--------- Okay, welcome to the Bradenton Community Redevelopment Agency board meeting. It is Wednesday, 2 p.m. June 10th. Um, calling the meeting to order and let's stand and do the pledge of allegiance. >> I pledge allegiance to the flag of
United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Okay, we will move on to the next part
of the agenda which is citizen comments. Citizen comment will be accepted during the citizen comment portion of the meeting on any non-aggenda item, agenda item, future agenda item, or topic of relevance to the community redevelopment
agency of the city of Bradenton. Comments will be accepted on the public hearings at the appropriate time. I see that we have one comment uh one citizen comment uh from Cecilia Hag. And I see
that Brian is also here. So, uh, Brian Hey. So, welcome, Cecilia. >> Thank you. >> Welcome. Hi. Happy afternoon. I don't I don't know about you guys. I had lunch, but uh I'm ready. I'm ready for the afternoon coffee. Um, it is a pleasure to be here to share with you guys. We
are not here today seeking any type of um anything yet. Uh, we are really here to just introduce you to a project that you may have heard a little bit about, but we have been working on for some time. Um we're really excited about this project and we really just want to give you a preview of what we think is
coming. Um we hope uh that you guys can get excited about as well. Um this is Gather 242 and um it looks like it may need to be zoomed out. Um but I'm here to really just introduce you to it. Gather 242 um will be on 13th Street.
Thank you. Um, it is going to be a community gathering space, specifically a food hall featuring seven vendors. Uh, two private dining areas as well as event space to be rented. Um, really the heart of Gather 242 is to bring the
community together around some new dining options, all private chefs, no franchises. Um really just looking for a way to establish a new place for the community to gather, break bread, hang out in downtown Bradon. That's what we're trying to do. Um and so the
building itself is really cool. You guys are probably familiar with this building. You may take a look at that accordion entrance and say, "Hey, I've seen that before." Um this is a building that's been in the city for about since 1922. Um, we believe it was right next to what used to be the movie theater
downtown, but it was um the home of Bradenton Office equipment. We think it may have been a part of a bank at some point. There's a massive safe in there that we cannot physically move, but we'll work into the decor because it's been there a lot longer than most of us. Um, but we're very excited. It's a
project that we hope um brings about 45 to 50 jobs to the city uh between the individual chef vendors and just support staff and operations as well as obviously enhance tax revenue and um just overall goodwill on
>> Miss H. I just wanted to stop you because I was remiss in saying so just for a second and I stopped the timer but uh I did want to mention that just to make sure that we were on the same page. Uh three minutes. So, you still have two minutes and 15 seconds left, but um
sorry to interrupt you. I did not make that clear at the outset, and I did not want to, uh mess up your time. >> Well, that's all right. And I really was just trying to give you guys a preview of what's coming. Um, now that we have the the projector, you can see a little bit more. This is the exterior of the
building. We're keeping a lot of what the building looks like, what people recognize from the building. We're making the awning kind of a fun photo spot. You'll see that on the inside, but not today because that's a sneak peek picture um that'll come in the future. But just to give you a feel for what
we're trying to do, very Bradenton, very coastal, very chic though, we really do want to set a stage for what's coming to downtown Bradenton as we continue revitalization efforts just throughout the community. Um we live here. We're we none of us are from here, but we believe
we were born to live here. So, we get really excited about being able to bring some of these like new things into the area, but honor the character of who we are. So, this is the upstairs. I like to show this because it's a little bit of a different vibe. The picture looks a little dark, but something really cool
about this building, there is Dade City pine on the floors in this building and they are intact. We have a plan to revitalize them, refresh them, as well as the wood beams that you see are all original. Um, and also some really, really cool plaster bricks inside as
well. So, really neat place to just kind of see, hey, this is what we used to look like and now we can still do that, um, but do it in a different way, bringing people together. And then we're adding this because who doesn't love to be out here most of the year. This is a rooftop garden that will be on the
outside, um, with plenty of area for kids and families to hang out. Um, and then just a picture of the back of the building. We think this is important because this is in an area that needs a lot of attention and support from a lighting perspective, safety perspective, and one of the things we
were really intentional to do is incorporate that into our design. Uh we believe it will bring lots of people down there, but we want them to be safe. So, >> did I go over Kemp? >> No. >> Uh you know what? 20 seconds uh short of it. So, thank you very much, Miss Hey.
Uh really appreciate. I also see that Jeff is here as well. Uh so welcome to all of you. Um anyone have any >> ask a quick question? Yes. >> Weren't you looking at a different building that will ma'am? >> We've been at this project a time. Um we
spent quite a bit of time uh and some dollars on the Dy Harrison building. The the beautiful building, but we got relocated. >> I like this. >> Thank you. We like it, too. We're excited. 13th seems to be the revival street. So >> yeah, it's a beautiful block. I look
forward to this this edition as well. Um, you know, a lot of lot of potential. >> So, thank you. >> Any comments? Nothing else. >> Have a great day, everybody. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Okay, moving on to the consent agenda.
Uh, everyone had a chance to review it. Any discussion? Motion. >> I'll make a motion to approve consent agenda. >> Okay. >> Second.
>> We have a motion by Vice Mayor Coker and a second by Miss Coachman. Um all in favor say I. >> I. >> Uh the uh motion passes unanimously.
Uh so we will uh move on uh to the Tamiami Trail CRA. Mr. Chairman, this is a followup to this morning's discussion uh regarding the um uh sales agreement
and the um impact fees and that discussion. So, it's on our agenda. Uh we were following behind city council. Uh, city council has um voted to
um not on the on let me get this right on the MET 2B um with this inside the CRA to not offer any um impact fee waiverss and on the
MET three which is in the CRA and and that's the um shuffleboard report to uh uh offer a 30% uh waiver and on the on both projects the CRA has offered to uh
pay 70% of the impact fees the city impact fees for um for both projects to move them forward. >> Okay, thank you for that. Uh any discussion clarify real quick.
>> Yeah. >> So, it's 70% per project even though one is not located. >> Yeah. And and again, let me rephrase that. We didn't offer the board has to make that decision. We just recommended to the city that the CRA could pay the
impact fee 70%. And the reason it's 70% is because that is the measure of uh workforce housing in both projects. And uh obviously we can put a paper together explaining multiple reasons why we can
do this. Um mainly because of the affordable housing clause in our statute and on our plans. Uh the removal of blight because both properties are blighted uh statutoily. And um it's um uh and we can also
provide the the costbenefit analysis showing um how we can pay for this. >> I guess I'm >> I have a question too. >> Oh, go ahead. >> Well, I'm just I'm confused. So, one of them is not located in the >> Both of them are located in the CRA. >> Yeah. Shuffles in there, too. >> Okay.
>> But, um >> so, Dr. Burton, just to be clear, Met 2 is 70% CRA. MET 2B. >> MET 2B. >> Yes. >> Um and >> MET 3 is also 70%.
>> And then MET 3 is 70% CRA. City's taking care of the other 30%. >> Yes. >> So the city on MET 2B is >> wave. They're not waving. They're not waving impact fees on 2B. >> 2B. Understood. >> The developers picking up the 30% on
that. >> Got it. >> Question. >> Yes. M. Okay, >> so I'm seeing one one on the agenda. Are we going to do need to have two? >> So Scott can speak to that. I guess what
would happen because we don't have the incentive agreement in place for the Matt 3 at this point. So it will be part of that incentive agreement and then >> Right. So >> go ahead.
>> So I think there will be two items here. Obviously the the first one for MET 2B is already on the agenda. My recommendation in terms of the motion for that item would be because we're going to have to we're going to have to
do some um amendment to this lura document. So assuming the board wants to move forward today, I think you could approve it subject to removing the city from the document
and providing that 70% of the impact fees would be paid by the as an incentive by the CRA. >> So that'll be a separate motion or it can all be in one or >> that would be one motion. Yes.
So, we're moving to approve this amendment as revised to remove the city and provide for the CRA to pay 70 up to 70% of the impact fees. >> Correct. >> Is that your motion?
>> I guess that's my motion. >> Well, I think I think we can't bring the other one. We'll do one at a time because the other one at >> Sorry, I'm trying to rush. >> Regarding the the first one, we have a motion by Miss Gonzalez Moore and a second by Vice Mayor Coker.
Um, any other discussion around it? Okay. I know and I know we discussed this at length this morning. So, >> yeah. >> Um, all in favor say I. >> I. >> I. Uh that motion passes unanimously.
Um and then uh second motion regarding I guess now we're discussing met three. >> Met three. Is this appropriate for under new business or what are we doing? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. I think it would be fine to add under new business. >> Okay.
>> So we're making a motion. You've already taken the city off of the other one. This one we're just >> This one the city was not a part of. >> Right. >> So we're just making a motion to >> this one. The city the city is a part of. Yes.
>> Correct. >> City CRA 70% city 30%. >> Right. So the city is a party to this one. I think the motion would just be to authorize
a CRA incentive up to 70% of the impact fees. >> So move second. >> Okay, we have a motion by Miss Coachman and a second by Miss Barnaby.
And if I could just we're going to we're going to be working with the developer on an agreement. So this will all be it will all be coming back in an agreement form, but at least this will have the authorization so we'll know to go ahead and incorporate it. >> Okay. >> Okay.
>> Any other discussion? >> You mean before journey? >> Uh no, just before we >> Yeah, before we vote. Just I don't know. I always move so quickly. I'm like even with this. >> Um, okay. So, we have a motion and a
second on the table. All in favor say I. >> I. >> I. >> Uh, that motion passes unanimously. Uh, Mr. Burton. >> Yes, sir. Uh just uh briefly to continue
this thought now that they have passed. Uh we would like just to recommend that a we get a workshop together with the city to discuss creating a policy for impact fees and any other potential
city incentives that may be offered that may be potentially asked for by a developer. so that we can have a policy in place because as I stated this morning, I like to move things fast and policies really do help remove a lot of
the clutter. Um, and it helps the attorney too when he has to sit and draft it just makes things so much easier. Um, so we will get with the city and find out when they would like to put a workshop together to and we'd probably want to include the EDC on that. that's
the city's economic arm. So, uh, they're going to want to sit in on that so they understand that, too, because this is kind of new territory for me. Um, usually the CRA just handles this kind of stuff and inside a CRA, but I've
never had a city want to do incentives outside of CRA, but you know, there's always room for something new. Uh, so we'll do that. And then also just to let you know that um Love Park is still in um purchasing and is working its way
through there. And I will say this uh you know purchasing does a good job. They really do move, you know, very efficiently. And um everything that you know versus other places I've worked, it's been a pleasure to work with them.
So they're getting it through. It's just going through the process. So, um, uh, that's all I've got. Chris, you got anything? >> Todd, you got it? Todd will be bringing some probably some amendments to the to
the grants. We talked about it at the last meeting. Uh, as you've heard from just about anybody that's in the business, the cost of construction and anything is going up. And um so we're going to adjust our incentives to meet
that. Um and uh and then at some point uh in the near future, Chris is going to give you a presentation on why we have to change our incentives because we're running closer to the wall. Um and we
have to we have to do that. So um that's what happens when your CRA get old. So um that's KK. You have anything? >> No. We're all good. We're all good. >> All good. Mr. Campbell up. >> Miss Barnaby.
>> Thank you. Lights and trees. Mr. Burton. >> Lights and trees. >> Lights and trees. Todd, you want to give her an update on lights and trees? >> I'm ready to move forward, sir. >> We are ready to We are ready to move forward. We're partnering with uh Parks
and Recre Parks and Rec Public Works and uh for the removal of the old lights, trimming of the trees, and having the private company come in and put in the nuke trees, the new lights, and also having an annual fee attached to it for
them to maintain them and fix them when necessary. So, we are moving forward with that. Yes, >> Christmas is coming, too. When do you see this happening? >> We would like to say that uh we can get there before Christmas, but we all know
that during this time of year uh things can happen that can slow you down and uh but we will do our best to get them there before Christmas. >> Thank you. >> Yes, ma'am. >> I just have a quick question. >> Yeah. So when we are doing the workshop
um the ED you I mean I think it's appropriate to invite the EDC when you say that we're doing we just adopted the co do over cool thing the visioning plan so is are we does the fourth CRA is that going to overlap the
>> that's a very good question um you know the boy what a time to be talking about this um Uh, I will tell you this. Um, we can move for we have to move forward. The mayor said it today. You can't stop
because of fear. Fear it'll it'll it'll kill it'll eat you up inside. Anxiety. So, we have to assume that everything is the way it is to today. We're in an environment a normal environment as we know it. Um, we have a number of
projects that would love to see a fourth CRA. We will continue to move forward with that. The city has to be the author of a new CRA. The CRA cannot create a CRA. So that's number one. We will get with the
city administration about funding that because it will require creating four new maps. Um just so you know. and and and you know I've been sending out emails just about every day on this particular
topic. This is pre-novevember we are moving forward as if things are normal. November occurs that is a day that that will could change everything after that
a number of things happen to happen but just as far as the CRA is concerned we've done estimates on what it will cost the CRA in revenue for each CRA if you've noticed in the you know downtown
has the fewest number of homesteads it suffers the least the area that needs the most redevelopment, central, has the most homesteads and it gets hit the hardest. >> So,
uh, and also the revenue hit does not come until October of next year. We can have a budget this year just like we normally would have, but January 1st is another key day. If
the the constitutional amendment passes in November, on January 1st of 2027, the new restrictions on spending go into place. And I will tell you that uh things like
things like libraries which is not you know under the city's opices they're not covered. Um neither are you know I there's a question about animal control and and and shelter you know
that's a question that has to be there's a lot of questions and there are very few answers. Economic development is not under the opaces of what's been put in place and again this is a constitutional amendment which is very hard to change
once it's not like a statute. Uh this is something that is um if it gets put in place it will be hard to amend and adjust just because you have to go through the very same process it took to get there. So,
you know, I have been in I have had discussions with Scott. I've had discussions with other attorneys around the state, uh, Florida League, the Florida Redevelopment Association, and we're all at a loss as to what
this means, how it plays out, how the money works out. Um, you know, we would like to recommend that the city do the same thing that that we're doing. We've we've we've got a a consultant that's going to come in and do a an ARGIS
analysis. I mean, what I gave you is is fair, but he will give you more indepth on on what the numbers would look like. It's very important for us to know what the city looks like with this also. So
um that being said, we continue today and tomorrow as if nothing has occurred because nothing has occurred. So um uh and then at the same time uh for the fourth CRA we can move forward. We can
move to the point of doing uh the slum and blight analysis. Uh we can do an ordinance or resolution depending on the attorney's pleasure. um setting it up and but we also need to
be cognizant that even if we did this that the limits of our spending could be severely restricted by this constitutional amendment affordable housing projects that the CRA even though the CRA statute that's a hallmark
no community policing is a yes because it's in both uh the constit constitutional amendment and our statute. So, and our plan. >> So, >> interesting. >> You know, very interesting. Uh and you
know, we'll need to have a little discussion too about between now and November. If there are projects that we want to really move forward, we really need to consider moving that don't that we can't do after November or after January, we need to
discuss that. It's it's it's an interesting time. So I am this is the first time this has ever happened to me. So you know this isn't new or this is new. >> Yeah. And it's
change in in the biggest form because the people that are making the change can't give us answers. Okay. I was really I mean I'm thinking about when we're in the workshop how we're addressing
city incentives perhaps, but you know to some extent most of that property potentially might be in a CRA still. So that feel like that's still in play. >> As I mentioned this morning, anything that we do into the into the future may be we may filter it by do we incentivize
anything that has a homestead exemption on it. >> Right. since the that home may not be paying anything into the system. >> That's a good point. >> Okay, that's one. That's one. Um, we need to be looking at uh a CRA can
function under this new uh environment, but it will be doing it won't be doing housing. Parks and recreation are off the table because it's not in that list of items. Um but policing is but fire
departments the city can do but the CRA can't. >> And economic development you said is not. >> Yeah. >> Does it define economic development? >> Uh it uh they there are like seven items that are in the uh in the amendment and
they're very general. And now for instance, you know, we may be able to do infrastructure for new housing but not the housing itself. So things like that, you know, we, you know, I think about incentives and we
may be able to, you know, we need to talk to developers about this to figure out how it works, but we may be able to pay for fire suppression within the building because that's fire safety. uh we may be able to pay impact fees to
the city because that's uh you know all of those things except for well I don't know if you're gonna have a a parks impact fee uh but those are all things that that you know that are we have to sit down and and the main thing is to sit with Scott and and folks like Scott
and go you know and they're going to you know they're going to be very cautious and careful about it because it is uh an interesting thing and uh so we're going to and then of course there'll probably be some court
cases somewhere in the future that test some of these things. Right Scott? >> Yeah. So um we are doing you know we're right I can tell you this that I talked with the FRA president last night. They're forming a committee. We're on the
committee and to figure out what this means to CRAAS across the state of Florida. So, um, it's a brave new world. Understood. Thank you. Any, uh, other
discussion, comments, Mr. Campbell, I do have something for you. You mentioned to me uh, two new board members and Tammy Amy Advisory Committee. Is that >> we were on concern? >> Yes, sir. We have uh two new brand new
as of 10 minutes ago >> and I believe one of them is here. >> Mr. Brian Moore is here in the audience. Um >> would love for you to come up and just talk about yourself. He he is uh was a a business owner, built a business, sold it, uh and has served on numerous
boards. Uh and we were able to recruit him with the help of Miss Natress. And uh so Brian, I'll let you just give a few minutes if you don't mind. planned uh speak uh comments or anything, but just thank you for the opportunity to speak and uh glad to jump in. I'll say
that like many people uh present company. I didn't grow up here. I was a Minnesota kid, came for a quick vacation, fell in love with Anory Island, and that's when I decided I would move to Florida. Uh I've spent the last 20 years in Sarasota area, so I'm quite familiar with um how that
community has grown um driving through the arts and watching downtown expand. and I've fallen in love with a young lady who bought a house in the Village of the Arts. So, I found myself back in Bradenton and I see a similar opportunity. Um, there's so much potential and we're seeing St. Pete and
Sarasota grow like crazy and we think that there's a lot of young people that should be attracted to Bradenon because it's a little bit more affordable and has quite a bit to offer. So, um, just excited to be part of that and contribute a little bit of my youthful energy if there if I still have some. I
think so. So, uh, I welcome that. >> Yeah. >> And uh just appreciate the opportunity. >> Oh, that's great. And welcome and and thank you. >> Appreciate it. >> We also had uh Wayne Chucknappy who was unable to attend because he had to work
today, but I think when you when you see him, you will notice him. He's a figure around town and in in the village of the arts. Um also was a uh currently lives with the Historia on 9inth. Um and so I think most of you might have met him there. he presented at that grand
opening as well. So, he's uh joining our board as well. >> Excellent. >> Okay. No further comments or discussions. Uh it is uh 2:30 and we are
adjourned. Part: 2
one. Welcome to the Braden City Council meeting, Wednesday, June 10th, 2026 at 8:30 a.m. At this time, we will do as we always do, our invocation and our pledge. Um, Pastor Don had a another
doctor's appointment, so he's gonna We're asking Vice Mayor Coker to do our prayer today. So, if we can all stand. Heavenly Father, as we gather today, we ask for wisdom, patience, and humility. In a season marked by strong opinions
and spirited debate, help us to listen with respect, speak with kindness, and seek truth above division. Guide our decisions for the good of those we serve. Remind us that even when we disagree, we are neighbors and members
of one community. Grant us clarity of mind, integrity of purpose, and a commitment to work together for the common good. We ask for your blessing on this meeting and all those affected by the choices we make. We ask all this in the name of the father and the son and
the holy spirit. Amen. >> Amen. >> Please join us as all veterans in the audience. We say our pledge. >> I pledge algiance to the flag >> of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One
nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you very vice mayor Coker and everyone would this will call the meeting to order. Madame clerk, >> the first item on the agenda this morning is a proclamation for National
Garden Week. Mr. Mayor, I have the honor of reading the proclamation as the Manatee River Garden Club is in W 2 in the city. >> Thank you, Councilwoman Barnaby. By the virtue of the authority vested in me as mayor of the city of Bradenton, I
do hereby issue this proclamation honoring National Garden Week, June 7th through the 13th of 2026. Whereas gardeners have a passion for nurturing the beauty and resources of the earth through the planting of seeds, the care of all plants, and the riches
of their efforts. And whereas gardeners seek to add beauty, splendor, fragrance, and nutrition to our lives through the growing of herbs, vegetables, foliage, and flowers. And whereas gardeners work to preserve our country's traditional
spirit of independence and initiative through innovation and hard work. Whereas gardeners advocate the importance of all creatures, large and small, that share our world and their roles in a balanced and productive ecology. And whereas gardening furnishes
a challenging and productive activity for our citizens, for those just learning as well as those having years of experience. And whereas gardening promotes a healthy lifestyle that lasts a lifetime, helps reduce stress from other areas of our life, teaches that
rewards can come from diligent efforts. And whereas gardening enables members of garden clubs across the nation and the world to make a world of difference in the communities where they reside and work. Now therefore, be it resolved that I, Gene Brown, as the mayor of the city
of Bradenon, Florida, do hereby proclaim June 7th through the 13, 2026, as National Garden Week in Bradenton, and acknowledge the importance of all gardening and the numerous contributions of gardeners and national garden clubs.
