANYONE ELSE WANTING TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE? ANYONE ELSE? FEW QUESTIONS THAT WE HAVE IS, DOES THE COMPANY GOING TO OPERATE OTHER OTHER ORGANIZATIONS OR OTHER ARCADES, WHETHER IT'S IN FLORIDA OR NOT FLORIDA, SO THEY HAVE EXPERIENCE ABOUT ISSUES LIKE KIDS AND THEIR LARGE GROUPS? AND IF SO, HOW LONG HAVE THEY BEEN IN OPERATION? AS STATED, 50% OF THE FACILITY NEEDS TO BE OCCUPIED WITHIN THE YEAR. IF THEY HAVE THE EXPERIENCE, THEN THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO OCCUPY THE 50% OF IT. AND AGAIN, WHAT CITIES AND HOW LONG THEY BEEN OPERATING THEM. WE ARE NOT FOUR OR AGAINST THE MENU. WE JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE RIGHT VENUE IS IN PLACE BECAUSE THE PAST HISTORY OF THE BUILDING, THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF TURNAROUND OF THE TENANTS IN THAT FACILITY IN THE BUILDING.

[04:15:04]

WISHING TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE? ANYONE ELSE? SO I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, AND SINCE WE DON'T HAVE AN APPLICANT TO ASK THE QUESTIONS, MR. FREEMAN, CAN YOU ANSWER ANY

OF THOSE QUESTIONS? >> WE ARE NOT AWARE YET OF THE OPERATOR OF THIS. WE WERE INFORMED THAT THE TYPE OF USE HAS BEEN DESCRIBED TO ME AS A -- AN ENTERTAINMENT CENTER WITH VARIOUS GAMES AND FOOD SERVED, AND OTHER PIECES OF EQUIPMENT.

MAYBE SEATING AND TVS AND SO FORTH. I AM NOT AWARE OF THAT, SO I CAN'T GIVE EXAMPLES OF THOSE OPERATIONS. IN THAT RESPECT, SAFETY AND HOW THE BUILDING IS USED INTERNALLY, I THINK THERE'S A LOT TO DO WITH THE OPERATOR CONTROLLING THAT.

OBVIOUSLY, THE OPERATION WOULD NEED TO COMPLY WITH CITY NOISE REGULATIONS. HOURS COULD BE SET IF THE COMMISSION SO DESIRED TO SET HOURS OF OPERATION. AND THAT IS, I THINK, THE MAIN

POINTS THAT I HEARD. >> THERE WAS A QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER IT'S FAMILIES OR TEENAGERS OR WHATEVER.

>> AGAIN, I THINK THAT HAS TO DO WITH THE OPERATOR. AND THEN BEING RESPONSIBLE, LIKE ANY OPERATOR.

>> RIGHT. >> I CAN TELL YOU RIGHT NOW, I AM UNCOMFORTABLE WITH THIS. WE ARE IN A QUASIJUDICIAL HEARING HERE, AND WE DON'T HEAR FROM AN APPLICANT? EVERYTHING WE'VE HEARD SO FAR TONIGHT HAS EITHER BEEN SOMETHING CONCEPTUAL THAT WE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO SEE OR GET OUR HANDS AROUND TO ENGAGE, THE ACTUAL APPLICANT ABOUT THEIR INTENTION OF THIS BUSINESS VENTURE THAT THEY ARE ASKING US TO TAKE YOUR QUASIJUDICIAL.

IT'S REAL HARD FOR ME TO SIT HERE AND TRY TO GET INTO THE MIND OF -- LISTEN, I'M ALL ABOUT BUSINESS. ANYBODY TAKING A RISK ON RUNNING A BUSINESS. SOMEBODY'S GOT TO SIT HERE BESIDES OUR STAFF TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IS GOING ON HERE. AND I AM NOT COMFORTABLE MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS UNTIL WE GET THE APPLICANT IN HERE TO REALLY UNDERSTAND. I THINK THE QUESTIONS THAT HAVE BEEN ASKED ARE VERY LEGITIMATE. WE HAVE A DOWNTOWN NOW THAT HAS AN ENVIRONMENT. IT IS AN ADULT ENVIRONMENT. BY NIGHT AND BY DAYTIME AS WELL. THEIR FAMILIES DURING THE DAY, MAYBE FAMILIES DURING THE NIGHT. BUT WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING THE HOURS OF OPERATION, WHAT EXACTLY IS GOING TO TAKE PLACE HERE? WE ARE PUTTING TOGETHER SOME ENVIRONMENTS THAT ARE CONCERNING TO ME. OBVIOUSLY, ADULTS DOWN DOING ADULT THINGS THAT THEY ARE DOING DOWNTOWN, AND NOW INTERSECTING WITH PERHAPS THIS COMING ALONG WITH FAMILIES, I'VE GOT CONCERNS. AND UNTIL I CAN GET THAT APPLICANT HERE TO UNDERSTAND, COMMISSIONERS, I'M GOING TO NEED SOME HELP WITH THIS, AND I'M NOT LEANING TOWARDS MOVING ANYTHING FORWARD TONIGHT UNTIL I CAN HEAR FROM SOMEBODY. I THINK IT'S TOO MUCH RISK FOR US TO TAKE TO ASSUME THAT WE UNDERSTAND WHAT THEIR PLAN IS FOR THIS.