And it's signed by our mayor. >> Thank you. And who are we going to have accepting this today? Everyone wants to come up. Miss Barnaby will go down. Then we'll get a picture once we have some talking points. You want to stay down there with the
Miss Barnaby? I think the uh I waited long enough to get almost there, but I think that'll be a good picture with you. >> Get her steps in. We'll >> stand up behind and get the picture. Thank you. >> As the president of the Manatee River
Garden Club, I would like to thank the city of Bradenon for your support over the years. We are approaching our centennial in just a few years and we are very grateful as well for Maryanne's help with so many things which you'll
hear about later in today's meeting. >> Thank you. Appreciate it. Thanks for coming. >> Madame clerk, >> our next proclamation is World Elder Abuse Awareness Day. Whereas city of Bradenton seniors are valued
contributing members to our society and it is our collective responsibility to ensure they can age with dignity and peace of mind. And whereas according to the FBI, elderly victims in the United States lost over 7.7 billion dollars to
scams in 2025. And as a result, the Bradenon Police Department is proudly taking an active role in education and investigative resources to stem this epidemic. And whereas the city of Bradon recognizes
the importance of protecting our most vulnerable citizens, prioritizing the prevention of elder abuse, and raising awareness to create a better understanding of abuse and neglect of older adults and their rights. And whereas eliminating abuse of older
persons is a community responsibility. And the city of Bradenton urges all residents to join us in this global movement to promote a safer community for our elder citizens so they can live their golden years with the security and dignity they deserve. And whereas it is
imperative to enhance efforts to permit, excuse me, to prevent elder abuse, including financial exploitation, neglect, and other forms of mistreatment by providing education, resources, and support to older adults and their caregivers.
Now therefore, be it resolved that I, Gene Brown, as mayor of the city of Bradenon, Florida, do hereby proclaim June 15, 2026, as World Elder Abuse Awareness Day, and encourage all citizens to recognize and celebrate
older adults and their ongoing contributions to the success and vitality of our city. Signed, Jean Brown, Mayor. >> Thank you, Chief. >> Hey, good morning. Thank you, Mayor Council. Uh obviously about three years ago um recognizing the large number of
scams and elder abuse that was going on in our region uh Chief Beavenon at the time formed a task force basically to deal with this. Uh what we didn't know at the time is how egregious this crime really happens in our community. And every one of us sitting at this dis and
in this room know somebody or has somebody close to them that's been affected by elder abuse or fraud. Um officer McNeel and uh Detective Kruula, he's on vacation. uh they do an amazing job of going out into this community um
through awareness and education to to meet with these folks and and tell them that when you get that call saying this is Johnny grandma and I'm in jail and you have to wire $1 million in gold bars now. Uh they do a good job of saying that's that's not at all the truth.
Unfortunately, it still happens and they do an incredible job of the backend work, the long research, the efforts of our intel analysts back there uh to trace these folks down and hold them accountable. And we've sent detectives all over this country to make arrests
and do search warrants um to put these hold these people accountable. This is our most vulnerable citizens that and our children. And so kudos to them. Listen, I I might be the assistant chief or the acting chief of police, but this this agency doesn't function without people like what stands around me right
here. So, they're the true >> and we just had one that um we went and got and he just got convicted, I believe. >> Yep. That was a gold bar scam, >> right? Over millions billions of dollars. >> Thank you. >> So, thank you again for having us. Diana, did you want to say anything? You
love public speaking. >> I don't. No, I really want to thank my command staff for allowing us to continue this program. It means a lot to the community here in the city of Bradenton. We get thank yous all the time pouring out their hearts because they could have been victims and we
prevented them from that action happening. So, I just want to say thank you for allowing us to continue to have this program. >> No. And I think it's it's something that we saw even the past week and a half where they're now calling funeral homes >> again and getting back to get to and and
I made a statement on TV and I'll stand by it. some words you don't want to use, but they are scum of the earth when they call somebody at their most vulnerable time and and try to do that. So, thank you to the Braden Police Department for getting that out on the social media
because obviously social media is where they're actually getting it from and trying to use it. But when you're trying to go after, you know, especially our older population, right, Tony? >> Older population. So, yeah. So, yeah. So, I figured you, you know, that's why
they brought you today. No. Hey, and and you got, we know, we're not making light of that, but you got to get people, you want people to listen because they do feel down at a time or they're elderly and their kids aren't around or and their kids could be 70 because they're
90 and they take advantage of that. And that's the sad part about what this scum of the earth does. So, let's really keep that. And if people hear this, watch this meeting and say, "Hey, nobody's ever going to call you and make you make a rushed payment and hang up and call
whoever you're dealing with or call the police or call your family and have them help." >> I'm not going to call you and tell you you have a >> right. Well, they use names. And the biggest thing I've got lately is this is detect or this is uh Sergeant so- and so from the Manatee County Sheriff's Office
and you've got um you miss jury duty >> and but if you pay $400, you know, so my wife's like, "Why do you keep talking to them?" I said, "Because the longer I talk to them, the less chance they're going to call somebody else and or it takes longer." But and uh plus it's fun
to mess with them knowing it's >> traverse this city and some of the county. We we'll be honest. Uh north, south, east, and west is every bank, uh every every nursing home, every elder place, everywhere. And and just to get that message out there and and we have
resources available. You know, you guys have all seen the book. Uh we we give those out like they're candy because the more and more and more we can push this out to our community, the less opportunity they have to target this area. And that that's our ultimate goal >> to to eliminate this problem. >> Thank you for doing that.
>> Y thank you for doing that. And and continuing. And I think it's a resource that the city of Bradenton having its own ple police department the way we do is able to get that out in a smaller package of our community because that's what makes a difference. So, absolutely. >> Thank you very much.
>> Let's get a picture. I was gonna say mine are just mine are accessible. >> Scoot to the right a little bit. >> You stay that way. >> Do I need to go to the outside? >> Yeah. >> There you go. That's perfect.
>> Now we're Brian. Brian, >> Chief, why don't you go to the other side >> now? Can you see Maryanne? make it. >> Hang on. >> We're getting the box. Hold on. >> Thank you. >> Thank you.
>> Two guys that are like 63, but you know. >> Yeah. >> Madame clerk. >> Item 4 A is the Bradon area EDC update. Welcome. >> Good morning, Mayor. >> Good morning, >> council.
>> Elizabeth Corores with the Braden Area EDC. I'm glad to come before you guys again um asking for a formal adoption of the do coal plan. Um we have heard what you all had to say and have spent the last several months making those
necessary changes to make this plan something that the city can adopt and be proud of. Um, just want to remind everyone to keep in mind that the Dover Coal Plan, while originally called an economic development action plan, is truly a visioning plan for the city and
a tool in the tool belt for the EDC to put together a fullyfledged economic development strategy that we can move help move the city forward. Um, >> and Elizabeth, who do we have here with you today? I was going to introduce our
uh brand new president and CEO, Shyra Okconor. Day eight on the job. Um >> we can answer any questions that you all have about the do coal plan. I know that you all received a copy um over a week ago and we have had individual
conversations about the document itself. So, we're uh Kurt and myself are happy to answer any questions that you have about those changes, about things that you want to see. Um, and then also Shyra has some updates to share with you about our strategy moving forward.
>> And and one of the things I'll say as we're going, the reason we did it here, presentations obviously, so we can get it taken care of. When the presentation's over, um, we're going to ask for a um motion to accept the do coal part. We're not saying we agree or
disagree with anything. We're just accepting it so that process can end. Then we'll have more meetings. We may have a workshop with the EDC to really start to drill down on things, but we just wanted to finish the formal process while meeting Shyra in day eight for all
of the part of that. We will recess for about 10 minutes after this presentation just to go out and say hi to her and shake her hand and get a few minutes with her individually if you want. But um that's kind of where we're at and why we did it this way. So, good morning. >> Good morning. Thank you. We're gonna
come up to the microphone as close. >> I know. And excuse me, my voice is a little horse, but um I've also just circulated an outline of um a you know, just some thoughts. We're going to be putting together a strategy that we'll deliver to you the first week of
September. And this is just an outline, some thoughts for you to peruse and to use as a starting point for our discussion as far as deliverables and actions to support the visioning plan. >> Good. Thank you. So, any questions right
out of the box anybody would have or I know again it's a lot but it's not really >> the part to go through the whole >> plan. >> I mean I have a few little questions but nothing >> nothing real substantive very little that doesn't need to be done.
>> Okay. All right. All right. And then again, they're open at any time to meet with you individually to get some ideas and areas and things of that nature. >> Text, phone call, email. >> Yeah. Signals, whatever. >> All right. So, um, that was kind of the
plan. We would need a motion just to >> is is there >> accept it >> to just accept the plan. So, it's kind of that adopt the plan. Again, it's not adopting everything gonna happen. It's just adopting that the process is over with do coal. Is that correct, Mr.
Ruticel? You look like you got a question or >> No, I think that's fine. Mayor, >> all right. So, chair will entertain a motion. >> So moved. >> All right. Word it. >> Yeah. >> Second.
>> All right. Any further discussion? Hearing none, we'll start the vote in ward one. >> Yes. >> Two, >> yes. >> Three, >> yes. >> Four, >> yes. >> Five, >> yes. >> Carries five to zero. So, thank you very
much. And we'll take a 10-minute recess. You guys want to go out and shake her hand and say hi. item on the agenda is >> Oh, no. Let me call it back from recess. Oh, yes. I'm just making sure you're ready. TV's ready. >> All right. We'll come out of recess. Madame clerk,
>> the next item on the agenda is citizen comments. >> All right. At this point in the meeting is where we have citizen comment. Citizen comment will be accepted during the citizen comment portion of the meeting on any non-aggenda items, agenda items, future agenda items, or topic of
relevance to the city. Comments will be accepted on the public hearing at the appropriate time. And as we always do, um you would have three minutes. You'll state your name, your city of residence, and uh this time I have no cards, and I see no one in the audience. If you would
come forward. All right. Appreciate it. None. Madame clerk. Item six is the consent agenda and staff is requesting approval of items A through N. >> Chair will entertain a motion. >> Mr. Mayor, I'll move for approval of the
consent agenda as presented with items A through N. >> And Mr. Perry, um, we're on consent agenda and I know you have met with everyone. I I have your honor, I have the the opportunity to meet with all
counsel and uh we actually spent probably a little bit more time than we typically do. Um and I think we went through it very thoroughly and get all the points and tried to address all the issues, provide information as necessary and um I think there was a from
council's feedback a sufficient briefing on it. >> Good. So we have a motion by Miss Barnaby. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Miss Coachman. Any other comment? Hearing none, we'll start the vote in W two. >> Yes. >> Three, >> yes. >> Four, >> yes. >> Five, >> yes. >> And one,
>> yes. >> Approved. Five to zero. Thank you, Madam Clerk. >> At this time, I'll administer the oath. Anyone wishing to speak during the following public hearing will please stand and raise their right hand. >> Yep. >> Do you swear or affirm that the factual
statements and representations which you are about to present to this board will be truthful and accurate? Thank you. Item >> Good morning, Miss Singer. >> Morning. >> Item 7A is resolution 2641
relating to a dock located at 121550th Street Court East. >> Uh good morning. Robin Singer, planning community development director. Um we're here today for a special use for a um dock that exceeds the 80 foot length
requirement uh in the code and also has some intrusions into the side setback requirement. Uh the applicant is Mark Parson's Duncan Seaw Wall um Doc and Boatlift um and um agent uh for Don uh
Barry Jackson Jr. owner. Uh the property is located at 121550th Street Court East. Um and the zoning on it is R1 or single family zoning district. So this is permission for a private dock to extend 426 feet in total length and 162
feet beyond the shoreline and encroaches into the required uh 10-ft side setbacks to the property. So to give you an idea of the location of the property, this is Brad River Lakes. Um so of course south of uh State Road 64 and it's really down in the absolute corner um of the
development. So, um, and it does retain some, um, water frontage through the configuration of this lot. So, the house is actually here facing on the culde-sac and it's probably the last property in a string of properties. And if you'll
notice um, almost all of the properties along this frontage um, along the waterway have docks that extend out. So, their dock they're looking to extend out through the mangrove area and down to the waterline.
And as mentioned, um this is in a low residential low density residential um land use designation and the R1 single family zoning designation. Um so the special use required um for a
new dock that extends 162 linear feet. So the cutoff is 80 ft. Beyond that you have to get city council approval through the special use process. Um be a total of 106 pilings and all deck boards will be pressuret treated wood. The dock
will be constructed through um 744 square ft of mangroves. um the applicant required in a DP permit and an ERP permit um and uh that approves construction and that full package of materials was included in your review
package uh with a number of maps um delineated and you can see in some of those maps it actually indicates that some of those properties that's going through the mangroves is considered upland. So it is not all water that it's transversing through um the mangrove
area. Uh this is a um copy of their survey uh giving you again the indication and it's sort of an easement area that runs this way and their property actually runs all the way out to the end here. Um again property configuration this is showing you their
property actually ends approximately there and this is the dock configuration through the mangroves and out to the waterway. and some further diagrams of the impacted area of mangroves
that was reviewed by DP and some site uh shots showing where the um where the dock is actually going to leave the the dry land um on the property and where it's going to come out and where the dock is going to be
located. So, there are a number of special use uh standards that they have to meet. They must be um erect that they're erected um beyond the mean high water line and public waterways and beyond the shorelines, ponds or lakes and inside
and this is what requires the special use. Um and uh they did in their uh package materials address all of these concerns. Um and we find that they're substantially consistent with all of the criteria and standards for the special
use. Uh there are some recommended stipulations which the planning commission agreed with and the voted unanimously to support and that those are that the dock shall be kept in good working order and condition and not to degrade from the uh value of nearby properties. Dock design including
amenities shall meet the requirements of the city of Bradenton ordinances. All other applicable state and federal permits are to be obtained before commencement of the development. Any conditions associated with the required FD permit will be met at time of construction as well as proper
maintenance of mangro growth and removal of invasive species required leading up to and after construction. Uh the proposed erosion, sediment and control practices that minimize the number of pollutants entering the Braden River will be uh taken during and after construction in compliance with the erosion and sedimentation control
standards enforced by the city's public works and utilities department. And with that, um, the applicant is here, applicant's representative is here to address any concerns or questions that city council may have. >> All right. Any questions of Miss Singer before we go to the applicant?
>> I have one question. I noticed in there it said generally meets the requirements. >> Yeah, we can change that to say meets. >> Okay. Yeah. I mean, it just uh Okay. Well,
why was it written? >> Um, well, I think in part it may be because of the location intruding into the side setbacks. >> Mhm. >> And so that was some of our concern. Were you talking it was it generally for
city council for city's requirements or >> whatever you just flashed away from it might have been the planning commission. >> Okay. >> Yeah. generally meet the >> Oh, yeah. So, it Well, it does meet. I apologize.
>> Okay. >> All right, Mr. Perry. >> I just got a couple questions. We talked about this. So, there doesn't seem to be this property in any direct contact with with the
waterfront other than the mangrove areas. Is that correct? >> Correct. >> And it's 426 feet in length. Yes. >> What if it goes 1600 feet in length? Would it if it was 1,600 feet or 2,000 feet? Yeah. >> At what point how how much can you
traverse a mangrove >> to access water? >> That is really a question for D. I mean, we don't >> if if D is willing to approve it. We don't really have any special standards in our zoning regulations regarding uh how much mangroves can be impacted. We
generally turn that over to the state for review. >> Do you know what the state uses for criteria? >> I'm not an expert in that. >> Does it strike you as strange that you can traverse mangroves that you don't own? >> I've seen other
>> I've seen them too. I don't know if I've seen 400 feet. I mean I I have seen some long ones. So >> yeah, they have had you know they do have standards that you have to meet in in terms of how you're impacting. In other words, you can cut them back and maintain them, but you have still have
to maintain them. So, you know, they're not able to clear cut this entire area. They're just clearing the area that the dock >> I think it's a 4 foot wide dock. >> Yeah. >> And obviously with a dock, you're going
to have to have footings and posts. >> Yeah. >> Yes. And it talks about in there the square footage of the dock and the the number of posts that are implied. We were surprised as well. I will tell you
that when we first saw this, but they went through the appropriate process. Um, Greg's here because he was part of a conversation with D just confirming that all their standards were being met and they were in agreement with this. So, um, yeah, they they did support it. They
and they do have the documentation in the package materials. It's funny because D won't allow us sometimes to move a tie pole four feet. >> Yeah. >> But they'll allow 416 ft in linear
length and 4 feet wide and all the substructure that has to go to support that through a mangrove. >> So, Vice Mayor Coker and then Councilman Moore. >> Okay. Uh yeah, I have two other questions. Uh, one, Miss Singer, my
understanding with repairarian rights, and I I mean, obviously this is an odd-shaped lot, is that you take your boundaries and then the lines just go out. >> Yeah. >> I I mean, how do you even figure the riparian rights on this? >> Right. And it's and it's a good question
because it's also uh according to their survey, it their property is not just that dry land portion. And some of this according to some of the documentation I saw in the D permit actually is considered upland.
Some of this peninsula that was required. So I mean you it could be argued that this is your repairarian lines extending from the end of the property. Um or you know I I don't know how else you would do that. Generally we
say the extension of the side property lines but in this case the side property lines would be all the way down here. So, it is an oddly configured one that I'm glad that it does come before city council because it's not one that administratively we'd be able to make that call.
>> And then my my other question might be for the attorney is microphone. >> You show up. >> Um uh how much discretion do we have on this?
Well, we have criteria that we use in evaluating the special use permit. Um, so, you know, I would encourage you to look at the criteria. At the same time, we do have to balance that with the riparian rights of the property owner,
which is why the state does permit these types of encroachments into the mangroves because they do because their property touches the mean high water line, they do have riparian rights, which includes the right to warf out to navigable waters.
So subject to reasonable criteria I would say is is something that the city can apply. Um so we should look at at the criteria that we have. >> That was helpful.
>> Yeah. I wish I had Yeah, it's not a great answer, but to be honest, I hate the fact that we do public hearings on these docks. We shouldn't be in this situation. We've talked about it um internally a lot. Um we really ought to
pull these out of the public hearing realm, but >> Okay. If I could just Sorry. Um on Can you go back to the picture? I mean, where exactly does it touch the mean high water line and can you explain to
me what the difference is with uplands? What what what does that mean? >> I'd like to have the uh applicants representative. >> Let me get that, but let's get Mrs. more first and then we'll go to the applicant because he can explain some of this maybe about you know >> it it's odd shaped
>> but that doesn't mean that it's not right or wrong it's you know I don't know I mean it's but I think that there's an opportunity you know if I had this I would be asking for the same thing you know because it touches it so Mrs. more. >> I was just going to point out that um
anecdotally I've um I have assisted other clients with the procurement of a permit and the determination of um upland and and repairarian rights related to that and I'm not an expert by any stretch of the imagination but it was um
a difficult and challenging process. So, I do feel like the the FT is really making people prove that they have the repairarian rights to get the permit. So, I'm a little comforted by the fact that they h actually have the permit issued. Um, and also something else
that's giving me comfort is that they are required to mitigate the impact on the um on the mangroves. But not only are they required to mitigate it, but the permit also says that just the plan itself is not evidence of successful mitigation. So they are it's a process
is what I'm understanding here not being an expert at all. And so they're going to have to ongoing, you know, remove the invasive species and and make sure that the mitigation is actually mitigating. That's my understanding.
>> All right. Well, let's get the applicant and then can probably ask answer some questions. Please state your name and >> Mark Parsons. Duncan Sewell. Thank you. So, do you have anything you want to say what you've heard so far and then we can >> Yeah, I I mean I think we all agree it's
a very unique property. Um the city attorney kind of outlined the repairarian rights of the the property owner, which is why the DP issued the permit. Um Mrs. Moore is correct in the process to get a D permit is an arduous
one. Um it's not always successful. Uh they're very thorough. They're obviously it's in the name of the the institution. They're very environmentally friendly. Part of this plan is the mitigation plan which she had had mentioned. Before
construction starts, they will make a site visit kind of survey invasive species and the percentages that make up that nearly third of an acre uh piece of mangroves. following construction within three months they'll come out do another
inspection and then I believe it's by monthly for the first year and then once a year for three years following that and it has to maintain the success rate that's outlined in the permit. So it's it's a very stringent mitigation
and success plan for the natural resources that will be affected. Um, mangroves typically if they're manicured properly, which it will be a certified mangrove specialist who will be doing the trimming. Um, only in the path of
the dock will they be trimmed. So, um, let me see if I can't back that up a little bit. That kind of gives you a good shot that the dock kind of comes through the middle of it. So either side of that mangrove island will be unimpacted. Um
the dock will be raised at 5 foot above a mean high water level. Decking will be half inch spacing. This is a D requirement that allows enough light to get underneath the structure to allow the mangroves that are trimmed to be to
to regrow. So part of this permit again is is maintenance on the owner's behalf, which if he doesn't maintain the mangrove trimming, it will envelop that dock. So it it is incumbent upon him and beneficial to him to to maintain the
mangrove trimming semianually to keep it out of at bay essentially. So any other questions? I'm I'm happy to answer, but I know that's generally the biggest concern in these scenarios. Councilwoman Barnaby. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Can you indicate
on the picture that you have, um, are they going to remove all of the invasives in that area? Are they just going to remove invasives along the the dock line? Because they're
talking about Brazilian pepper and carrotwood trees. And what I know about those two species is that um Brazilian pepper recede crazily and that's why there's they're such a problem. And carrotwood can can
grow just about anywhere. If it's growing in a mangrove, it can grow anywhere. So if you're only going to remove certain parts of that, it I think it's like almost like a losing battle because it's going to keep receding and re regrowing, I guess, is how I would
say it. So the top right shows the mangrove impacts. That is the area where the mitigation is required. And part of these follow-up inspections, part of the success rate that they call out in this
permit is that the mitigation is working, I believe, within plus or minus 5%. So throughout the first three years, they're going to monitor this to make sure that the mitigation is successful. It's it's
not just a matter of you implemented it. You have to prove success over the course of the first three years. >> Okay. >> That timeline will extend if you have not achieved that success. One other question because where you see where the house is located and you see
the length of the dock and it abuts or is is next to at least two neighbors there. My question is is there any kind of security system on that dock? Because if someone comes up the river and starts
partying on that dock, the people that are going to hear it first is not necessarily the owners. Is there any kind of system? >> There's been no requirement either from the city or the state for any any such situation. And and in our experience,
I've not ever seen that required. Um obviously >> I'm saying I don't know that it's ever been required, but >> I don't I don't disagree with you. >> I have a lot of problems in Ward two along the river with people coming and get climbing on people's structures and docks and stuff. And
>> I've had clients come home to people in their pool hanging out. >> Like it's it's pretty brazen. So I It's a great question. Um but it's it's not anything that's ever been really required of us in any regulatory agency. >> Are they going to have water and
lighting? I mean, are they going to have electric out there? >> They will have electric and water out there. Yes, ma'am. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. I think and again as it's been stated you know sitting up here and going
through several doc situations that you know obviously I think this board is a a property rights board. We believe people have property rights and even though this is a unique situation uh most times if we approve something
because we think we had to then we look at it and we say well the D will take care of it because sometimes they come up before they have approval and we it's depending on if they get the approval and you know D approving it gives me a sense of security that they've met the
requirements now it'll be the long-term maintenance of those requirements. And that's what I think the only thing that to me is you can't assume somebody's going to be bad. You got to assume they're going to be good. And we But if there was something that they didn't
maintain it, they would go back to D if the mangroves grew over it and and I know that's an HOA, I believe. So what requirements will the HOA have and different things to make sure it's maintained correctly? That would be the thing you would hope. It's easy for the
person living there now to say, "I'm gonna maintain it because I just spent the money to do it, right?" >> But a future owner of the home might say, "I don't use it." >> But that's also adding value to the home. >> So, I just think that's a big thing. Miss Moore, >> do you um if you could remind me does
the D permit have a have a expiration date that they would have to actually renew it and have the D consider the >> the actual authorization for the dock? Mhm. >> It it may I don't know off the top of my head to be honest with you that generally I believe they're good for 12
months >> to get the dock. >> Correct. >> Right. Just to approve it. >> No, I think it's a it's a unique situation, but if it meets all requirements, >> you know, I think that the homeowner has an expectation. >> Part of the purchasing of this property
was the fact that it had repairarian rights. Um, so when I met the client at his house, I was like, where are we putting this stock? Um, and so he walked me out there, showed a survey, and you know, the first conversation was I was like, "You need
to hire a permitting consultant to to get your FD permit because City of Bradon is probably going to require that to prior to even applying. And so that's kind of the path we took to make sure a the state would be okay with it before we even brought it to the table to you
guys." >> All right. Well, thank you. I think any other questions or we'll go to the public hearing. >> Well, I I would like to ask Mr. Dong to come up because he's the one that had >> it >> the information. >> Do you want to let's do the public hearing and then have him talk after? >> Is that a problem?
>> Are we allowed to do that? >> Sure. >> Yeah. Okay. >> Yeah. I just thinking to see that and then we'll know others. All right. Thank you. All right. At this time, we'll open the public hearing. Anyone wishing to speak? Anyone wishing to speak? Anyone wishing to speak? Hearing none, we'll
close the public hearing. Mr. along. >> Sorry. >> It's okay. >> Can you just share with us your conversation with D? >> Sure. Um Hannah Gordon, our uh city planner, was actually assigned this
case, but she's at a FEMA training this week, so we're covering for her. Um when we got the application when it was received we were shocked ourselves. Um like wow there's a D approval letter in here and this is 400 feet of dock going
through mangroves. So myself Hannah Kim Claybach from public works Don Johnny from public works all had a Zoom call or teams call with D to just confirm that they were good with everything and they were fine with everything that was applied for through the applicant. It
was a complete application. They were comfortable with it. They kind of went through the same regulations Mr. Gordon or um Mr. Parsons went through. So, we were fine with it and just proceeded forward, took it to planning commission and here we are today. So, it was just kind of a general
conversation trying to get us a little comfort level with D to make sure we understood really where they were coming from because we were a little taken back ourselves. And they're they're going this distance to be able to get to navigable waters. >> Yes.
>> Because the you can see there's a little bit of water. >> There's a not deep enough. >> It's not deep enough. >> Not deep enough. >> Okay. >> Yeah. So that was our conversation. We just wanted a comfort level on our end too to make sure that we were good and
they were good too. So you know it is a unique lot. >> It is. So, the city approved it that direct that way at some point. I don't know why, but they did, but we have to work with what we've got in front of us, and that's we're doing our best.
>> All right, I'm going to go to Mrs. Moore. And then >> I I found it it is um it does have to be there's monitoring annually for three years after the first year. So, the D will remain involved with them
>> for at least that period of time. >> All right. Vice Mayor Coker, >> can you explain uplands and what that distinction is? >> It's basically the area not in it's on their property. It's it's a different elevation. So, it's not really within
the mean waterline area. So, mangros grow pretty much everywhere. >> I think it means the property goes like this >> and it goes up a little bit. >> Up a little bit. >> Okay. So the chair will entertain a
motion. >> I'm move to approve special use >> permit application. >> All right. We have a motion by Mrs. Moore, a second by Mrs. Coachman
>> subject to the stipulations >> with the stipulations. Agreed. Agreed. Okay. Both agree on that. Um we've had discussion. Is there any further discussion? >> Hearing none, we'll start the vote in ward three. >> Yes. >> Four. Yes. >> Five. >> Yes. >> One. >> Yes.
>> Two. >> File this away under things I really don't understand. Yes. >> Carries. Five to zero. Thank you very much. >> Moving on, madame clerk. >> Item 7B is the second reading on public
hearing for ordinance 4077, an ordinance of the city of Bradenton, Florida, proposing an amendment to the Bradenton City Charter. proposing a charter amendment to section eight of the city charter to remove the designation of the mayor as exeicio
president of the council to remove the mayor's right to cast a vote in the event of a tie and to provide that the mayor is not a member of the city council calling for a referendum on the proposed amendment to the charter to be held at the general election on November
3rd 2026 providing the ballot title and ballot summary for the referendum, providing for direction to the city clerk in coordination with the Manatee County Supervisor of Elections, providing for severability, conflicts, and an
effective date. >> Mr. Rudicel um the question of the way it's worded is what you thought was the best legal way to meet the requirements if there's any challenges I believe and it still leaves everything else in order
in the charter from the mayor's standpoint authority in that it's just so to take away the tiebreaker vote and meet the requirements >> that's correct I mean the understanding what the intent was and
and why this was being pursued. I mean, if the language stays in there about, you know, being an exeicio president of the council and things like that, it suggests that the mayor is still a member of the council, which even non- voting members can be subject to the
sunshine law. So, we just wanted to clarify that. >> Any questions before we go to the public hearing? All right, hearing none, we'll open the public hearing. Anyone wishing to speak? Anyone wishing to speak?
Anyone wishing to speak? Hearing none, we'll close the public hearing. Chair will entertain a motion. >> If we wanted to discuss, do you want motion? >> Let's get the motion and then then we can go into further discussion. >> Miss Barnaby, did you have
>> I was just adjusting. Okay. You always say the microphone. Vice Mayor Coker. >> Okay. >> Where is it? >> To approve ordinance 4077. >> Okay. Uh, I'll make a motion to approve
ordinance 4077. >> Second by Mr. Schustler. >> All right. Discussion. Miss Moore. Um I just generally speaking for both of these um I think it's a very appropriate obviously for voters to vote for for us
to put issues you know questions about the charter and amendments to the charter um out to the voters. My comment for both of them to all of you guys is I uh recently attended um Maninnesota League of Cities meeting and I found out
that we are one of uh very few cities in Sarasota and Many counties that are not actually required by our charter to appoint a commission to review the charter on regular intervals, five or 10 years. And um and while I think that
that I think that these both are issues that I I know we've heard from people throughout the community, I wonder if there's any appetite for going in that order for us considering either amending the charter to require so require and that be the charter
amendment that we start with or whether this process of putting these two things on the ballot and I know it would take time and I know we might miss this window of um opportunity with the election coming up in November. Um but I that was my question to you all is I
have no problem with voters deciding these matters, but do we want to when presenting them to voters go through a a a maybe what I would maybe consider to be a more lengthy but thorough process of having a commission review the
charter in its totality before we bring them to the voters. So, it's really more of a question. All right. >> I'm not opposed to doing it, but I just wanted to get a pulse check for you all. >> Vice Mayor Coker and then Councilman Shusler. >> Um,
>> prior to your being on council, there was a lot of discussion about the charter review and quite honestly, it became very political and um, I really hate to see us go down that road, especially in the climate that we're in.
Councilman Shusler, >> I was going to say in terms of a charter review, when was the last charter review back >> ever? >> Right. Well, that part of it, but we did some that we had some charter review
when we changed. We actually updated the charter and we basically it said that police chief will be he will be in a lot of the terminology in it. And so there was three things that were on the ballot that were corrected that um one was
voted down by the citizens has taken away the mayor's authority over the police department because again that made it more political in my opinion >> because if all of a sudden you know you have to have five people making a decision in an emergency situation would
have been very difficult. We've seen other councils that have that and it's very difficult. So, and like you said, I don't disagree with having some things, but I think you take out the politics. That's a great idea, but you can never take out the politics and that's where,
you know, can do it. I have no problem. But you're looking at 24 to 36 months when you do these committees. And we know how we have Mr. Perry said once something to me one time that I reminded him that we're in election mode every year because we have two years of
something. So, it's not about taking it away from the citizens, but it's about giving you let them decide if this fails or passes. I'm fine both ways, >> you know, but I think it's something that we keep talking about things, but when you then go to a committee, who gets to pick the committee? Who gets
to do that? And right now in the climate we're in in Mante County, it becomes a lot more interesting. So, >> Miss Coachman, >> that's not usual for me. >> Yeah.
>> Um, question real quickly, Mr. Rouso, at the tail end of your when you were speaking about this, you said not being a voting member doesn't necessarily release from the sunshine
law. >> That's correct. So our purpose for doing this is >> well that so if the mayor is removed not only
removed from the tiebreak vote vote but it's also clarified that the mayor is not a member of the city council. >> Gotcha. >> Then he doesn't have any any voting power at all in that. >> And that's what it says in there. That's why I said there's three parts to it
>> other than just taking away the one >> was because when when Mr. Ruticell wrote it and did his research, that's what I called and asked him out privately, well, what does that do? It's still I'm still the chair of the meeting, >> but I just don't have a voting power and I'm not considered even though, you
know, people don't sometime most people don't think of me as a member of the council now. >> Yeah. >> Because it's not part of the five. >> You don't think it's public? Yeah. we don't often even exercise that. >> Um I just wanted to say this too. I mean >> in fact our system of government is a
hybrid. >> You know it it it I just kind of I I guess I'm trying to wrap my head around what would this do to that? Are we moving closer to being a
weak mayor? >> I'm a weak mayor now. It's always been a weak man. So, one of the things that and Mrs. Moore brought it up probably more than anything >> and and that's why, you know, I think that talking about it and going through things
>> is, you know, there's times that we're working through a process with the administration, with others, and you know nothing about it, >> right? And you know, again, politically, there can be good and bad things in in life when you're up here. But one of the
biggest things is if there's opportunity for me to be able to tell you where we're at, tell you because obviously the citizens when they vote the mayor, you know, I'm one of one. When you vote the council, you're one of five. So you need three votes to get anything through
where if I'm able to say, "Here's what we're doing." And the vote, the tiebreaking vote is very ever used in my lifetime up here as councilman in that. But I always wanted to know more information. So again, if it's a two to two tie for some reason and the mayor is
breaking that tie, then there's 50% of the board at that moment is upset. So I'm trying to think how it can make it better. Now obviously I think that that with what we're doing in this city is a lot positive but how do we make it even
more positive and again everything in life is political but how do we continue to work down the path that we're doing with what we had yesterday with city park we saw the collaboration and that's what my goal is you know so it's
something that I just think was the right time and and when over all the years I've been here this has been something that's been talked out and moving forward. Um, I don't think there's a good or bad way when you say charter review required or not. I don't know that either one of them's what the
weight of it is, but it's something we can look at and, you know, go forward. But you're looking at 24 to 36 months and in today's climate, would it be only political? >> All right. Yes, ma'am.
>> Does this mean we can put you on the CRA board? Well, there's a there would be a seventh there's seven members able to be on that board. >> Just questioning. >> We'll figure that out when the citizens speak. All right. Hadn't thought about that,
but All right. So, we've had a motion by Vice Mayor Coker, a second by Councilman Schustler to approve going on the ballot ordinance 4077. Start the vote in ward four. >> Yes. >> Five. >> Yes. >> One, >> yes. >> Two, >> yes. Three.
>> Yes. >> Carries 5 to zero. Madame clerk. >> Item 7 C is the second rating and public hearing for ordinance 4078. An ordinance of the city of Bradenton, Florida proposing an amendment to the Bradenton city charter. Proposing a
charter amendment to add a section 14 to the city charter to provide for term limits for the mayor and city council members. calling for a referendum on the proposed amendment to the charter to be held at the general election on November 3rd, 2026.
Providing for the ballot title and ballot summary for the referendum. Providing for direction to the city clerk in coordination with the Manatee County Supervisor of Elections, providing for severability conflicts and an effective date.
>> All right. Um, this is something obviously Mr. Rudel had we talked about um and he had went over and written the the ordinance to process through. Um, I just over the years, you know, something
that I brought up early on in 2012, not because I think anybody that's been here has been any other different than a good steward of our community, but at times that, you know, I and I voted I say right out of the box, I think it was in the 90s when legislative did eight years
and looking at that time, you know, they said a lot of things back then who was going to control things and I don't necessarily agree both ways. There's been some good and bad with it, but one of the things that I never thought eight years was enough in a situation. 12 years is what, you know, seems to be
good. And and again, we're not, you know, you can be president for eight years, you can be governor for eight years, but you can never go back. There's opportunity with this to go back at a time. Um, and if you move or do something, get out, then move in another
district or ward. So, I just thought it was the right time to bring it up. And again, I believe this is an 8020 in the community. The citizens probably believe in some term limits. And you know, we're in good times right now, I believe, with our council and our community in the
city of Bradenton. So, when's the best time to bring something up? When it's good, not when there's controversy. So, and I I know that um and I won't steal your thunder, Councilwoman Coachman, but you only had one response. I've talked to a few people that have heard about it and support it, but I know we got one
email >> and uh that was shared through the clerk's office. So, it it is not either way a hot button item, but it's everybody that I've talked to, two or three people that have seen it are supportive of it.
>> So, other comments or we'll get a motion and then we'll go to the discussion or we have to do the public hearing. So, why don't we do the public hearing now? We'll open the public hearing. Anyone wishing to speak? Anyone wishing to speak? Anyone wishing to speak? Hearing none, we'll close the public hearing.
Chair will entertain a motion then for discussion. >> Mr. Mayor, >> yes. >> I move for approval of ordinance 4078. >> All right. Is there a second? >> Second. >> All right. Miss Coachman. Thank you. All right. Discussion. Anyone? >> I just >> Yes, ma'am. Miss Moore.
>> I saw you. You called on you. >> I I did. I heard her. Um I again same same comment uh as before you know just the uh it's appropriate for voters. I I think I mean
I get the political aspect. I but this is just the way my brain works. I like process. I feel like we get a better product. Um, and for this one too though, I I wanted to just I feel like I have to say that I have some element of
concern about um about narrowing a pool of candidates. Uh because it's a difficult thing to be able to, you know, financially and time be able to to perform this role. Uh and times are changing and things are more
complicated. Um, so I just note that out there for people when they're thinking about it. I do think that it, you know, fresh ideas are always a good thing. Fresh faces, you know, uh, fresh excitement and passionate for or passion for some other, you know, some other thing that might be happening in the
city at that time. Um, but that's my only concern about um, term limits in this particular instance. But um the other thing I was going to mention is just the ballot itself has, you know, now we're we're adding to a ballot that has some heavy weighted
considerations. And I want to make sure that we're we're giving voters the absolute best, you know, information and clearly written things so that they can make good educated choices about what's on the ballot. Um >> we were talking about ours first though,
>> right? Yes, we were. and we're being very thorough. >> Um so um so that I just raised those things as you know maybe more for just generally speaking for people to consider as they move forward with this
overall obviously all the charter amendments are appropriate for voters to decide. I'm gonna play a little devil's advocate with you on the part about thinking it will disenfranchise people to a point because when you are in a town and you see long-term
council members or mayors sometimes that disenfranchises people more than if there might be an open seat coming up because then you have more people that are will say well I'll take a chance at that but I don't want to go against a
20-year incumbent. So, you know, that's again, it's not about and again, I think it's a good time right now because I don't think we're going to have a lot of us up here that want to be here 20 years. You know, I just don't believe that. And and and I've said it all
along. I'm not going to be a 20-year mayor. And you can take that to the bank. Um where people say it before they get elected, but do they say it when they're elected? Right. >> And then all of a sudden, one more, one more, one more. Um, so I just think it's
the right time and again if it gets voted up or down, we live with it. So I saw Miss Barnaby's first and then Vice Mayor Coker. >> Well, again, I have always said we need to listen to the voters what they want to do. It's
their government and they pay for it. So I think this is just another opportunity to do that. >> And it's not always when it's a a controversial time. I think this is these two items are non-controversial right now because it's not somebody as a
board or the mayor pushing it for self gain. >> It's going to help the community generationally going forward. And I believe we use that term a lot in our community's collaboration. So, all right, Vice Mayor Coker and then Councilwoman Coachman.
>> Yeah. Uh my only concern um while I would love to think that I've gone unopposed twice now is because of everybody so happy with me. But um what what in the I mean sometimes there aren't people that want to step up and
and be leaders. It's not easy sometimes. What happens in that event >> if nobody applies for the job and the person's term limit out? >> There's not an exception for that. Right. >> I don't know. Somebody would jump in at the last minute.
>> Well, I just feel like we're putting in a hoop that, you know, I hope we don't trip on at some point, but >> unintended consequence. Okay. >> I don't think it'll happen, but because somebody will jump in. It's always has happened. Somebody's jumped in. >> Okay. >> Well,
>> that is um I think that that actually is a good point. You're a good example of um um of what could happen. And I to follow that train of thought. It does seem like you know and maybe another tiny concern is that then we are moving
towards more appointments versus people taking that opportunity to which I it's not that you know obviously we have to appoint if there's a vacancy but I certain you know I think everyone up here would agree that that's not the goal. We would rather that people you know have to >> well I think that and and and that plays
right into maybe why term limits are important because I'll look at it the opposite side. there was a 30-year member in that seat before her >> and was the community disenfranchised in that ward because they knew it wasn't worth trying to run against that person
and the new person just got lucky >> because there was two I I ran for my election in 2012 and it was a filling of the two-year remaining part of the seat. So, I filled those two years and then both of my terms were unopposed. So I don't know if it was I was good or again
it was going after a very positive long-term person before and you know so I think I don't I would in my mind guess that that will never happen you know that nobody but you know if that's the case then the whole community is
disenfranchised with what's going on. So I I just think it's the right time. Again, the community will have the chance to speak on a lot of things on that ballot and it's going to be uh interesting to see and and again that's why the ballot is there and that's why constitutional amendments and charters
are able to be done right or wrong. So appreciate the conversation. I think it's a great one and and uh it's been out now for months. Yeah. Okay. I'm sorry, Miss Coachman, but it's been out now for months and you see we've really had no engagement
>> per se. So, Miss Coachman, >> um, before I even say what I was about to, um, in the case of Vice Mayor Coker, third year, the third term, no problem. and you get to take a break
because when there's a council member and Mayor Brown, you were an example of that. If the people are pleased, you're unopposed. Um,
and there's still also that caveat that because you are so good at what you're doing, people won't run. a different perspective won't even attempt. Whereas if that third term occurs and someone
runs or two people run because they feel like oh I can you know it's a possibility um just consider it a vacation a four-year vacation because from what I understand it starts
over you know after yeah so anyway for that but my my question I guess I'm questioning myself is finding that sweet spot. You know, 12 is it does sound like the most logical
as opposed to 16 and that being uh you know, four terms. Um, but just just looking at my personal situation, I'm in my second term and some of the things I
had hoped to see in my first term, you know, they it it wasn't uh jelled yet. Um, so eight is definitely not enough. I'll tell you that. even though I'll just be here for eight, but u but I I
think 12 is I guess the sweet spot, but I'm also thinking about some things that are in place and a a a third term would be great. Um, and I don't know, depending on some of the projects we have going on and CRA might need five to
see it through, but I'm just but I I'm definitely for this going forward to the public and and hear what they have to say. >> Thank you, Miss Moore. >> Um, I was just going to follow up on your comments. It just made me think that um that uh I definitely agree with
you. four is four is way, you know, you're just literally learning something so new. Um and and just as we're considering people, you know, wanting to stay on for 20 years or whatnot, um while I can appreciate that that might
seem like a, you know, breeding ground for complacency, um a lot of people asked me the first time around, "What do you want to do next?" And the answer was always nothing. I'm doing what I want to be doing. Um, and so just if you will, uh,
you know, entertain me for a minute, I will just geek out on the fact that I feel like what we're doing here is, uh, not the most, um, prestigious thing. You know, it's not, you know, we don't get a lot of, you know, I feel like there's no there's no accolades. There's no real
pomp and circumstance to it, but the work is so gratifying because you see things like what we did yesterday. You see the labor uh, or the the fruit of your labor so tangibly. um that I I don't know. I just I between what you were saying and thinking about
the the groundbreaking, I just feel like to some to to alleviate some people's concerns, sometimes people just want to stay here because it feels good to know that the work that you're doing is something that you walk the dog every day and you see it and you can touch it.