>> YEAH. BECAUSE IF WE APPROVE THIS CONDITIONALLY BASED ON THIS, ARE STILL A LOT OF QUESTIONS. THEY MIGHT BE ALL

ANSWERED SATISFACTORILY. >> JUST COME AND TALK TO US.

BUT NOT ONLY THAT, IT'S THE TESTIMONY. THEY'VE GIVEN A SWORN TESTIMONY THAT THIS IS THEIR PLAN. AND THAT MEANS A LOT MORE BECAUSE IT IS A QUASIJUDICIAL HEARING. EDIT HIS SWORN TESTIMONY. AND TO ME, THAT MEANS SOMETHING, AND WE HOLD THAT TO THE CITIZENS TO AT LEAST HAVE THEM COME HERE TO EVEN HEAR FROM THE CONCERNED CITIZENS THAT WERE SPOKEN OUT AGAINST -- NOT SPOKEN OUT AGAINST, BUT THEY JUST DON'T

KNOW LIKE WE DO. >> COMMISSIONER, ARE YOU

LOOKING TO POSTPONE? >> YEAH, I AM. THAT WOULD BE MY RECOMMENDATION. AND SO I WOULD MOVE THAT WE CONTINUE -- 30 DAYS. WE'VE GOT TO HAVE SOMEBODY IN 30 DAYS. SO MS. COX WILL MEET ADVERTISEMENT IF WE BRING THIS BACK?

>> WE CAN BRAK BRING IT BACK EITHER APRIL 15TH OR MAY 6TH

LIKE WE DID THE OTHER ONE. >> I MOVE, COMMISSIONERS, THAT WE CONTINUE THIS QUASIJUDICIAL HEARING TO A TIME OF APRIL 15TH TO HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT AND TO HEAR FROM THE REST OF THIS

[04:20:01]

PRESENTATION ON THIS QUASIJUDICIAL HEARING OF 111

ORANGE LLC. >> SECOND.

>> ANY MORE DISCUSSION? >> COMMISSIONER BRODRICK.

COMMISSIONER GAINES. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON. MISSION

[a. Submittal of applications to serve on the Keep Fort Pierce Beautiful Board to fill an at-large vacancy.]

OR JEH JOHNSON. OR HUDSON. OKAY. NEXT WE HAVE UNDER CITY COMMISSION, APPLICATIONS TO SERVE ON THE FORT PIERCE

[b. Resolution 24-R10 appointing Dr. Patrece Frisbee to the Historic Preservation Board as Commissioner Broderick's appointee.]

BEAUTIFUL BOARD. TO FILL IN THE AT-LARGE VACANCY. THIS WILL COME BACK YOU AT THE NEXT MEETING AND YOU WILL BE REQUESTED TO VOTE. THEN WE HAVE RESOLUTION 24R 10, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF FORT PIERCE FLORIDA CERTIFYING MEMBERS TO THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THIS ITEM APPOINTS DR.

PATRICE FRISBY AS COMMISSIONER BRODRICK'S APPOINTEE.

>> WOULD YOU LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION? EMOTION AND SECOND.

CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE. COMMISSIONER BRODRICK.

[c. Resolution 24-R16 appointing Gloria Baxevanis to the Planning Board as Commissioner J. Johnson's appointee.]

COMMISSIONER GAINES. COMMISSIONER C JOHNSON.

COMMISSIONER J JOHNSON. MAYOR HUDSON. WE HAVE RESOLUTION 24-R 16, CERTIFYING THE APPOINTMENT OF A MEMBER TO THE CITY PLANNING BOARD AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THIS RESOLUTION WILL APPOINT GLORIA BAXEVANIS TO THE PLANNING BOARD AS COMMISSIONER J JOHNSON'S APPOINTEE.