>> So anyways, >> yep. No. And that's again >> again I think >> when you look at the history of Bradenton, especially in the mayor's office, um we've 123 years on May 19th.
There's been 20 mayors. I'm the 20th mayor. If you look at most cities that are as old as us, they've had 40 mayors or more. Um, we've had three mayors that were 61 years.
Again, I'm not saying good or bad, but opportunity, and I agree with you because I sure thought we'd have done a groundbreaking on City Park two to three years earlier, not in my sixth year as mayor, but it also
gives the sense of public that it's not about, well, now I'm in my 12th year. I'm just worried about getting reelected because I need the paycheck or I want the fame. I think this is a board right now that we are not in that situation.
You know, even if all of us this passes and all of us next terms can go for 12 more years, you know, that's so it's not that, you know, again, we can't go back, right? >> You know, you get you go forward. But I
just think there's the opportunity and I think it'll engage the citizens more. I mean, every time I've said um public hearing today and open for public comment, I see relatively maybe one person in here and when we have our
budget meetings at 501, we have zero people in here. I want to get people that might be thinking, well, there's a chance that I might have an open seat, you know, and again, it's not I I want engagement. We see all the people that come up that want engagement, but then
they feel like, well, I can't win at all, so why waste the time? When open seats come up, it's going to give an opportunity. And again, I don't know, you know, I think it's an 8020 right now that people want to see that and we're doing it without the
controversy. That's my opinion. All right. So, we have a motion to approve ordinance 4078 by Miss Barnaby, seconded by Miss Coachman. Start the vote in ward five >> to approve. One, >> yes. >> Two, >> yes. >> Three. >> Yes. >> Four.
>> Yes. >> Carries five to zero. Thank you. And great discussion. And I think one of the things that when you look out, if people are watching or listening, you know, this is real discussion. This isn't just it's going to benefit one side or the other, whoever you're agreeing or disagreeing with. It's about doing the
right thing, putting it out there, and give an opportunity for people to feel like they're engaged and get engaged in the future. So, uh, at this time, we'll take a fivem minute recess, and we'll be back in five minutes. Thank you.
>> Why is my stuff not downloading again? Resolution 2654 Ironwood Condominium's water mane replacement project initial assessment. >> Mr. Perry, Mr. Williams. >> Mr. Williams will take this one. >> Thank you, Mayor. U so this is just the
next step. Um we've all discussed the Ironwood project at at length. Um had many meetings with the residents, had their support, their approval, their their desire to get this done. Um we all know that this is a water man project for improvement. This they have a
private a private water man uh system that was failing for them. Um in order for the city to take it over, we needed to replace that line to the city standards to include it into our water system. Um what this resolution is is the next step in the assessment that'll
go along with this project. Um so this resolution provides estimates for the cost of the project, directs the preparation of the preliminary asset role assessment role, establishes a public hearing to consider the impositions of the proposed assessments, describes the assessment area and
provides the imposition of the assessments and the assignment assess and the assignment of assessment units. I now have a newfound love for what you do. So, um, and describes the computation and the assessments and prepayment amounts and options. Um,
included in this resolution were some attachments of examples of the letters that will go out to the residents. U, we have our our financial advisors, PFM, um, that are working with, uh, Heidi and Tamara, uh, to make sure that they go
out, um, by the deadline of July 1st. So they'll actually do that that notification for us. In that notification, you'll see as a example shows what the person would be paying. Um the information very detailed information. U we've been very
forthcoming with all of the residents out there. They've participated. They've asked the questions. Um so this is just the the next formal step in that process. We will we are required to have a formal uh public hearing at city hall and of which we will do that in our next
council meeting on July 22nd. Um it'll be a public hearing. They'll be able to speak. Um but again, we've seen a lot of support in the Ironwood community for this project getting done. Um everybody sees the benefit for it. So, um, with
that being said, uh, the only, uh, request is a motion to approve the resolution 2654. >> Councilwoman Barnaby. >> Mr. Mayor, I'd like to make the motion to approve resolution 2654 as presented to us today. >> Second.
>> Okay. Motion by Miss Barnaby to approve, seconded by Vice Mayor Coker. Um, comments and I'll say something out of the box. That's all right, Miss Barnaby. Um, in all of the meetings that have
started many years ago, there was always my concern that, you know, when these things are done and the people that are in the box from the public understand it. But as soon as that transitions out, the new people want to know why
government's making them pay for their own water when in reality, this was their water, not ours or their their system. we supplied the water. So, it really went through a process and I want to commend our staff especially as well
as the administrative staff for the associations that were together plus the people and I know we've had several meetings and and Miss Barnaby, you know, you've been in most of them and it really is
a attribute how government can work with the citizens in a business manner to help them get something done that otherwise if their water system crashed, it's not our problem, but it is our
problem. And so that's been a great great thing to see how we can make it business-like and work together to get it done for an a lot of people, hundreds if not thousand plus people that need it. Um, the next thing that I'm going to
commend is again our public works group and as administration group that has worked with the contractor because the contractor, what are most of the complaints we get when construction's going on, how something's not happening or how it's taken longer, how the road's
not paved, how the contractors don't care, they leave it a mess, they do this, they do that. Um, I've only so far, knock on wood, and we hope it continues. Heard what the good part is. And, oh, by the way, I drive through there about once every other three days. And I stopped and talked to the
supervisor, which he's the one we're actually getting compliments on because when they're cutting down a roadway and you're making dust and dirt, but they're sweeping it, they're keeping it clean. That was one of our regulations or requirements, but it's happening. And
also um the golf course over there, Ironwood Pine Brook Golf Course is the microcosm of that community because most of the people that play there actually go in there and talk. And the few times that I've been there just visiting or
they had an event on a Saturday, I went and talked to them is they were all like saying, "Wow, you guys are really doing a good job." So, it's almost like we are business-like making it better. And that's what the goal of this council has
been. And so, you know, ward wise, I mean, we saw it with lift station um 13 and then lift station 3. Now, can't get to lift station 3. It's too hard. I'm not going to drive my car back there. I didn't get out of the car and walk yet. But when you look at it, you can see it
from afar. >> It is coming. And so we hope the neighbors and all of them are having it. So that's just a a statement that I said kudos to our staff. Kudos to this council. And that was the expectation.
What's the saying? You get what you the expectation is whatever. When you get what you expect and if you expect something good or bad, you get the good or bad. So Miss Barnaby, did you have anything else? I know I talked a lot. This project was something that I mean
it was it was a big I don't know what word I would use with it because you're dealing with um there's 15 homeowners associations over there. There's all the residents that
are over there. there are that there were people that when we started talking about this initially they're not with us anymore and their condos have their families have sold them and they have got new people coming
in. So, one of the reasons that it was really important, I think, to all of us was to make sure that the individuals that are there now and the individuals that will come in the future that there is is a body of work
that we can point to and say you had a failing water system. It was a private system. It was put in by the developer back in 1969, 1970,771. and they had gone and tried to find
private funding for this and no bank wanted to touch them and no contractor wanted to take it on. So we were kind of the court of last resort with this. However, I think that we have handled it very well
and like you, the only comments that I have gotten from residents is it's really happening and they're doing such a good job and they're so polite to us and they, you know, because there's a lot of people that physically walk that
circle and I honestly think if they weren't happy, we would all be hearing about it. >> Be here. >> Absolutely. >> Yeah. No. And I think that really shows the public private partnership to help someone because you said they had
gone out to the private world and nobody would deal with 15 HOAs, >> right? >> So, we figured a way to do it and that's good on our part through our staff and all. >> I would like to thank the mayor and council for supporting this project. I >> want to give one uh kudos to Don Demon
as well. He's our construction manager and he has a great relationship wherever he goes in the in the communities and he's the one that really holds our our contractors accountable and uh does a phenomenal job at it. So >> important. So all right. So we have a motion and a second to approve
resolution 2654. Start the vote and board one. >> Yes. >> Two. >> Yes. >> Three. >> Yes. >> Four. >> Yes. >> Five. >> Yes. >> Carries five to zero. >> City administration. Uh, mayor item B, city administration
public works master plan professional design services agreement for phase one. And I believe we're Miss Melton's going to be able to pull that up. >> It's up. >> It might be better if I work from down here on this particular presentation. Um it council is aware that we basically
purchased a Tropicana property for the site for redevelopment of a public works um annex. Use the term annexes of a number of different uh programs that public works operates and and need space for. Of course, we were previously in
the Crowley area at at the administration building for the Crowley um on 9inth Street and the public works annex on 13th Street. And with the advent of City Park, we basically have had to relocate. It's a longer term plan. We're in an interim phase of doing
certain things right now as we build out City Park. At the same time we build out City Park, we have to basically build our new public works facility out there at Tropicana. Um and and obviously we got a I think I I think we got a pretty good deal on the land itself. The land
uh as it's rel as it relates to its uh adaptability and suitability for this type of industrial program is is pretty complimentary. We've had our planning department work on the annexation and get that approved obviously. But where
we're at now is basically trying to um draft master planning and move forward with design and permitting and construction of that new facility. The short version with that facility is that it involved a multitude of different
program areas that I spoke about. Um in this drawing you'll see what was initially proposed as building number one which was a 22 bay fleet maintenance facility. Fleet maintenance basically is something that you would see at probably a large dealership where there's several
bays that you know do do maintenance on motor vehicles. We do mo we do maintenance on our fleet both from the perspective of light duty maintenance. So things like oil changes and brake jobs and tuneups, whatever it might be, uh preventative maintenance, things of that nature. But we also do a lot of
heavy duty uh maintenance. We have a fleet of about 53 pieces of equipment over at the sanitation department, solid waste, the crushers themselves, the rolloff trucks and everything else. When you talk about heavy duty, you're generally speaking about diesel and and
hydraulic equipment. A lot of our excavation equipment for dirt work and and and and doing different types of heavy construction um is serviced by the manufacturers of those particular pieces of equipment whether it's Cataterill or CAT whoever it might be because those that type of equipment now is so
digitally controlled with proprietary information that you typically can't do it internally. So we send that stuff out. But we do have a pretty robust program in that regard. that fac uh the cost for the overall facility was estimated to be between 60 and $80 million
um because of the the robust and and and significant sizable nature of it. And frankly, we just don't have that kind of funding within our within our um our enterprises that make up probably about 75% of public works activities. Um and
and right now as it stands with the current rate um we don't have funding that would provide for debt service suitability to meet coverage ratios and funding ratio requirements. So what I did was I went back to our our
architects on the project sweet sparkman and kind of came up with some novel things myself and and Mr. Williams and and and a few other folks and we said we need to phase it and we need to value engineer it. And so what we looked at is
a a proposed phasing plan for a two-phase buildout of this facility. If we could go to the next slide, please. Thank you, Miss Melton. Here you'll see basically that building number one instead of being 22 bays, is broken down to about six bays. And then
support services on the far I think it's the eastern orientation of the the building for parts rooms and things like that. And again, that would do light duty maintenance. We're considering the possibility of outsourcing that heavy duty maintenance um to a
um a heavy diesel hydraulic service provider that would service our equipment on a contract basis. That way, we don't have to capitalize that building. If we have to build that building, that in and of itself with the size and magnitude of it would probably
be on the order of somewhere around 20 million of the total purchase price. And that's a guess give or take probably give or take two or three million off that number, but it's a big part of that total cost for the project. Um, also
you'll see building number four, which is an operation center. Um I believe it's about 31,000 square feet in its proposed size on the key to the to to the uh drawing on the right. And really we are currently over at the Tropicana
um corporate center where we lease the land and we lease about 15 16,000 square feet. Um it's a very good facility. It works really well. There's really good parking there so our equipment can come in um as relates to mostly light duty
vehicles that our field teams have to work out of. And then we have technical services in their administration and a whole host of different types of superintendants for the 19 different programs and divisions that uh the public works department works. We rent
that space for about $12,000 and some change a month. So, when you multiply that on a 12-month basis, it cost us about 140 to 150 million uh I'm sorry, 150,000 to rent that on an annualized basis. And again, the condition is
really good over there. Um it it's very lighted in there. The office space and the cubicles and the technical areas are really well laid out. For some reason, when we went in there, um it was very suitable for what we were trying to do. And then we made some minor tenant
improvements to add some different spaces over there. And everybody's, it just works really well. Lance and I are obviously and and other folks are over there pretty regularly. And um you see the operation and it it's a great physical plant for what we're trying to do over there for administration
technical services support. The point is is that at $144,000 a year, if we were to build an operation center as depicted in this drawing under building number four, you're probably talking at 31,000 square feet, you're probably talking about another $20 million. That's 600 bucks a square foot
um thereabouts. And and so again, we don't have the money to capitalize that. Even if we had the money, I'm not so sure that would be a good business decision to make because to pay debt service on a $20 million debt, um, which would probably be a bond issue and opposed to a bank loan. Um, there's
other configurations you could do or mechanisms for financing, but the reality is is that the debt service on that would probably be on the order of about probably 1.8 million a year thereabouts. And that's comparative to what we had to
borrow for our police station and fire station, which was the last debt offering we did at about $35 million. Um, and so we the the point with this is that we can lease for about 10% of the cost of what it would cost us to build.
And and and and from a business decision perspective, um, that's a lot better. It's particularly better in times of limited revenues and changing revenues. Again, most of this is enterprise, so it's related to the cost being borne by
the enterprises. But as we talk about potential for rate increases, and I don't know if any of you, well, all everybody lives in the city, but you know, the county basically had just put out something with their bills basically saying their rates going up. And you know, I pointed out several times in the past that they had done workshops
suggesting that their needs were on the order of$2 billion dollars um for improvement of their utility infrastructure over the course of the next several years and that their rate is highly extremely lower than what you'd see in the surrounding communities and and
really extremely lower uh to meet their operating and their debt service non-operating expenses. And so there's going to come a time when we talked about as far as, you know, talking about what we need to do on the fiscal side of things, but this proposal that's before
you as it relates to the revised scaled master plan would build out all of solid waste and sanitation. You'll see that depicted in the upper left hand side of the drawing. What you need is basically a lot of surface area for your equipment because it's an equipment heavy um
undertaking and operation in industry. And then you basically need certain aperture that is relates to um the the fueling for that equipment, the servicing for for washes and and and lifts and a couple other things. Um some
some covered storage and then an administration building that's depicted here um as building number two, which I believe is about 5,000 square feet. I'm sorry. It's depicted as 10,000 square feet. We can probably scale that
back a little bit. We also have the warehouse that's over there. We store a lot of different products. They have to be um stored indoors within the warehouse. And then we have a lot of covered storage over at the public works in the former public works facility before we demoed some of it. And that
basically covers a lot of materials and supplies that we used frequently, piping, um valves, things of that nature. you really don't want that exposed fully to the environment over a long period of time because it deteriorates it. Also, equipment um storage, some of the
bucket trucks we have and other things like that. So, the bottom line with it is that we would build out the totality of the sanitation solid waste area. We'd build out the warehouse. We'd build out a size down fleet maintenance facility.
And then we'd also build out some of the um adjunct facilities that are necessary. The other pro issue with this site and any type of development when you're converting it to a new use is going to involve ingress and egress
because again it's a heavy field um dominated operation where those trucks have to go out at 5:00 every morning and come back in around 3 3 a.m. I'm sorry 3 p.m. >> and everything. And so you h we've talked with FDOT um regarding access and
you'll see that in the lower left hand corner right where 301 that would be uh proposed and permitted through the FOT process as a right in right only um point of ingress and egress for our fleet actions. That way we don't have to deal with Ninth Street and some of that
Tropicana traffic and the signalization which is at 301 and 9inth Street. As you know, it's a fairly active intersection right there with this high-speed traffic on 301. Um, and we kind of don't want to have to have large um uh equipment
rollouts basically occurring um during hight traffic areas, particularly in the afternoon. 5:00 a.m. in the morning isn't really a problem. Uh 3:00 in the afternoon, it's a busy area for for return. Um so you have this C and then the interior circulation roadway
buildout that has to be um built in into the area. Um also the storm water planning. We're in pretty good shape on the storm water because there had to be a permitted storm water pond that's depicted in the middle of the site and we don't want to
have to abandon that when it's already been permitted. But we probably will have to do some modification to it. um particular some of the routing for the storm water and the drain and collection system and wear system and out
conveyance thereafter but the proposal we received as part of this package is to because what I'm proposing to you is twofold one to adopt the scaled down master plan and move accordingly in this direction for the buildout and we're probably talking about a year in design
and then about a year for buildout thereafter That's what I'm told by our architects and design team with Sweet Sparkman. As you look at the contract, basically this the base rate for development of the facility is about the same as what it was for what's called
general conditions and and base services. However, when you put the additional services, which is before you today, the rate goes up to about a fullborn architectural design, engineering, and technical services cost of about $2.7 million. That's pretty
accurate and on on par where it should be for a $30 million buildout. Generally, that's controlled by the state of Florida and their recommended rates for architectural services in a document and a rate system called the DO, I believe. Um, and the Department of
Commerce puts that out. And so really depending on the size of the facility and the complexity of the facility, your architectural and tech technical service engineering and technical services fees are going to run somewhere between 6%
and 8 maybe 8.5%. These are at about 8%. If you take the 30 and you basically apply an 8% factor to it, the 30 million it's about 2.7 million. So we think the cost is is is in line where it should be. When you look at again the contract
itself, it's about 1.6 million in base services, but then there's a lot of engineering, geotech, other technical services. There's about $700,000 in engineering itself. And then you've got to get, you know, your electrical experts to figure out your generators
and backup programs. You have to basically um do permitting through that. and the process of going through FOT as well as Swift mud permitting. And so on page four, I think it's either page four, page five of the proposal, you'll see those what are called additional
services. And that's what we're doing here. We're adding those services that we now know are necessary to the base rate which was initially proposed and approved by you for sweet spartman for the overall facility. And that's pretty much a deep dive into item number B.
>> So Mr. Perry, a couple of statements and I'll get to anybody else that um one of the things that I that proud of this council over the last several years and and since I became mayor in 2021 is three of the four budgets that we basically have done, we have been very
good stewards of the the people's money and we've lowered the military. >> Yes, sir. So, you know, all the other stuff, outside noise and that, you know, we've tried to be good stewards and this is bringing this after processing through what we knew, where
we're at, what's going on climate wise in the state is to be fiscally responsible going forward and really getting what we need, not what we want. And I think that's an important factor that anybody listening to this needs to
understand. This government has been very efficient and that's because of your leadership, Mr. Williams and the finance department and and moving up as well as the stewardship of this council to make sure that we we continue to do
things. You know, I think and that's no matter what happens in our state, we're going to be prepared to be positive and move forward and continue to collaborate with those that can help us in the future. So, Vice Mayor Coker.
>> Yeah. Um, just so I'm understanding, we approved 1.7, you said? >> I believe it was 1.6. >> 1.6. Yeah. >> But we're making the project smaller and the price is going up for the engineering. Well, the first proposal was for what's called general conditions
and base services. And as we look at now what we have before us and we estimate those associated costs for engineering, we know more what we need specifically for engineering for permitting um for for uh geotech for environmentals
because we've done phase one phase two PAS groundwater and I think there was another environmental test. Yeah, we've lost track. Corey and I had meeting after meeting it seemed like for the better part of a year with Terracon, who was our environmental um services provider. Yeah. So, it's a good
question. I understand why you're saying, "Well, if it gets smaller, why does the price go up?" I I think that when the base price comes in, you understand it's a base price and they start to do the master planning. And as you move forward, you know exactly what you're going to build with a lot more
specificity and you're moving towards what's called the DD or or design development phase. Where the buildings are going to go, how much roadway is going to be needed, things of that nature. So hence the additional services is what the million dollars on top of the >> but those additional services would have
come down the road as we planned. >> They would have been more in my opinion if you went to if you went to more. Yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah. I don't know how they would have been less. Yeah. >> Councilwoman Coachman, >> I'm kind of in that vein that you were
speaking of. Um, you're outsource outsourcing some things and now offices are more in a of a lease type situation, which is cheaper. What's the
total that that we would be saving? I mean, I guess I'm because I was trying to factor it out. >> We don't have really calculations on that um um on a projected basis. Typically, the way you do that calculation is you basically say, how
long would it take me to make the money back? >> The you you decide you're going to buy a machine for for tooling. the MBA business school is well see how much it costs to lease the machine and see how much it is to buy the machine and then
figure out how long it is that the machine is good for and when does the machine pay for itself because it's a capital investment and that's what this is capitalizing the investment on a couple ways um where we don't own those buildings we lease them
>> and it comes out quite >> it it comes out considerably better for I could do the math and and and and actually I might >> I might play with I like doing like formulas and things like that from a business perspective. It kind of gets complicated and modeling, but I could do
it, but I imagine it's going to take >> I I I think to to reach that kind of capitalization, you're probably looking at somewhere on the order of, you know, real property and building structure, specialty stuff like that, whether it's a crime lab or or or a fleet maintenance facility. generally is going to be
between 12 and 20 years. >> And I think a benefit and this is will kind of maybe help answer a little the question too. >> When we started all this in 2020, >> a lot of things were >> a more reasonable cost. Things have escalated a lot different. And one of
the things that I think is still a possibility. >> We know how Tropicana is changing. there may be an opportunity to buy that building at a very reasonable rate for the future. So, and and again, we talk
about city hall. I think this is again my opinion and we've talked about it quite a bit. If we would have programmed a city hall five years ago, we'd have spent a lot more money, I believe, than as we are working forward through that because and again there because we
didn't have a perfect site >> and we're still working through some of that. But there's opportunity to get us a little farther down the road and you know, we have a big thing coming up in November that we're going to have to vote on. Citizens are going to vote that could change how government operates.
And I'm not saying right or wrong. I'm just saying right it's going to it's going to tell us what we do >> and how we do it for the future >> and you know some good things some bad but we'll just figure that >> and this proposal has scalability what I mean by that is that if we're better
financially and better suited financially the rate stabilizes we know a little bit about more advalorum or property tax or whatever the macro influences might be economic influences that affect our revenue situation then we can make decisions about do we build
out the operation center and the like. One good thing about this location and where we're at currently um as it relates to our administrative location in Tropicana is they're basically right across 301 from each other. Right. I mean they're within a probably threequarters of a mile. Yeah.
>> One of the things that Mr. Perry and Mr. Williams and I have talked about very aggressively at times is we don't want to put a a halt to everything for the next six months. We've got to keep trying to process. I mean, there's things in the fire department, things in the police department that are going to
slow down, but we don't want to stop things, you know, and just say, "Okay, let's wait and see." and hope one way or the other. We've got to continue to run a city. We've got to continue to be progressive while being very conservative with the finances, which
they've been doing all along. But we've also got to be frugal in what we do, but not stop. And I think that's our downtown. That's our because you stop one thing, you stop another. >> And you know, and so let's figure out how we can manage through with or
without what happens with the November election. >> That's uh that's put quite well. Um we don't really have the luxury of stopping. >> Um we can't go back to to do a utility the way it was with the p patching, you
know, force mains with street signs and things of that nature. It ju it just doesn't work. And you know, one of my mentors who was the director of both the legislative and executive side of of of funding, Department of Finance Administration, he said to me early on,
he goes, "You know, anybody can be a good budget manager in good times, but no, not many people can do it in in tough times." And that's what we're doing right now. We're moving into some changing, you know, tough times. Um, we saw inflation as it relates to
construction inflation go through the roof right in 2020 and general inflation and core inflation and specialized inflation as well. Now we're seeing these more internalized problems with revenue as it relates to some changes to the state's policy in that regard as
well as energy cost. You know, that's kind of gone through the roof a little bit. But that's the world we live in of a of a cyclical economy. Things go up and things go down. They never stay the same. That's any economist will tell you that. But we've got to be able to manage through that. The good news is is that
our utility program if they sit and fix it and some of the stuff we're going to talk about next, you know, as as tough as it might be on certain things that deal with construction or adorum tax, we're quite well positioned to take take advantage
of funding opportunities in certain regards to build out that infrastructure. And so, you know, I I don't think business is ever good out there. Business is good here >> and how you manage it. >> Well, I think and a benefit, you know,
we've all lived through the recessions, the different things that happened. >> One of the things though when those happen, >> you may have to cut back. You may have to do things. You have to conserve. But then what happens is it's going to start to build back up. >> Yep.
We're planning for a process that's going to cut back, but then year-over-year stay the same forever. That's right. >> You really have to plan it that way. You can't, you know, it's going to be other things that come and go, >> but it's not >> it's it's it's here what you say. And I
agree with that, Mr. Har that we're positioned and we're positioning ourselves to actually be a better government coming out of things and which sometimes it's forced sometimes it's >> you know self-relied on and I think that's what we got to look at as
important with why in tough times over the last four years we've lowered the milit rate three or four times and you know at at some great discussions but but again I want Don't apologize for me pushing that and our council approving
it, you know, and that's that's the things. But, you know, tough times you have to manage, but it's also how you come out of it, not being poor me situation, and I think that's what's going to be important to see. Uh, Councilwoman Moore, >> um, you I think you touched on it a
little bit because it was, um, very much falling in line with, uh, Councilwoman Coachman's question, which was at some point we rent annually until it we've spent annually or we've spent an aggregate amount that no longer, you know, tips the scale and no longer makes
sense. But what I'm hearing you say is that we will be able to be nimble and that we can add to the phases if the renting no longer makes sense. Um, I just wanted to be cognizant of that because the renting sounds now, but I just want to make sure that we know that
we can't do that forever without really addressing like >> right >> eventually you get to a tipping point. >> And that's something we discussed quite a bit when the purchase option might come up in the future >> for that building because >> it might and location, location, location and everything, right, Mr.
>> Cooker? location is that >> um but but again and again I kind of make fun of things in ways that we think about it but that's how we've got to look at we've got to look at not because again a lot of these things that are happening none of us will be here when it's at the end of life of that project
or you know and again I hope that we get a lot of these things done but when that building's at end of life >> or that lease part is somebody's got to make a decision in 10 years from now >> right >> how is that going to be we want to set them up to succeed need and government
doesn't always do that. It's what's in it for me lately and then move on. So >> that's it. Yeah, I feel like >> Councilman Schustler >> saying the same thing. >> Uh Mr. Perry, Vice Mayor Coker touched on it for a uh briefly a little bit. Um
regarding what did you say the percentage of design and construction as a percentage of the whole project? Did you say it was six to >> It's Yeah. six to six to eight eight and a half%. Okay. >> Yep. >> Um, got it. And we're at with it going
up roughly 9%. >> Uh, >> 30 million. >> Well, yeah. 30 30 million. And so 8% of 30 million would be basically 2.4 million. >> And this is 2.6, I believe. >> Got it. >> This is a lot of specialty stuff. It >> It is. It is.
>> Especially with the when I was sitting through a meeting a while ago looking at some of the structures that they have to do for the >> the U buildouts. It's not just put a loadbearing wall up and do that. It's it's safety. That was the biggest thing.
And they have to really if they don't build it right at the beginning, you can't go back and refix it. >> Y >> you can't add something. And so we got to make sure that we got the right people on the job. Um I think we've seen some good things and I think we've seen some bad things at our police department
>> that we've had to deal with >> and those are the things that we don't want to have to go back and deal with. And that's not criticizing anybody or anything. It's how many of us have ever built a home and it goes perfect the whole way. >> Never. >> First one I built, I thought I was going to get divorced.
>> Yeah. >> I It's the closest I've ever been in 35 years of marriage. And I probably shouldn't say that publicly, but I can't tell you how. >> That's with my wife and I. >> That's my wife and I when we got a boat, >> right? >> Bought a boat off the side of the road. Try to back it in and get it in the boat
ramp. And you know when you don't know how to do that. That's funny thing with Gina and stories. >> I just redid a kitchen one time and >> you are not the man I married. Why are you doing this? >> All right. So we do we need a vote on
this. >> I I believe we do need approval. >> We need approval for the the additional services amendment and that has been submitted to Mr. Rudes. Mr. Rousell, would you like to please comment on anything? Yeah, I was just the action before the council is the amendment to
the agreement with Sweet Sparkman to to add the full design package. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Chair will entertain a motion. >> Mr. Mayor. >> Yes, ma'am. >> Motion to approve the contract with Sweet Sparkman Architects for phase one
of the design and as amended. Okay, I didn't see that. um as amended on the design and construction administration of the new public works complex. >> Second. >> Second by Miss Barnaby. We've had >> discussion. Start the vote in W two.
>> Yes. >> Three. >> Yes. >> Four. >> Yes. >> Five. >> Yes. >> One. >> Yes. >> Carries five to zero. Mr. Perry. >> Thank you, Mayor Councel on that matter. Um up next is items are going to be items number C and D. And if Mr. Scott Shannon could come up come up to the
podium. Mr. Shannon um is a senior vice president with Wooded and Karen and he's a professional engineer and he's been a a point man um for some of the work that's been done on the proposal to have Wooded and Karen do our facility plan.
I'm going to have him talk about that a little bit and uh his role in that. But I want to kind of just open a little bit about what's before you and the facility plan. As you know, we've been approved basically under um supplemental
appropriation Helen Milton, which is affectionately referred to as SAHM, supplemental appropriation Helen Milton, which is federal EPA money that comes down to the state's D and then is administered through the SRF, the the state revolving fund. And there are a
lot of specific requirements with that funding both for the 53 plus million that we've received already as far as a preliminary award and ultimately what we will have to do to get it fully awarded to us. Um there's also weight listed
funding within the categories of infrastructure both drinking water and and clean water which is wastewater of I believe it's $252 million where the city of Bradenton was weight listed as the largest recipient of weight listed
funding. I believe the next closest one to the 252 million was 145 million. And so we want to try to qualify for that as well and we're fairly optimistic. Um you know what's interesting is about this type of utility work when you talk about
drinking water and wastewater is that I'm not an engineer. I don't have an engineering degree, but I've learned more and appreciated more about what engineers have to do as it relates to the operation management and capital um
planning and and construction for utilities because what they have to do is a lot of business and compliance and permitting and and and just a whole litany of things that are in these facility plans that's required
to qualify for the initial funding as well as the supplemental funding. And the engineers don't go to law school or get MBAs either, last time I checked, in most cases. >> But but it seems like that's what a lot of the folks that do what Scott does has to do in addition to engineering. It
it's it's just when you look at these things really what it is it's a path to fully um fund the design permitting bidding con procurement construction and
reporting of capital improvements for a 20-year period that has never been done in my review and experience with the city of Bradenton and Aside from the fact that we qualify for all of this highmagnitude
funding to redo our drinking water system. And when you talk about drinking water, there's three different adjacencies that we run. We run a source which is surface water and the the reservoir off the Braden River. And then we run a plant that treats the water and
puts it into basins and heavy equipment and electronics and chemical treatment and and like and it treats the water to drinking water standards. Then it distributes the water through large piping systems that come from Natalie Way 7 miles from the city of Bradenton.
It goes into a series of tanks to create hydraulic pressure valves and things like that. I mean, it's it's in the hundreds of millions of dollars what you own in assets for those assets and they need to be kept up. I won't go into the same detail for the wastewater system,
but it's similar. >> You know, it's a series of different components and and folks have to do that. So, this puts together a 20-year projection on that has to consider population growth, different changes in the community. It has to look at order
of magnitudes as far as what's more critical, where the best bang is for the buck. You have to make a compelling case for that money. That's what a facilities plan is. You have to look at things like the no action alternative. What if we do
nothing because we don't have the money? Pretty interesting. Um and then ultimately what you're doing is putting together a business plan. That's what's necessary. the the the two plans before us, one is about $600,000, which is the
drinking water, and the other one is 1.6 million. It was competitively put out because it had to be. We couldn't go off library services for engineering uh support for this. And so, we did a solicitation on the drinking water. I believe there was three applicants
and we put together a selection committee that allowed those engineering firms to come in. We wanted to make sure that the engineering firms offered and understood the requirements of this federal funding which was critical. It's not just go take some volume and
pressure me measurements but to basically understand the totality of of the business plan, the strategic planning, the host of the different components that are necessary. And if you read the scope of this contract,
it's it's probably the most thorough utility review capital plan that I that I've seen as far as the job that we'll be undertaking. And as ownorous as that is to get that federal money, it's incredibly beneficial because I think
once you have that, you know what your game plan is and you know what you have to do and how to do it and when to do it, why to do it, where to do it, those questions and and and Councilwoman Gonzalez Moore when she first came in
and I absolutely agree with her said we need strategic planning and and she's been a big oppon you know, supporter of that and and I am too. And we just don't have the bandwidth. Most people don't have the bandwidth to do that internally. And
we're fortunate to have a partner with Wooden and Karen who we actually got through the maintenance and operation side of things. That where it started, but they have proven to be very very effective at at obtaining funding for us and understanding the rules related to it and how to do it. And I think that
that type of expertise and sophistication is exactly what we need. >> So I just say a couple things, Mr. Perry. >> Please join me >> to the the council and to to all um totally agree strategic planning is so important, but unfortunately in life,
strategic planning can also mean slowing things down. And I believe the way we've done it through your leadership, through this council opportunity is getting things done. If we strategic plan us out
of a situation where we don't have something fixed >> and you just have to keep things going and I think that's where we are. I agree 100% with what Mrs. Moore says all the time. Can we set things up? But
sometimes those slow things down when you have a a Milton, a Debbie, a Helen that come through. And we realize that when you're sitting out at four o'clock in the morning and you're trying to turn valves that have never been turned in 20
years since they've been put in to keep water flowing to the city of Bradenton. You know, where are we at? And we had some yank to call, some things to do. But my point is this is a great strategic planning because it's not going to slow a process. It's going to
help get you to that process, but it still needs to be quicker than later because we have seven miles of a water line that we saw the problem with our INI and I even learned more about it a week ago that with the last things
manatee stuff that it did, you know, even though it's underground, it was caused by the damage was caused to those even though they're 100-y old pipes, maybe the damage was caused by the water table changing so much that hydraulic pressure broke them. We have a hydraulic
pressure with a seven milei water line. Where are we at? So, this is something strategically let's get it planned, but let's also get that backup in order and not wait 10 years to do it. So, I think that's an opportunity, but also let's
get it done because I, you know, strategic planning is great, but strategic planning can also kill a project for years. >> So, thank you. Thank you. What do you have? >> Well, Rob, I appreciate that introduction. Um, good morning, Mr.
Mayor, members of council and staff. Uh, I'm not sure I can add much to what Mr. Perry just said, but um, I'll underscore a couple of things. First of all, kudos to you all and your staff for for taking a long-term view for your infrastructure here. Um, we wouldn't be able to do what we do without without the support and
partnership of you guys through this process. Um secondly, um while engineering is what we do, being able to provide the the the level of financial assistance that you guys are considering here for a community this size is is some of the most rewarding work that we do. And I guess, Mr. Mayor, just to
address the the the emphasis on speed, um the the challenge and also the promise of this funding source is that there's a lot of money to be spent in a short period of time. Should we be able to justify it accurately? So, um, the prior supplemental appropriation in Florida, which was after Hurricane Ian,
that that up that appropriation came out in 2024, like there's a there's only like a four-year timeline on that one. We we we've yet to see what the what the ultimate timeline is on SAM, which is this current one. Uh, but but the deadlines and the schedules associated
with planning phases and the design phases and the construction phases are driven by the federal government and they're pretty quick. So, so the, you know, a lot of the emphasis on doing this is on speed. Right now, unfortunately, we've had a head start because we've had a good partnership with you all and your staff doing some of the financial work ahead of these
plans. Um, but just to underscore like the initial ask was $274 million for wastewater, I think 43 million for drinking water, and I think we think the program is probably closer to 90 in in looking at the the um long-term financial needs of your
drinking water infrastructure. That said, this is this is a ve this is a vehicle and and this plan will set you up for being able to pursue additional funding that may come through through SAM and additional um principal forgiveness, but also even favorable terms on long-term loans that may be at
0% interest. So, like you're really taking a long-term view here and the opportunity with this funding source right in front of you uh enables you to do that for what is essentially a grant and and and certainly the timing will allow us to move quickly. So appreciate appreciate your consideration of both these contracts and and you know look
forward to working with you if you choose to. >> Well, another thing to to thank this council and administration and what we've done to bring in Woodard and Curran and obviously with the way things have happened. You know, we've been I don't want to say lucky by having
hurricanes, but it opened up pots of money that you can get things done a lot quicker than you would have if you had to tax your way out of it because it wouldn't happen. And I think that being the the own the employeeowned company puts a lot
more onus on employees that run the company to make sure things are done correctly. And that's what it's been good to see. We've seen our wastewater because, you know, it's interesting that when you get people that go online that are running for governor and other
things that have no idea what they're talking about and put emojis out there that I think are as funny as anything about me, that we're fixing stuff, but they have nothing else to say. So, they put a negative emoji about our river.
And it's like, okay, that gets more information out there that we're fixing it. We're facing it and fixing it and you're helping us do that. And if it can get us more light to get more federal, state D funding, then let's make that
happen. And this is what this is doing. Councilwoman Barnaby. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I just wanted to to bring in one more thing, which is people think that we're just just now starting to do all these things. We're
just Whoops. just now starting to to look at them. But we have been doing this for some time because you can't get some of the permits that we've gotten in two weeks. So we were looking at this all the way back
trying to get some of this stuff done. And this is we are not Johnny come lately to this, but we we have been working on it. We're getting the permits. We're getting grant funding. And as the mayor says, we're facing it and fixing it.
>> The funding source for this is also um reimburseable through the grant. Just so you know, >> and and just to address Marty, um if you guys hadn't done that, I'm not sure we could do it what we need to do in the speed of time that we have to do it. If if we were coming in and starting from
scratch, this would be a lot more of a burden um and a daunting task. But because the because you guys have done all this stuff already, it does make it a lot easier um to to quickly get through and identify the things that need to be done and evaluated and and to justify the eligibility for those things under the grant source. >> Thank you.
>> Say it louder for the people that aren't here. >> Councilwoman Moore, >> um I hope I'm going to say this correctly because I have a head cold so I feel like I'm fuzzy. But um I'm I'm I'm excited about doing these two things because when we did the other one with the storm water I believe it was um that
plan uh something that is notable to me is that uh it was we were going to be procuring something about 80% of the total net or um not not the net excuse me 80% of the capital expenditure which was an in insane number I forget what it
was $159 million or something. Um, and what I think people don't realize, especially when we're in this kind of environment of uncertainty as we go forward with revenue and whatnot, um, is that that 20% was going to have to be made up on rates because this is an
enterprise. So, as we kind of move forward with some uncertainty as far as revenue goes, I think it's important that we move quickly because um this is really about making things more affordable and using as much as little as we can as far as our enterprise funds
to make all of these things happen. I'm not articulating myself well, but I think you all get the point. >> But, you know, you know, Tom um on on the fiscal solutions team, he was a director in Tallahassee and he's repeatedly we met with a couple years back. Remember we had dinner with him
when we first met with him and he basically said, "Look, we, you know, when I ran the public works department and utilities fat for Tallahassee, it's the same thing. Um, you don't want to do as least as possible on your rate because that's what has the impact on
your consumer and ultimately your taxpayer and the like. So, I don't know what those ratios are, but the reality is we could never do all this on the rate because you'd have to have a rate that was probably, I don't know, $200 a month. You know, it's unsustainable,
right? Unaffordable, right? >> He'll get a kick out of the fact that you guys are talking about that right now because every internal meeting he he underscores the fact that his position is rates are the funding source of last resort, >> right? That's >> Yeah. >> All right. So, do we need a motion going
forward to approve >> to to approve um both of the contracts? Um, and they're under items C and D. >> Can we do both at once? Mr. >> I have >> Can we do both at once or do we do separately? I do separate motions.
>> So, entertain a motion. Yes, ma'am. Motion to approve agreement 26-031EJ with Woodward Curran for the water reclamation facility and collection systems facility plan as presented to us. >> Second. >> Second by Mrs. Coker. Had a lot of
discussion. Start the vote in W three. >> Yes. >> Four. >> Yes. >> Five. >> Yes. >> One. >> Yes. >> Two. >> Yes. >> Moved five to zero. chair entertain a motion for um 26-030ej.