>> MOTION IS SECONDED. >> COMMISSIONER BRODRICK.

[14. 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.]

COMMISSIONER GAINES. COMMISSIONER C JOHNSON. THE MISSION OR J JOHNSON. MAYOR HUDSON. NEXT, WE HAVE COMMENTS

FROM THE PUBLIC. >> IF ANY MEMBER OF THE AUDIENCE WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THIS COMMISSION ON ANY SUBJECT,

PLEASE COME FORWARD. >> MICHELLE, CONFIDENTIAL. I HAVE TO SAY, I AM SO DISTURBED BY THIS EVENINGS SITUATION AND LISTENING TO THESE QUASIJUDICIAL'S. YOU GUYS ARE THROWING THE COUNTY UNDER THE BUS, AND I JUST GOT A PROBLEM WITH THAT. THE COUNTY IS VERY EASY TO WORK WITH, AND I WORKED WITH THEM WITH NO ISSUE WHATSOEVER. SO WHAT EVER YOU GUYS ARE DOING, YOU NEED TO LOOK AT YOURSELVES AND STOP PUTTING COUNTY UNDER THE BUS. BUT I WANT TO DISCUSS SOME THINGS THAT ARE GOING ON. THE FIRST THING IS, YOU HAVE A CITY ATTORNEY WHO HAS AN ACTIVE SEXUAL HARASSMENT CASE THAT NOBODY IS TALKING ABOUT. YOU ALSO HAVE HER, QUOTE, BEING PROMOTED, EVEN THOUGH SHE BULLIED ANOTHER PERSON, AND ACCORDING TO, YOU KNOW, ACCORDING TO THE DOCUMENTS I'VE SEEN, SHE IS DEALING WITH AN ACTIVE SEXUAL HARASSMENT CASE.

IN ADDITION, YOU CURTIS JOHNSON, WHO I HAVE DOCUMENTS THAT SAY THAT HE SHOT ALFRED PERRY. HOW DOES THIS HAPPEN? HOW DO WE HAVE SOMEONE APPEAR WHO COMMITTED SOMETHING LIKE THIS? WE HAVE A MAGISTRATE WHO IS INTERTWINED WITH CURTIS JOHNSON PREVIOUS TO HIM BEING ON THE BENCH. YOU KNOW, WHERE FRAN ROSS IS REPRESENTING ALFRED PERRY, YOU KNOW, AND THEN THERE'S A FLORIDA BAR REPRIMAND, AND YET YOU GUYS HAVE ALL OF THESE PEOPLE -- YOU HAVE NEPOTISM AT ITS FINEST.

WITH PEOPLE BEING HERE THAT ARE INTERRELATED. THERE'S SO MANY OF THEM, IT'S HARD TO GET IN FRONT OF THIS. YOU HAVE A MAYOR THAT HAS COMMITTED MALFEASANCE OF OFFICE. YOU KNOW, I MEAN -- AND PLEASE, SOMEBODY EXPLAIN TO ME HOW WE HAVE A HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT PERSON NAMED JARED SCOTT SORENSEN WHO HAS ACTIVELY BEEN ARRESTED FOR DOMESTIC VIOLENC. WHO IS DOING THE BACKGROUND CHECKS ON THE EMPLOYEES HERE? ARE THESE WOMEN AND MEN SAFE WITH THIS HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR? HAVE YOU GUYS EVEN READ HIS RAP SHEET? WHY IS THIS EVEN HAPPENING? THE ONES THAT DON'T WANT TO HEAR, LIKE JEREMIAH JOHNSON OVER HERE, YOU KNOW -- YOU ARE COMMITTING YOU. YOU ARE THE

HYPOCRITE. >> A DUE ADDRESS THE WHOLE

COMMISSION. >> JEREMIAH JOHNSON DECIDED THAT HE DID NOT THINK HE HAD TO PULL A PERMIT ON HIS PROPERTY.

SHALL WE TALK ABOUT THAT? YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT SIDEWALKS AND ALL THIS OTHER STUFF, BUT YOU HAVE NO BUSINESS TALKING. NONE.

YOURSELVES. YOU GOT A BUNCH OF LAWBREAKERS UP HERE. I MEAN, DO WE NEED TO GET INTO MEDIA ARTS GROUP?

[04:25:05]

>> ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION, PLEASE COME FORWARD. ANYONE ELSE? YES, DO THAT. ANYTIME YOU NEED

TO DO THAT, YOU DO THAT. >> ONE, SITTING DOWN. TWO, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'VE EVER SAT IN THE BACK THERE, BUT THESE