>> Mr. Mayor. >> Yes, sir. Mr. Sh. >> Motion to approve the agreement 26-30ej for the water treatment plant and distribution system facilities plan. >> Second. >> Second by Miss Barnaby was the
only good ear. So, all right. Stoked to vote in ward four. >> Yes. >> Five. >> Yes. >> One. >> Yes. Two. >> Yes. >> Three. >> Yes. >> Carries five to zero. >> Thank you. Great job. >> Thank you all, >> Mr. Perry. It's a second amendment to purchase and
sale agreement. >> Yes. Yes, sir. >> And this matter is before council um as it relates to a request for waiver of impact fees. That's the the major
substance of this amendment. And um as the council's aware um Mr. Gaboodi is is the developer um who's done some excellent work in the city um with with Metwan
challenges. Um Mr. Moody and I have had differences of opinion on the impact fee issue and and my position is that the city isn't particularly well suited to wave impact fees particularly in light of its current fiscal uncertainty. At
the same time, Mr. Kabbouti can make uh pretty um uh good arguments regarding his need to do that. I think it's important to understand that the projects we're talking about basically which are met to
AB and then under the next item which is going to be item F uh I think that's the one that deals with the the uh shuffle board court area and it could be the reverse on that. Um, where we're at is
is the city has received basically plans for the proposal of the Met across the street from the existing Met. So, we know how many units are contemplated there. There was an application basically to do affordable housing and a
good portion of that particular project is affordable housing. When you apply for affordable housing, you get an incentive. that incentive is an increase in density uh because you can put more multifamily housing in a smaller
envelope um if you have affordable housing. There's also been an um an incentivization through the CRA and I believe there's a memo in your package that talks about how much the CRA had um
put into the project and is willing to put into the project to provide financial support. Um and that's again in the in the 2A one of one of the the mini's not in the CRA. Um the bigger met
across the street from existing MET is and so you have that CRA contribution as well. Um and and when we look at it basically there's a significant issue with increasing the
stress on in my opinion the stress on the existing infrastructure by increasing density and I've heard arguments and there and and and I think there is credit merit to the arguments about well I don't think a developer should be responsible because we have
deficient infrastructure And we have aged infrastructure. There's no doubt. And 14th Street is one of the places where it's mo greatly aged. Um the things that because it's a major thoroughfare and a lot of both east, west, and north south infrastructure is
within 14th Street. At 14th Street and 17th Avenue, we had a force main break. And that force main break had an emergency repair of I want to say it was about $1.6 million. uh because it's a FDOT roadway and we have to go 500 feet in each direction. Um I was there when
we tore it up the first time and did a temporary repair that held for about six months. Ultimately um it broke it failed again and and we have to repair it. The only thing we're asking for is to use those impact fees basically um and use them for you know revamping
infrastructure within that area. There's police. This there's actually six types of of impact fees. There's police and fire and those are not eligible I believe for reimbursement because it's existing and
then there's utility which is water and sewer um infrastructure. There's school district and there's transportation. We can't wave the school district. The school district has to wave it themselves. The school district doesn't
wave impact fees that I'm aware of. And so I think the I think the council's choice on this is going to be to not wave the inact fees understanding that there's uncertain financial conditions that
there are infrastructure needs and the total amount on the MET 2 I think it was estimated at $365,000 by the developer. I asked Robin and planning to take a look at it. They think it's closer to 440, but you'll
never know basically until we get the actual buildings because most of the the the impact fee is calculated on fixtures um as it relates to the utility and everything. Um and when we haven't got any building plans for the other
project, which is the shuffle board, I think we're kind of doing some site review on that right now. Um so so really the options council is to wave the impact fees, not wave the impact fees or wave a portion of the impact fees.
All possibilities. Um Mr. Kabood is here. I'm sure he wants to address you and and I just want to say Mr. the committee and I had an excellent conversation on the phone and understands both positions and he's done a good job as being a good developer and a good corporate citizen in my opinion
um with his projects here in Bradenton that 14th Street itself is a important affordable housing corridor um I think it complements what we're trying to do a little bit to the east and the city park area what we're trying to do to the north downtown and I think we it's
almost like a organic master planning of itself and the council itself as you well know has done a very good job with affordable housing contributions, but that we're not in the same situation we were with reserves or other funding opportunities um a few years back. And
and that's why, you know, we talk about kind of changing economic dynamics that at this point in time um I can't I can't in good conscious recommend to council to wave those fees. It's ultimately your decision. >> So, Mr. Perry, I'm going to ask you a question.
>> Yes, sir. Um, we just paid how much money to fix a pipe? $1.1 million. >> 1 six >> $1.6 million. Um, if another pipe breaks >> in that area and we have no development
going on and and again, I don't disagree that we've got to really value what we're doing. Um, but if it's blank land forever and that pipe breaks, who pays for it? Who paid for the 1.6?
>> City did. >> City did. >> The city basically gets the rate, >> right? But what I'm saying is then we pay for it as citizens because we have to raise the rates to try to fix those pipes. if we're able to bring in things.
And again, I don't say just wave them willy-nilly, but when I sat on this council and I got criticized years ago for giving the Spring Hill Suites next door a $74,000 impact fee credit and we look back today, that was one of the
best decisions this city made. And that was a small fingerprint of what we're doing here. So, and I'm just saying this for the council, too. If we do nothing, the rates are going to have to pay for increases. If we do something, and
again, I don't know what the right number is, it 100%, 50%, 25%, 75%. If we do nothing and it stays empty land like that, and we don't have more workforce affordable housing, we don't have a chance to raise the tax base in that
area that will offset the expenses, then what do we have? So again, I don't disagree with you and you and I have had this conversation. >> Mr. Williams and I have had this conversation and I appreciate that part of it,
but sometimes you have to do things to get things. And and I'll bring it up because I bring it up a lot is we are finally 50 years later getting the final portions of the sand pile done. If the sand pile would have been done a lot of
years ago, what would that have impacted us? Maybe they would have given up stuff at the time, but would that have brought in tax increments over the years and economic development that would have made a difference? Now, I know we're in a different world because of what's on
the ballot. So, I think, you know, Mr. Gaboody also has to take that into factor, try to work with us. But if we have zero of zero is zero. if and it went. But again, it could be a negative $1.6 million >> because that could happen again. And I
think that I think you were mistaken on one thing. I remember that hole being dug twice before it was dug the third time. >> So >> I think you're right about that. I think it happened actually here nor there. But >> but I'm saying that hole was dug twice before we spent the 1.6 six on it
>> because we were out there >> like two years previously >> previously which I wish we'd have known it then we'd have fixed the whole thing at a lesser rate and so again I'm not trying to make an argument that I agree with giving up impact fees >> but zero of zero
>> is zero >> if we can somehow get projects going and I think the Met as much I was the only one up here at the time when we approved the Met that we caught a lot of grief Well, the original part of doing >> I was saying no, I was not here when you
>> Yeah, you were not here. I was the only one here. The original process, I believe, and as a council member, and we caught a lot of grief about what how it's going to destroy Village of the Arts. Some people still don't have a warm and fuzzy feeling about it. But if
you go to most of the people and especially the younger population in the Village of the Arts that have businesses, they like it because it's bringing more people in the Village of the Arts. Now, the rest of Village of the Arts is going to be on them. And I've said it all along. If we don't get
along everybody, then we don't have a Village of the Arts. So, I'm just saying that's an offshoot of it. That's an offshoot of City Park that's going to need more housing. So, just for the council to think about that and again, what's the right happy median, >> right?
>> Maybe 100% isn't a happy median. And even from our friend Marshall, that has taken a lot of a lot of stuff here, but where is that happy median that we everybody can walk out with a smile, >> right? >> That's my >> I think you're right. I mean, that where
is the happy median? And and you know, it's interesting because I agree with you that vacant property and and and just sits there in in urban redevelopment basically is not a good thing. You know, whether it's in Boston or LA or here or any place else. There's
no doubt. I I just point out though that I think that both macro and micro conditions contribute to that. Like when you talk about the sand pile and why it hadn't development and and it's you know waterfront beautiful property we all know that right but at some point the
economics makes sense to do things and that's what basically engages people to put their money on the line and do things and and and they they want a little help and I get that you use the hotel example and and that was a good decision for sure and I want to see 14th Street develop and there is probably a
happy medium. It's just I am concerned about our infrastructure funding and the the impact on waiverss of impact fees. I think Mr. Ruticell would tell you with other people that I think maybe not Mr. Rousol but but Robin that we should have
we should have policies on impact fees that that's the conversations I've had with her opposed to having developers come up and say geez on this one one you know I got I can make a compelling case because they always can make a compelling case and really the compelling case is that geez I want to
do a project I want to be nice for the area but if I don't get the improve the impact fees approved I can't put as many windows in or I can't have as much lighting or the sidewalks aren't going to be nice. It It's no different than value engineering the home you all
decide to buy or build or a police station that we decide to do. There is a cost associated with doing it. And the one thing at city park or fire stations or the police stations, we do good quality projects. >> They're not cheap, but we do good quality projects and we want to keep
doing that. We want our developers to keep doing that. So, you all make the policy decision. I'm fine either way, but I got to watch the bank. If you if you make no decision or you don't work with people and you know in this world a developer is not a bad
person if they're doing good things for >> average citizens that need us the most. Yes, sir. >> And that's where you know again I'm not going to give it things away. I don't want to give things away but if you don't work together nothing happens and
something of nothing is still nothing. So I go to Mr. Shler first and then Vice Mayor Coker. >> May I sit down or would you like me to stay up? I >> stay up. >> You can sit down next to Mr. Landerfelt and then let's see what they want to talk. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um, I have had a
chance I I understand the the the current environment about what's going on. Um, I have had a chance to uh talk at length with Mr. Perry and then to go back and look at the second amendment
item AD uh 8F the second amendment to the purchase and sale agreement on the on the you know item 8F and also Dr. Burton's um memo. And really what struck out to me in looking at all of this uh is I think
that we really need to make a decision about what the contract says uh when it was first um you know made and what uh the memo
uh from Dr. Burton um you know that's that's a policy argument. So just briefly looking at uh the purchase and sale agreements on both um you know page three the owner has requested as part of the project a waiver of certain impact fees from the city in order to construct
the project with workforce housing. The city has agreed to provide the waiver for that purpose. It then goes further page four. City shall wave impact fees for parks, police, fire, roads, water, and sewer, which would otherwise be
applicable to the project. To me, all of these read as a a commitment. Page eight, the uh agreement later defines a city waiver incentive, you know, further uh adding into the contract. It it creates remedies if workforce housing
requirements are violated, including recapturing the value of that waiver. So looking again, I want to separate a policy argument versus what these contracts say.
And um you know, I don't refute that Dr. Burton is correct that other incentives could offet the impact fees. Um you know, as an argument about policy, absolutely. But as a contractual argument, I I I don't see
um you know how this necessarily uh you know goes I I get the current environment. I don't see how it necessarily goes to these amendments. Um again, it's perfectly reasonable uh policy decision uh you know position for
future deals. But I I I just think that when you look at these contracts, what's in there? Uh as a businessman, you know, looking at n a number of contracts to be asked after the fact, you know, I'm
quite sure that Mr. Gabbouti hasn't underwritten this whole deal uh based on incentives that the government would later decides are, you know, enough, meaning the CRA incentives. Um,
you know, the developer uh is, you know, already agreeing to approximately 114 units, minimum 70% workforce housing, 15-year affordability uh period, annual reports, audit rights,
clawback provisions. Those are significant obligations. So, I just want to point out the fact that removing one of the financial incentives that we previously agreed to, you know, I I just want to point out
that that's that's something that in the initial underwriting and looking at it, do we do we do this deal? That changes the whole scope of things. Uh, and in my opinion, um, and so is it a material change? I don't know. I'm not a contract attorney.
Um, you know, but um, again, I'll leave it with we we all do and you mentioned it. We all remember the sand pile. Uh, so I think that, you know, my opinion, we need to finish what we got started. We could certainly look at a policy
initiative in the future. Um, but the way it is now, I just look at at at the contract and that's what I have to say. Thank you, Vice Mayor Coker. >> Yeah. Uh, completely agree with
everything that we just heard from Councilman Schistler. And I I just want to hammer in a little bit more. I mean, first off, predictability. If we have a contract that says one thing and now to come and pull that back, that's not good. That's not good for other business
people in the future to realize that they come here, they make a deal with us, and then we're going to pull stuff back. I I definitely have a problem with doing that. Um and and I want to hammer in. We've got a known entity and a known product that is so um is so desirable
and we want to keep that going. I I don't know how many were around and knew how many years and failed attempts to get the manity insight developed and then we finally get it done and look at what a great product we got. So let's keep it going. Otherwise,
we might as well just do the methodone clinics. I mean, we've we've got a a a design and a vision for that 14th Street and and we need to go forward with it. And I I just want to go a little bit f a little bit farther. Um this is not about
providing subsidies to a builder. Um this is a strategic investment by the city um and the CRA and it'll help make the project financially feasible while delivering tangible benefits to our residents.
In return, we're going to gain a highly qual quality workforce housing that will help increase our property values. It's a long-term tax revenue and a continued reinvestment in our com our community.
One of our greatest challenges today in Braon, we all know, is housing affordability and our teachers and our first responders and our healthcare workers and service employees and young professionals. They need a nice place to live and convenient to downtown and
modern and at reasonable prices. So projects like the Met help address that need by providing the quality housing at rates below the prevailing rate the prevailing market. Equally important,
these developments transform underutilized properties, which is what we've talked about. you know, the, you know, it was the manatee ends and now the shuffleboard court and that 7-Eleven property. Um, all of that is prime for
what we want to get done. And our taxpayers will benefit not only from the immediate investment in the community, but also from the long-term economic activity and future revenue that these projects are going to generate. And and
this is not about choosing between economic development and community benefit. It's about achieving both. So by partnering with the private sector, we are leveraging our public resources to create badly needed housing
opportunities, strengthen the neighborhood, and build a stronger tax base that supports the city services in the future. And I believe this is a responsible investment that aligns with our goals of redevelopment, housing affordability for working families, and
long-term financial sustainability for the city of Bradon. And I strongly recommend that we go forward as as the contract stated. >> Mayor, I just want to kind of correct the record that I think what was being read was the proposal for the contract
amendment, >> right? Right. It was never an agreement to provide any sort of of of um waiver of impact fees. I I just think it that was kind of incorrectly read and I'd be remiss if I didn't point that out because the argument had come up
irrespective of what councilwoman Coker's points are. And >> we're not going to let Miss Barnaby talk, >> but I think I definitely have to make that clear. >> Okay. As a matter of fact, these were put in as unsolicited proposals by the developer that explicitly said from my
understanding that there was not going to be sought impact fees. >> Let's get to Mrs. Barnaby and then we can debate more. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. We just we'll have a chance just to come up. >> Dr. Burton, could you please come
forward? and state your name for the record. >> That's my job. State your name and city of residence for the record. >> Well, you know, sometimes he has to be told twice. >> Jeff Burton. I'm the CRA director for the city of Bradenon. I live on Sne
Island. >> Okay. Um, exactly when did the CRA board >> put the incentive package that we have now in place? Do you remember
approximately when we did that? >> How we did that? >> When? >> Oh, when we did that, it's been probably at least 60 days ago. there. Yeah, there's >> no I'm talking because we as a policy sat down and we approved the incentive
opportunities >> on the two the the incentive package was approved by the board the policy about three years ago and the the first property that the CRA dealt with which was meant to be at least
six to nine months ago and then the shuffle board which came later has been at least about 3 months. >> Okay. >> Um is it is this something that the CRA board could choose to do if the CRA board
wanted to? Would we be able to pay a portion of the uh impact fees back to the city to try to get this project going?
The answer to that simply is yes. And to back that up, the fact that this is um workforce housing uh 120 AMI area immediate income um helps support that through the statutes because that's one of the
arguments for having a CRA is to generate uh 80 to 120 AMI housing. Uh, also, uh, it's the removal of, uh, blight in the area that both pieces of property. I
won't speak to MET 2A. It's outside the CRA, but the the one property the CRA owns uh, was a vacant building that had sat vacant for almost a decade, bought in 2017. It was used a little bit by the
police department as a substation, but for the most part had been a derelch building till we demolished it. It was also a brownfield site, which uh has been remediated, which is also supportive of of what we're doing. The city's property, which is the
shuffleboard courts. Um there are three properties, which one of them is the shuffleboard court. One of them is a a vacant fenced parking lot that is in disrepair and has has sat like that unused. So all of these properties
um meet the criteria for blight. All of these properties um can be used especially when we're talking about affordable housing uh workforce housing. Uh the CRA can stand behind that. And since it's been brought
up in the the the process of process of what's happening uh during this next election, I would even bring to the point that we need to be in incentivizing as many nonhomesteaded
products as possible for our tax base because uh this is exempt from the new exemptions that are being proposed. So this this would actually help the city and the CRA and the county and local government in general. So the answer is
yes. So if the and as if you've read my memo, this isn't something that's just from the city of Braden and I've I believe this for the 20 years I've been doing this that CRAAS are here to help the city work with the private sector
and bring in investment. The city should never take a position of incentivizing if they have a CRA in place that's within a CRA district. The CRA needs to do that heavy lifting for the city and the city needs to collect as many fees
as possible because as the memo says, the city's responsible for providing the infrastructure to help make this development happen. If if we didn't have the capacity, if the fire department said to us, you don't have the pressure there to to put the
lines in for all of the sprinkler systems, then we can't develop. We can't redevelop. So, the answer is yes. U unequivoc unequivocably yes that we can do that. And if the city decided to to not wave
impact fees and the CRA board decided that it wanted to step in, then it could. And we would provide for you a costbenefit analysis because we're talking about all these dollars as if they exist. But one of the beautiful parts about redevelopment is it's
self-funding, which means none of those dollars that we talked about today, the incentives, the the increment revenue to the CRA, they don't exist until the developer invests in the property and creates it, they create the revenue that
we spend. So, we need to be very respectful of that and encourage that. So that would be something that we would we could have a discussion about um in case the city said that they did not want to to wave the impact fees.
>> Is there a is there a limit to what we could do? Is there only a certain percentage or could we >> I would recommend that since the statute states that we are supportive of affordable housing in the Sierra
district if it was 7030 which I'm supportive of that also um 70% affordable 30% market because we should not be denying our downtown that added income that that disposable income that market rate people might rent from.
uh uh the MET. So I would say we we should look at uh forgiving or paying the city um 70% as as whatever the percentage is that are going to be affordable. Well, I guess my question was not to the
division of how the apartments go, but should the CRA pay 70% of the impact fees and the city collect 30% from the developer or what what can we pay up to 100%.
>> They could. I would I would um I mean that argument could be made. Have to think about it. I would 100% say 70% because that's the affordability percentage. >> The 30% would be something that that we would the CRA board would have to take
in consideration. Uh if it made that big of a difference in the um in the project that the but for if you know if this is if this doesn't happen then then we can't build it kind of argument then then you should consider that also. Um,
but right off the bat, the 70% automatically. Yes. >> Okay. Um, I am very interested in hearing what Mr. Gabi has to say, but don't go away. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. The M vice may not
>> on the Met one the, if I'm remembering, there were no impact fees on that. Was that paid for? I mean, was it just forgiven by the city or was it >> forgiven by that was something that was done prior to the policies we have in place? And I agree with the city
administrator. You know, this type of thing, we need to have a policy put in place so we don't run into this type of situation. If the city and the city CRA board can agree that, hey, it's affordability. We want to support affordability. Um then we will also because we do have
a factor for affordability built into our incentives then we would we would make those adjustments and bring it back to both parties. That way the next time our attorney needs to do a contract it's automatic and it happens very fast. I
like very fast. >> Thank you Mr. Shusler than this more. >> Yeah. Just very quickly I just wanted to go back to what Mr. Perry said about it. Not, you know, it it seems to me that I just wanted some clarity on it. The
the waiver, uh, you know, is built into the contract. In terms of the second amendment on page, you know, three, it says waiver of certain impact fees. And four, I don't have the original one, and it's blank, so it's, you know, maybe my
novice read at it, but then again on page eight. So, I was just wondering to me it seems like it was built into the contract. >> You're reading the proposed amendment. >> Okay, let me maybe Mr. Ruda. >> Yeah, let me clarify. >> What you're looking at in the agenda
packet is supposed to be redlined. >> Okay. >> But it's not showing up that way. But that is the way it's supposed to be. And if it were, you would see that that section is new, >> the impact fee waver section. >> All right. >> Thank you,
>> Miss Moore. Um, I agree that um, a lot of this angst that we're facing would be alleviated by a policy and I'd like to see us move forward with that. Um, the Dr. Burton's memo addressed some things like the CRA incentives and how that's a
tool in our toolbox plus the EDC coming online to provide some kind of cityside incentives. But, um, the problem I think we're facing right now is that none of that exists at this moment in time. Um, I think that there was an intent to provide some relief originally, but
obviously it's was not in the original contract and that's why we're here today. Um, I just want to make sure I understand how all of this is working and how we what we're actually doing. So, and I'll just speak to the one not
the one that is outside of the CRA. So, not the one inside the CRA. Um, but do I understand correctly that the we have an estimate of the the impact fees to be approximately $440,000 that those uh amounts have to be paid.
So those are dollars that to uh contrary to the CRA that self-funding incentives are are given out as they earn the um income or you know as we earn the revenue we um that's when they get the incentive. In this instance, we're waving impact fees that
will in fact have to be paid. And that some are going to be enterprise related things and some are going to be general revenue things. So if the impact fee is for something like a road or landscaping, I'm just throwing out things that are general revenue that comes out of general revenue. And if
they are things like a pipe or something having to do with the sewer system, that's an enterprise and it comes out of the enterprise. Do I understand that correctly? >> Generally speaking, you're correct. I mean, police services, fire service, the vast majority of that funding is going to come from
>> general revenue. >> General revenue, right? General general fund revenue. >> And then if we have to pay that to what fund are we paying that? So we have to pay >> it comes back into the general fund. >> Okay. >> Yep. >> And then um and then so if that's the case, if some
of it is going back in would you say that is there is there some split like do we have any idea like how much goes back into the general fund? And where I'm coming, where I'm going with that is obviously this concern that we don't know what our income gap might be in years two, three, four in the near future.
So that's the nature of the concern is that we're going to be paying out impact fees in two or three or four years, but we're not um necessarily going to be having a very we're going to have a revenue gap because of what potentially could happen in November. Do I
understand that Elsa correctly? um to a certain extent. I mean the >> and I guess I mean where I'm going with all of that is I just want to know what we're actually having to pay because
if we are if we can quantify that to some extent and we can assess our level of risk based on what happens in November. I think that we're better equipped to say >> when you say we have to pay what what are you referring to that we have to pay? My understanding when we were in our one-on-one was that the impact fee
waiver doesn't mean that it it doesn't work just like oh okay the the uh builder Mr. Goi doesn't have to write a check. It means that we cover those expenses actually physically in real time. We pay the impact fees to ourselves to some extent. >> No,
>> that's not the way it works. >> The developer when they go in to get um a um a building permit >> Robin, do you want to >> Oh. Yeah, >> probably just a little bit. >> Mr. Mr. Yeah, I think maybe Mr.
>> I think what she's saying is if the city were to wave the impact fees, >> right, >> they don't just not get paid. The city would fund the shortfall of the impact fees. >> Yeah. Basically, what the impact fee is
to basically calculate at some level the additional services that are needed for the new housing. If you have raw land that hadn't been developed before and you say I'm going to put a subdivision in, the fire department's going to have to basically figure out, okay, now we got a larger service area. Same thing
with the police general fund operations. And then of course the utility infrastructure um as well as the impact on that. >> Well, I I get that part. I think and I agree with I mean Mr. Rutil was correct in in paraphrasing, but what I'm saying
is um some of those things are a little nebulous. they're a little less quantifiable. The impact on our fire department is maybe a little less quantifiable as the impact on needing to expand a pipe so that the fire department can hook up and put out a
fire in something that has increased density. So, I'm just I'm trying to figure out if we're writing a check or if we're just saying, "Okay, that's less income that we're willing to gamble and and say we're not going to we're not going to collect that and hope that we're healthy enough to weather whatever
kind of expenses we might have. impact fees are somewhat nebulous um because you're you're assuming that because of future development growth there will be an impact there'll be an impact on the roads there'll be an impact on the sewer there'll be an impact on the water the
fire the police and the school district and so that's what allows authorities to basically charge impact fees within their permitting process I'm assuming through state law I don't know the specific provision but as far as the exact amount ount of the impact. That's
what's nebulous, >> right? Well, I think one of the things, Miss Mour, and I agree with you from the standpoint of, okay, the impact is they're going to put this many apartments, >> but we're not adding two police officers and two firefighters because then that's a fixed cost,
>> right? >> You know, but the impact could be to that area goes into general fund because we just had to pay $1.6 million to fix it. Well, everybody that's had an impact in the whole city put money into the general fund for impact fees, but that's
stuff that unfortunately we as a city, not us, but we as over the years have not sometimes maintained some of that. And that's my part of it is so you don't punish people going forward because then, you know, but you got to you got
to collect it. But I like if the CRA because of the impact to it, if the city would not have spent before I got on in 2013 the money to buy Manatees Ends, it would be a nightmare right now. And they kept going back on that before that
the city overpaid, the city overpaid, the city overpaid $1ome million dollars for that property. But you know what? We wouldn't be where we are today if the city would have never overpaid. And I kept telling them when I was talking to the members of trying not to do the
original Met, I kept saying, "Listen, yeah, but how do you charge that guy 1.6 because what they paid for it? It's only worth 600,000 now." You know, so the million dollars people were wanting to recoup, but you know what that million dollars
was worth to what? To get that out of there. I mean, how much did it cost for the police department and the fire department to be there three and four times a night on a weekend or seven times on a Saturday because there were drug deals going on and people were
overdosing. So, that was an impact at that moment where now we see what that did. So, that million dollars that we overpaid was what the slum and blight got cleaned up and changed the dynamic. So again, we're talking about a lot of semantics,
a lot of all the things, but I just think that, you know, again, if it can be 7030 and the CRA can pay 70%. Because that's what it's to do because he wants to do it and the other 30% we might have to decide well to get the project, we want to forgive that. >> Well, and that that's what I was going
for. I mean because that's what I'm trying to reconcile I think for us is if we so we have this not I mean we know what maybe the impact fees are are going to be what we would charge uh for that at least the one project that we're aware um we know that the CRA can
potentially refund us some 70% of one the one project because the other one's outside of the CRA. So those are dollars if we are if we if you less out what we charge because we wave it. We know 70% of one project comes in. That's plus.
Yep. Anytime. Correct me if my math is not right. And then potentially we plus what we think uh alternative revenue sources post November look like for something like a revitalized city park area
and commercial properties. Is that the calculation then that we're kind of doing? >> I don't think so. I mean I I think I I think it gets fairly >> You were doing good. >> Fairly tricky. Yeah. Till till the end. Right. Yeah. That's a good way to put
it. I I think really that if if the city if the CRA was willing to to reimburse 70% of it to the city and the developer agrees to pay 30% of it, which is pretty good deal. Um
we you know I I think that's a good way to accommodate the need for the for the growth the accommodation to the developer so that they can do a quality project and the same way to protect the city's interest in the impact fees. >> But if we got 70% doesn't matter where
the money comes from would we be able to survive without the other 30% if we decided to forgive it as a city >> the 30% to the developer. >> Yeah. No it's an incentive for him to keep the project going. Yeah. >> And and get it done, >> right? Well, I think he'd be getting the
70% incentive, right? >> But we're worried about what the city >> we're trying to get to 100, but we're worried about the city getting a project. >> Yeah. >> And you know, >> I I got no problem 70% of the impact fees. I don't care who pays them, whether it's developer
>> project though to be >> I don't care if somebody walks through the door right now. >> We got to keep the math going, >> right? And there's two projects is what I was kind of alluding to. So that's why I was trying to do crazy math because we got 70% of one project available to us from CRA. Then we have potentially
commercial you know nonadal or I'm sorry advalorum you know increasing in value theoretically depending you know depending on what happens in November >> and then we have increase >> no it's going to increase will be taken off of it
>> right well I mean I think that they're cap they're capping assessed value but ne regardless like that's just the math I'm trying to be commercial property >> it's commercial it's not c >> right no I know but in November there's a it's potential that we >> homesteaded properties Not these properties. >> No, I know. But I think that there is a
the proposed limit on how much you can increase the assessed value of commercial properties. >> That's true. Between the >> going from 10% to 5%. >> Right. Yeah. So, I was just trying to do that math. >> Still going to be >> right. And so, like I'm like I'm thinking if if the nature of Mr. Perry and Mr. Williams concern, which is a very good one. I appreciate them, you
know, letting us know when they're concerned is that we are potentially facing a revenue gap in general revenue after November. Um, I'm trying to figure out how you make up those dollars. Then that sounds like the CRA to 70% of one of the projects is a is an option and
potential increase in the commercial the value of the commercial property plus the nature of the entertain, you know, the the economic development that will be happening in the area with with the um city park.
>> I'd like to hear from Mr. Gaboody. >> Sure. if he has anything he wants to say. >> Yep. >> Welcome. Thank you. >> Did we get the Did we get anything up on the computer or never came up? >> No, we have something. First of all,
hello. Thank you for seeing me. I appreciate it. It's great to see friends. And uh we except for the last 15 minutes where I had everything perfectly planned out here. I was like I was like I was like I said to Tamara, "Okay, I gotta move this slide here. I gotta do that." I think like don't let
my Jerry Seinfeld voice scream up when I start to get excited. Keep it calm. Keep it normal. Thanks for letting Rob go first. By the way, like I didn't see that on the agenda. Okay. I want to start off with from our
understanding of developing these two projects. We'll talk about 2B which is across the street from the Met and I and I have a great presentation to tell you about the rental in the rental numbers how much lower they are than everything else on the market and the fact that you know and I and I think one of my most
one of my best moments was when when Dr. Burton came to see the Met one for the very first time. He turned around and he looked at me and he said well he's over here. He said this is a class A building and that's what we built. We didn't build something a block with no windows
and then decided, "Oh boy, I better paint something on the exterior like we have a hundred yards down the road from us." >> So, we essentially built a class A building and that's why we're at 95% occupancy and and the market around is
77%. We're at 95% because we're giving people a place to live that they should live in and they shouldn't be skimped on on anything. But I I do want to the most important message I because I don't want to let Rob get out of here without this.
Without a doubt, the the the the city paying or waving the Well, really, it's paying. Lisa's correct. Miss Moore is correct. >> Paying the impact fees were always part of this deal. They were never not part of the deal. It just was omitted out of
a mistake between everybody. But the MET one had the impact fees. It was part of the agreement. We went to a different agreement now. Dr. Burton came up with a Craig plan which makes us allow impact windows and we just improved the product
all the way through and it and it was like it was just it was an oversight that wasn't included. But to say that it's three months, six months, it's years that that has been in the understanding and there's no way to do these buildings like and his example
which I still want to go through this presentation and uh luckily that three minutes hasn't started yet is that you know the MET one was a $32 million cost for 200 units. the MET two across the
street with a hundred units to be is a $20 million cost. So things aren't going down, things are going up. There is no way we can underwrite this without the expectation which we 100% felt and under
I mean underwrote this completely use your words because that's how we do this with the waiver or the payment of the impact fees and and should I have been all over it a year ago probably but it was just an understanding that I thought
we had and and of course now we're in a situation where Tallahassee is saying things and getting everybody very concerned and then I you know my timing could not be worse. It is impossible for it to be worse. But we still want to
build these class A workforce housing communities that are successful because you you were here, Jean. You remember and I remember you know, thank you police department. I used to call before I'd have the lenders come and I had 10
people come. I would call the police department and and two hours before I'd have one of my staff go with him and they get everybody off the site and then the the lender, oh, this is an interesting site. Had he seen the people there in the tents, there would never be a met one. So, it's really done amazing
things for our community and and it's our community and and it's not a a flip deal. It's an opportunity zone. So there's no there's no profit for us until the end of the 10-year period and the lura is expired. Like this is an investment in the community if it's an
investment on our side into the community and it's an investment that you know someone like Dr. Jeff that actually he's been around forever and he knows what a class A building is. And so that's what we do. And even in the Met 2B across the street, you know, we have,
you know, we we've actually given up rental space to put an art gallery for the Village of the Arts. So they can, you know, for the five people that aren't happy, try to get two of them happy. So there's only three people that aren't happy that there's more people shopping in their stores and eating in
their restaurants. And then a gym so that not only can it be a class A building, but it would have all the benefits the MET one people can use. submit two building for the gym. It's like it's just creating this community and and I really, you know, shame on me
for not like screaming, you know, why is this not included? But it was always included in our understanding. But again, this is the way the world works. I made a huge mistake and it probably should have been, you know, from day one. But working with the CRA and the
way they work so efficiently with us with me specifically uh I it was almost like hey dear Robin dear Greg by the way uh you know how are we right how are we getting these waiver it was an email like >> where's Rob it was an email one day how are we waving these impact fees and then
that's when this became something but it wasn't even a I I I didn't go to Rob I didn't I didn't go to Scott and say hey by the way we have to you know how are we doing this it was a simple email saying, "Okay, so now that we're going to be paying for the permits, how do we
wave the impact fees?" So, I'd love to get to my presentation. It's been a long day for you guys here. I I I don't want to keep you too long. I just think it's important that that the incentives and the waiverss, you know, they're not a gift for a developer. They're not a gift
for us in this position. you know, there it's a it's a necessary investment into our city and we get the payback and and if we went to hypothetically the you know, the the uh other categories where we pay no taxes, you know, it's less
money costwise for us, but there's no benefit to the city. Like the live local is a great thing and we see everybody going in that direction right now. But for me, it goes against what I believe is best for the city because I want that tax money. You know, right now, like as
Dr. Jeff said, like the the tax credits that are are given back to us are generated by us. It's not like you're writing us a check. It's a matter of us generating and building these buildings and making sure and like to keep it 95% occupancy, which is really really key.
You know, we live on this every day. So when we see like the rents are, you know, all of a sudden we're at 92, we drop the rents, get them back up to 95, like you know, it's a very very fluid operation to keep it fully occupied because we want happy people. Now I'm going to try I don't I'll go through
this because I've spent so much time on it. Tamara, I'm okay. So, I I I don't mean to be emotional about it, but it's just I it's it was something that was understood and agreed
upon, but wasn't executed. So, in all fairness, it you have every right to say no uh because there's nothing here. But that the general understanding 100% from our side was that that it was just a matter of you know here dear Robin and Greg how do we handle this? It
wasn't a matter of calling even the mayor or calling anybody else and and and that's why we're here and so next time that won't be happen. And I do agree you have to create a you know in a line in the sand. It's just not right now and not on this. I I agree with you.
Like I agree with you because otherwise you're going to have I mean the last meeting I had developers here that were here 20 years before me giving me an attab boy and I'm going no don't do that to me. You know I'm not the guy for that. You got to find somebody that you know this is workforce housing. This
isn't an attab boy. This is how do we take community areas of our city and make them better and and the Met one has proven that. So, I'm going to stop with the off the off the uh
cuff comments and go right to what I talked about. And the first slide is showing, you know, this is going to be what the shuffleboard met uh three would look like. And I'll show you some pictures, but it's all class A. Like, as an example, MET 2B is $200,000 a door to
build. So, it's not anything cheap. There's nothing skimping because that's what keeps the buildings occupied. That's what puts the right people in there. And and even when we talked to the village of the arts people, their complaint was for some of the people that actually develop in the village of
the arts and live there is that when they were developing their other projects, they couldn't rent at the Met because they didn't meet the qualification. So they'll find anything to argue about, but really it's giving them such a benefit. And you can see by the colors we we've completely engaged
ourselves in uh in the village of the arts. And so today's there was two things. I I have three here of mistake, but there's two things to talk about. Um Scott, Mr. Councilman Schustler has the amendment. Scott's got the amendment. Um
it's for the lura for the met the same as what we did for the met one to include for the met 2B and into the met three which is called shuffleboard the A and B we got to talk to we got to talk to Kim about how it became A and B. It's very confusing but I'm not going to
argue about it. So I think we've got we've got a grasp on it. U and and that's what we really need to do. And and I'm going to jump from here to uh page to number page 18, which I didn't have in the correct order, but these are
the buildings that this city council has approved the waivers for. So the yes, the Mets at the top, I highlighted it, but then you see these one, two, three, four buildings, they all had waivers. I'm not creating
I'm not coming out of the blue with something brand new. this is existing and this is what you know so so I agree with you in the drawing the line in the sand okay absolutely you have to manage your fiscal responsibility Rob and get
better but not today now let's go back to where I was okay so here we go so you know we so much of you know with the CRA we talk about market rate we want to build market rate. That's the future for the city of Bradenton is to build market
rate. And we talked to Councilman Moore over and over again about how we can get there. But the market's really tough right now. So, but we do need more market rate product. And so, Dr. Jeff's idea of to allow 30% market rate and 70%
affordable. We could be 100% workforce just because of the fact of the where we are and because we may not be able to generate the market rate numbers at this stage but we know the city needs more market rate product and you've done that
with the new city hall and that like you've done an amazing job really Dr. Jeff did a great job on that bill. Uh but but why should a frontline worker not live in a class A building? I mean, I think it's just something that we've and if you've been to the Met, which I
think we have been there a few times, like we've got everything that we use between the the the car system, the mobility, the community of the Village of the Arts, you know, engaging them, not just ignoring them. You know, when people call me and they'll say, "Well, well, you're parking in the Village of
the Arts." And I said, "Ma'am, really, honestly, we're not. We have a service that that absolutely checks to see every night if there's somebody, you know, parking in the village of the in our community. What's the percentage? 85%, 92%. So, they are parking in our parking
lot. And and that same lady said, "But you're charging for parking." I said, "We're not charging for parking." Yes, you are. Okay, but we're not. We do not charge for parking. You can't charge for parking in a workforce project. If somebody has uh one if we have one and a
half cars and they want to get another spot, it's like $20 a month. Like there's no real it's not a profit center. We don't charge for parking. They get free spots. Okay. And this is an this I really want if I'm going to shorten this
presentation. I'd really like to see the class A work the class A buildings that we have in our community. You can see the Mets average is 1360 a month and then you can go through all these other names that we're so familiar with that
go all the way up to with my terrible eyesight here 2100 a month. That's an average that's not a per unit and and and look where we are and and we're really proud of that because that means that we monitor the rental market so
that when people can afford it, we drop the price so they can afford it. That's what 80 to 120 means. It doesn't mean you go to 120. It means you use all your assets that you can to fill the buildings up. And it's a 10-year period. It's a longtime hold. It's not a
short-term flip. Like, you know, I'm going to own this. Hopefully, I'm around when this is when it done does come out of out of the Lura. But we've we committed to offer reduced pricing on a class A building and it's an amazing
building. And honestly, last time when I, you know, my grandson was in town, I took him over there and he's like, "Wow." Walking around and I took pictures and I was like I was more excited than he was. He he went to get on a tractor because I he had to get on a tractor that day. How much longer do we have to stay here? I want to get on a
tractor. But it's important to know that look at these brands. You see all these names and they are the same class A buildings that we have, but look at our numbers compared to them. So, you know, we can talk the talk, but action speaks
and and people of know that if this was so easy, everybody would do it. It's not easy and it's a serious commitment and and we know and and I know each one of you and I know that you appreciate that and that's what motivates me because it's not going to change my life and I
don't go buy a new car because of this. It's just the right thing to do for our city. Now Rob, back to the timing thing again. Really bad. Okay. Like really bad timing. So we're talking about the Met one. Then
we have which is built was 199 units. 95% occupied 94% these numbers I I updated except for that clause. The MET 2 is 100 units. Uh and you know we've taken because the police station was there and
former restaurants and whatever they had there uh we we we together with the city with the CRA we created the fastest brownfield that's ever been done. So that property had a tank underneath
there. We cleaned it up and made and so think about this. What a great PR story that we get to say that this this was a it's a brownfield defined by the state and now we have a hundred people living in there with a with a beautiful art
gallery and a gym which is a brownfield which means people oh I don't want to live anywhere near that. We cleaned it up and we did that and we did that with state credits and we did it with the work of Dr. Jeff pushing everybody in the world to get it done. So this is something that we should be
super proud of because it it's you know when you have a tank in there it could be 13 15 years before anything happens but we did it and the same thing as the manity insight you know I remember the push back you know you were here Gene it was like well we paid so much money for
it and then but but how look where it is now and look at the tax revenue that it's generating. Uh and the Met 3 shuffle board is is an amazing location. Yeah, I I don't love that 7-Eleven. I can't tell. I've told everybody in the world like if it could be anything else.
You know, I I I'm a slurpie guy, but I'm like, "Oh, man. Do I really want to park here?" You know, I'm running in and running out. But that's going to change, too. When the shuffle boards up and that building of 145 units is built, it's going to it's going to improve the
entire area. And we won't be afraid to go get our gas at that 7-Eleven. But that's but that's what our job is is to see the future not just to live where we are right now. Uh okay. Uh these are just some information
on the site on the cultural components but it's been a long morning. I don't need to keep you here. The proximity though of you can see for the MET one and the MET 2B you know right we're dealing with the FDOT so we can probably hopefully get a crosswalk to get access
so that the MET one tenants get to use the gym they'll be able to go to the art gallery. You can see the parking. It's nice configured. We could have put more units and increased the density but it wasn't necessary because a 100 units is really enough. You we want to keep the buildings full. We don't want to have
vacancy. So, it's nice to to to have a building that you can proudly say is 95% occupied is way better than saying you have a beautiful building that's 70% occupied. Uh, and this is a this is what the uh
MET 2B across the street will look like. Consistent with the MET 2A across the street that's across the street and you know and and and thanks to you know what Dr. Jeff has done through this, you know, taking taking brownfield and
putting it into a thriving community with with the incentive that he's given us. Yes. So, we're spending 20 million to build it. Of our tax revenue getting back, we're going to get 2.3 million over 12 years. The CRA is still net almost $700,000 after that. And so, from
that point on, it's all profit that will go. And I guess I I I don't quite understand the uh delta between if it's homesteaded or not. But there the good news I've learned while sitting here anxiously trying to get up here is that there is there is money that will be
coming to you. It's not it can't be homesteaded. That's a great thing that which I did not know that but you know so so the gross revenue will come back to the city to the CRA and they can do more creative things which was impressive you know this CRA is
something very special what you have here I I've I mean really it's it's it's think they plan they they go out of their way to do things they think out of the box you know we we're trying something in one area and like we're just trying new things all the time and
and and I actually stepped out of the way um and said to the buyer of this project that we really want to have that I think you all know about because the seller was just impossible. I just said, "You know what? Let me step away. I'm I'm out of here. Here's the address.
He's right here. Give me here's your phone number." And I said, and he said, "Great. Thanks a lot, Marshall." But he's dealing direct with them. And and all I asked the seller to do was was was was one thing. I said, "I want a donation to the Salvation Army and I
want a donation to the Boys and Girls Club." And he said, "Well, I'll pay." No, no, you don't pay me anything. I want nothing because we need this. We We need that parcel. And one day we'll get it. If it's not today, it's in a month. and and and I really believe that it's going
to be great for the city and and and how that can expand and and it's it's just about the the puress and the integrity of our mush which I didn't even know what it meant until and he said you know sometimes he's thinks people are his speed and he's going PPP and I'm going
oh man what the hell is he talking about now I know what private part public partnerships are you know and we've really created that amongst ourselves and and and and I believe that that will happen uh in in that other area too. And
you know in the Met 3, you know, it's 145 units. It's going it's it's very expensive, $35 million to build. We have an you know, this will hopefully be in the 40-year CRA. And you know, after 18 years, you know, there's $24 million that's going to be
generated back to the CRA. So, you know, as the mayor said earlier, we build something and yes, the tax revenue would be, you know, we would be getting a credit for it, but that's only for a certain amount of time and then the
city, the CRA gets it back. So, that's why the waiver for the impact fees, yes, it's money, but it's still something that's very necessary. And and I really, you know, it's great that that he's stepping up to say he'd pay for it, but that really wasn't what I came here today to talk to you. I
really wanted to convince you that this is something the city should do because it was done on all these other projects. It was done on the MET one. And so it's just it's kind of slightly unfair when something that was understood to say,
well, now it's not part of it. So, I I disagree to some degree with with with Rob saying that, you know, this is all brand new. Wasn't part of it. It was always part of it. It just wasn't documented properly. I'm sorry. I I
uh and and so we all know the social mobil all your mobility, all the assets that you've done, you know, we take part of. We want people to be we're going to add sustainability. uh we're going to add the resilience to our buildings that that only we do so well because that's my niche. That's
what I really are I'm really known for and and I want to bring that so that people don't have to live in you know class B buildings and not have the power goes off and you know because it's not a flood zone but FPNL our great friends
you know heavy rain the power goes off so we don't want that to happen. I'm going to go through this. This is what the Met 3 shuffle board will look like. Um there's some great views of it. It's got a beautiful round entrance and u it's it's really special. Uh it's an
it'll be an amazing building and it'll do a lot. I'm going to quickly touch on uh 2A which we we are very proud of. This will be the very first net zero multif family I had in America. I I just didn't I don't think there is a multif
family that's net zero in the country. But when we do have this building built, it'll be the most impressive. The fact that that people can live in in workforce housing net zero and that will get this community and us recognition
across the country. And I think it's something we're very proud of and it's something that hasn't been done because the question normally is as you see down the street, well, how many windows do we have to put in there? You know, do you really need a door here? Instead, we're saying we're giving you a net zero
product, which means the this this multif family will generate more power than it consumes. And we'll talk about that in July. Uh I I I mentioned a few things that have become harder in Florida. You know, the building activity, as we can tell, it it's
completely at it stopped. Uh costs even, you know, in our in our single family business, costs are going up all the time. I mean it's just impossible for trades and you know we think that you know even even really great builders are
going bankrupt. So that's why all these things are so important and and with the support that you give us at at at the way you you sell us the land at like the most reasonable prices that's what allows these buildings to go up. So, it's a pure partnership because
otherwise, you know, you you could sell it for more money and nothing would get built, but somebody in 10 years would build something else on it, you know, and and I and I think that's what makes this PPP of our relationship and and the performance. I remember
sitting sitting over here and um there's a great guy, Mike Carter, was building a across the street at 2B. He he was at a meeting and he said he's not going to build the storage anymore. It was going to be a storage. 2B was supposed to be storage. And then uh someone from city council, I think it was Mr. Gallow,
said, "So why don't you make it?" And and I said, "No, sir. Nothing until I actually get one of them up." >> Well, we had approved that, too. >> Yes, I know. >> We had already approved it. >> Yeah. >> No, it was going it was done. >> And and and you know, but out of respect and also the fact that I I hadn't
started anything yet as far as the multif family, I I wanted to prove and see how we could execute prior to taking something else on. But look, here we are. Little more gray hair, a little less hair, and uh different people, but we all feel the same way about the
community. And so, the way that we we fund this is the underwriting is important. And we have the history with the with the lenders. They they love the occupancy. They're very happy to get going. Uh you
work with us all the time. And and I I really feel like, you know, we're at the path now for, you know, maybe not three more, but at least these next two would give us a really great foothold on the number of units of workforce housing
that would keep our community, the the people like I have someone that works on my site and and he's a manager and he's making 65,000 a year and he lives so far out in Sarasota, it's an hour for him to get to the site and now he's going to move into the Met because now it's a it's quick 15inute drive for him and and
that's what this is for. So we're not building hundreds 3,000 of them. We have another 14 245 260 units. So it's not like we're overwhelming the workforce product. We're just giving more place if we're at 95% which means in a couple years those
other ones will be at 95%. We still have the shuffle board or shuffle boarding so we have a couple years before we start that one. U and and then you know I I wanted to show you the path. Of course, it's not something that I I in any way feel like I want to do like I I I am so
against the live the live local program that you know I I didn't even want to show it to you. But you can see you pay zero for for 30 years and for us you know when if we do when we do this the
CRA's payment you know look at the increase by 2000 in year 30 look how much money they're making and and that's what you know you know Dr. burdens put together with the incentive of giving the incentive. We invest it and then the
tax credit they give us that tax credit for the short period of time and then the tax goes right to the city. So the live local, we know that's the new thing, but we still believe for the benefit of the city, it's the right way
to go with with uh the CRA incentives. I've seen this page. page. I could I may come back to this page one more time. So, every one of these has the waivers. >> But the bottom two, right, the ones on the right are county. >> And the is county.
>> Yes, they are. >> So 9 just so people don't say we're trying to >> No. No. >> On the left are city. >> The riverview >> top and the the 920 and Riverview 6 are city. >> Okay. >> Uh >> they had to get help from the county, >> right?
>> They wouldn't have made it. But yes, I that's a uh >> I mean we put ours in as much as we could for 920 Riverview 6 and then if the county at the time wouldn't have then jumped on, they wouldn't have happened. >> And also the other one, what's the other one?
>> Um you could have put that in um a story on ninth, >> right? >> Yeah. So that could have been in there. >> Yes. Uh and then we talk about the re the income and the dollar value and and with the every incentive and what the
redevelopment value comes to. Uh you know, right now this is for this is for the shuffle board. Uh there's $3,000 in annual city tax which I don't think I think the shuffleboard club pays a dollar of. um you know and then by the
time we're you know we're complete you know it'll be $175,000 a year in taxes >> taxes not including the economic >> no just pure just pure taxes >> 7-Eleven >> yeah and and and so that just shows the
like yes in and I I didn't really understand the the model of what the CRA does until you you live it and you see that it's a great idea idea. You You give them the tax credit and and they it
comes back eightfold. So, I know I'm going a little too long. I'm going to shut this down shortly. Uh let's see what else. So, you know, I really if we could look at this relationship and partnership through the lens of the PPP,
you know, the return is 10 years away. Even for the shuffle board, it's 12 years away by the time we get started. The importance of significance of class A buildings are very important for frontline workers or anybody that moves in our community that can afford whether
it be the $900 studio or the $1,300 two-bedroom. Like that's important for us because that gives us the chance to hire more people. It's impossible to hire people here. It's just impossible. And and I think that it's something that it's a pride factor
and it's a and I think it's a a mutual pride factor between everybody here and and I know it's tough and I I recognize Rob's issue and I recognize the fiscal who knows where this is going to come out in November and where it's all going to lay down. But for these two projects,
I would really ask you to stick to where we were and support us and let us deliver these great projects for you that they're not Ritz Carlton's, they're not market rate things. There's nobody's getting rich on these things. It's it's
a service that we're providing that we really love to do. And uh when you get to a certain age, you kind of like these things. And it means more than money sometimes. And uh and that's how I feel about these. That's why I was like trying to jump out of my chair. I was
all perfectly set for calm, you know, nice calm conversation. But thank you for your time. Thank you for your consideration. Thank you for your friendship. And thank you most importantly for your trust because it means a lot to me. >> All right. Um what was the name of a jeans company that once was at JC
Penney? >> Arizona Jeans. >> Arizona Jeans. So, um, before I go out to the council members, I just want to say one of the things that that I think that, you know, again, we got to try to work through the numbers. We got to do all of that. Figured out what's the win-win for
everyone. You know, we all walk out with a smile. But and for the citizens especially and and those, but um, you are a proven product in our town, >> whether it started with Marbella with Mr. Gallow and kind of that situation
going then the Met and then another product in the county you're doing which you know again it doesn't matter from where it started from what it is what's the cost of it is you're a proven product and you could be sitting in your Arizona jeans
>> in a nice place with grandchildren running around >> and doing a lot. >> You don't need to be doing what you're doing. So when I say that's the things that I support and again I don't have a vote and I'm even giving up a tiebreaking vote. >> I see that you're I I I see you're giving up your vote here.
>> Um but from the standpoint of what our city is and what my life has been where we're at and and and again I don't disagree with Mr. Perry and Mr. Williams really trying to give us all of the options because that's important that we
see that and then it does as Mr. Perry always says it comes to a policy decision by five people. But I just want to thank you and this is nothing to do with anything other than you're a proven product commodity in our town. And when you're a proven product or commodity,
you want to try to build off of that and know what's happening. And you know there's in government elected officials are always going to have stuff. But it's how we make it better. how we do a impact fee over next door which again
nobody said would succeed. it succeeded how a sand pile and again I'm beating a dead horse on the sand pile but >> just think of the economic impact if those apartments would have been there 50 years ago right >> obviously be a whole different scenario
but the impact of what would come in and that's that's what that I see as a vision as and as a very conservative person on finances >> right >> because that's how I grew up with my dad in 1975
with no money as a poor Cortez fisherman starting a family business with a vision and we still work it today with him. You know, if it's five cents, $5 or 500 or 5,000, still the same questions come in, >> right?
>> Because you have to make sure you're doing it right. >> So, I appreciate all of the staff and what they've done, but then it comes a policy decision. Are we willing to take a chance? And I think that's where we're at now. So, um, and I couldn't remember Arizona jeans. They just >> Yeah. No. Um, but
>> my son-in-law called me. He he, his mother said, "Get some stuff out of your the house." And, uh, so he had to go pick it up and he opened up a pair of board shorts. And he says, "She bought them for me in 1998." I said, "Yes, I made those with the tag on them." So,
uh, and and and and and I I and when I talk to my wife when we're alone and I sometimes I say the relationship that I feel like I have here and with the CRA and it's it's akin to my relationship with the penny company at the time when
it was a real family, you know, it was like I had my own access card, you know, every it was just it was great. It was it was a time of life that, you know, you can never forget and and and this is what this has turned out for me. It's it's not about the short-term money.
It's it's it's a long-term project and and it helps. And then when you drive by the Met, I I can tell you I go down 14th Street and I take more videos. I don't get I don't text and drive like I used to, but I video and drive now as I go by and I look at it later, you know, and I
think >> standard, >> you know, and and and honestly, it's like it's it's like it's a great feeling and and uh I just want to continue it and I just know my timing and I get what you're up against. I I I get it. a month and a half ago would have been
not a discussion, but I know where we are and so like I think that I would be happy to help with the digging of the line in the sand uh after the next few days. I'm happy to bring the shovel to dig the line, but thank you for your time, >> Miss Barnaby.
Um yes. I think what I think what you see is that um while it may have been kind of a understanding that to get affordable housing in the city that we would
automatically do these things. I think you see now it's not such an automatic thing. >> Uhhuh. >> And I'm not I'm not so sure it should be. I think we should be having these discussions >> when we go to to approve
>> these kind of projects. >> Um, we've we've heard from the CRA director that should the CRA board choose to do so, they could pay up to 70% of the impact fees, which would leave
another 30%. If the CRA board chooses to do that and pay the 70%. What would that mean to your project? Because if I'm if I'm doing it the math correctly, $144,000.
30% of that is $132,000. What would that do to your project? >> You say 440. >> Yeah. >> You said 134. Well, but 30% of 440. >> Yeah, but you said when you said 134, you meant 440.
>> No, she took the 30%. I think that's I'm taking 30% of for >> I'm I'm follow >> Are you follow? Okay. I mean, I promise you, yes, I have numbers dyslexia. >> No, no, I follow you. I really do follow you. >> I do follow. Is that something that as
as the builder that you would be able to work around or I know it would be difficult. I don't like asking the impossible, but tell me tell me what that could mean.
>> You know, on on the uh MET 2B, uh it would be doable on on the shuffle board if we have the 40-year CRA in place. it it would be doable if we don't have the 40-year CRA in place. It would be
more difficult because the 40-year CRA, which I think is the general plan, and I'm not speaking for Dr. Burton, you know, many things he's got juggling, but uh the 40-year CRA would make it workable. Uh
and and and we could be 100% affordable like so there wouldn't be a 70% factor. Um, but I I do see the merit in in the in having people move there that aren't restricted by their income.
Um, it just depends on, you know, would the shuffle board itself be able to generate shuffle board, that's a great name for it, but would the shuffleboard itself in that area generate market rates? That's the question because we know the Met one can't generate market
rate. you know, the few people that would come, it would work for, but for the most part, it's successful because it's it's affordable. And so, if we take it and say 30% of it's going to be, you know, instead of the average of 1300, it's going to be 1,700. You know, would
we lo like how much would our vacancy increase, which is a concern, >> right? And I would be remiss if I didn't say something about this. Um, when we're talking about affordable in this community, it's a percentage of their
gross income. Correct. Yes. And those those statistics and standards and things are set by the federal government. >> Yes. >> Because invariably anytime we open an an affordable project, a workforce project,
we see the comments from people going affordable to whom? And it's not that we're setting those standards, >> right? >> It's a federal program and it comes down from the feds >> and and and we vet every single person >> and because the the city itself doesn't
have a third party vetting, but we vet every single person has to go through. We have a third party company that does this that that's why there's been people that have been rejected because they're trying to take advantage of of a lower rent when they can afford more. And so
that's when Dr. Jeff said, "Well, why don't we make it 7030 so more people could afford the mark, you know, could that that could move in there?" But nobody lives there that is not in that 80 that the 80 to 120 AMI like and and we're very serious about that because
even though there's no third party from the city at this stage that vets the specifics we have a third party that does that. Well, I think another thing to to talk about with affordability is when a story on 9inth opened up because
they were truly the lowest, >> right? >> They couldn't get occupi occupants there, >> right? >> So, they had to change their methodology because they were only like 20% occupied, >> right? So, I mean, again, when you got to try to come up with the happy median,
and you're obviously at the Met right now, 95% is the right median, >> but we want to continue that, >> right? And we got to like 92 and a half, and we I completely panicked and dropped some rates and got it back to 95. So, it's it's it's it's a it's a weekly
review uh of of how many people came in, how many people signed up, how many people are looking, and it's it's it's really a management job to keep it full. Well, you also would like to be if somebody was truly in that scenario, but now they've worked up in their job and they've got a little bit more money, but
they want to stay there, maybe they move into the market rate. So, there is that Yes. eb and flow. Yes. >> And that's that's something because I I've known people that got in there and all of a sudden within a year they have to move out because they did become more successful, >> right? No, that's true. >> And then they can't really afford what's
next. >> That's true. But yours would be probably, >> you know, it's not a lot, but it's it's next steps. >> But the retention rate over the first the first year, it just happens. People move out after the first year. It's just a thing. It's just it's just I didn't
know that. And now people are staying signing two-year leases. >> So the retention rate has increased over the last eight months significantly, which is a great sign. >> So what is next steps, >> Dr. Jeff?
Mr. Perry, >> impact fees are a city function. So, the city council needs to make a decision. Um, the you can you can do whatever the city council, that's your policy, your impact
fees. Um, so the CRA can step up and and again we've made that pretty clear what we can do. Um, and u I'll leave the rest up to city administrator because it's his impact fees. >> Yeah. I I mean, you know what's
interesting is when you take 250 units and you basically figure out the consumption is about 6,000 gallons and then you do the math on it, those units add probably slightly less than a million gallons a day and just to
the utility infrastructure. So when councilwoman Lisa Gonzalez Moore was asking about, well, how do you price things out? We said that's kind of nebulous. That's one way to do it. The point with it is I think we want to incentivize this. I mean, I like the program. I always have. I think council does, too. >> Mr. Perry, though, but wait a minute.
You just said 250 units are going to consume a million gallons a day. >> Yeah. >> If we're doing six to seven million is gallons for the whole city, >> right, >> a day. How does 250 units add a million gallons? >> You just got to do the math, I guess. Um,
>> yeah, but I mean, overall, the whole city only does six to seven million, >> right? Ultimately. Yeah. So, I think that seems a little bit >> Yeah, it's got to be off a little bit. >> Well, awkward >> to make a point which I think you need to stop making. >> You need to let this council decide on some things. >> Well, that's fine.
>> But but again, you're trying to work a narrative right now >> that I don't think is right. And I agree with you. Yep. >> And you know that I support you. Yes, sir. >> 100%. >> Yep. >> But you just made a statement that when the whole city six to seven million
gallons a day, I don't know where Mr. >> No, my math is wrong. Let me let me just All right. So, but that was like inflaming something to say it's a million gallons. So, these apartments are going to take one sixth of the city for 200 units. It can't be I >> right. It would be a lot smaller figure.
So, please >> appropriately. >> Yep. As far as you know, I would like some the the the CRA to cover a portion of the impact fees. >> Well, I mean, we've heard that the CRA could cover about 70% >> with the right process.
>> Mr. Gaboody could cover the other 30% and that's what we wanted to go into. >> I be more than happy >> I don't disagree with you >> on trying to work things but I also don't agree with you that you go in and
try to manipulate things that just happened and maybe it was a mistake honest mistake but a million gallons we do six to seven millions. >> Let me just add some clarity to it. It's not a day it's a month. Okay. Well, he said a day. >> So, the numbers are right, but it's it's
not per day. So, the misspeak was daily versus monthly. >> Okay. So, then okay, I'll accept that, but I just >> that proportionally comes up. And I apologize. I didn't mean to mislead you because I agree with you that it didn't sound like too good. So, all right. So, let's moving on. So, does the CRA have
to meet and then come back with that recommendation to the city and then the city would accept that from the CRA? I think that this is it's an amendment to a contract. So if the city said that they would they would not wave the
impact fees, the CRA would meet and the board would determine whether it wanted to meet the 70% which we could make the justification for that and uh and then we would move forward with that. Then the city would be paid in full. We would pay 70, the developer would pay 30 and
we would just move forward with that. >> Is that acceptable, Mr. Gaboody? Could that be workable >> on the MET 2B >> 2B? Right. Talk about that. Now, >> I'm good on the board. We're going to have to work through that process. >> But I do agree that I think the CRA has
said that even on the MET 2, they would come up with the 70%. And then we'd have to work the other 30, >> right, >> at a later time. >> Right. But but we have before you today we have the we correct me if I'm wrong attorney Russell but we have the met three we have shuffle we have both of
them in front of us today to vote on right >> that is correct >> yes >> but the one if we vote on and and it's goes forward stipulations on the other one the shuffle board would have to be written into a stipulation >> so we could approve it with stipulations
or whatever we call it >> let's take one at a time let's because they're both a a little bit different in how their >> purchase agreements are structured. So, let's start with the 2A because that's the one that's >> on the agenda now. >> On the agenda now. So, that would be
where >> So, what would the motion be right now with the 70% going back to the CRA? Um, I think it would just be a motion to reject the amendments and then it would
be in front of the CRA board. We have it on today. >> Mhm. >> For later. >> Oh, yeah. That that would be my question, Dr. Burton. Well, because we have >> when you say reject, I mean reject what's here or can we
>> we're the what's what's before remember we have we have a purchase agreement that has um that has a lura attached to it. And the
reason that this this amendment would add the city to the lura to address the waiver of impact fees. And so if the city is not waving the impact fees, the city doesn't need to be a party to that lure at all. So that's why I'm saying I
think the motion if this is the way we're headed the motion would just be to reject the amendment that's on there for today and then we have the CRA board >> understanding it's going to the CRA and then would come back so then that would be taken care of so we don't really have to do anything.
>> My question is is this something that the board could undertake the CRA board could take today at their meeting? Could we discuss this? >> Yes, if we add it >> are you prepared to discuss this? >> Yes, we are. If you add it to the agenda at the meeting, we can discuss it and the board can take a vote on it.
>> Okay. Well, Mr. Mayor, well, technicality part, but what I don't want to be back, who cares what I want, but but you know, we're moving ahead on the MET three. We have a purchase and sale
agreement and I don't think I don't think we can say that in the next meet the July meeting things are going to be all that rosier. Uh and >> I don't know any different than we know now, >> right? And and so I you know it's on the
agenda you know for the Met 3. Um, which which I think that uh because of the area of of that, you know, that 7-Eleven and the meth clinic in the area that that whole area like I'm not so sure
that we can support that without the impact fee waiverss. >> Well, let's let's deal with met two. >> That's the second >> 2B >> 2B. Let's let's deal with me to I mean, there's two separate things here. >> Yes. So, let's get one off our plate.
>> We'll talk about the second. >> Well, I guess is your question. I mean, are they contingent upon would it need to be contingent upon the approval for the for the Met? >> No, it's it's a separate, it's completely separate. >> Okay. So, so we can do one at a time.
>> Abs. Absolutely. We do everyone. Yeah. >> Um, at this point in time, I'd like to make a motion to reject Help me, Miss Mr. Rutesil. The Second amendment. >> Second amendment to the purchase and sale agreement with um Pearl Homes.
>> Second. >> Second. >> We've had conversation. Anything further? Seeing none, we'll start the vote to reject the sale of second amendment. Start the vote in W five. >> Yes.
>> One. >> Yes. >> Two. >> Yes. >> Three. >> Yes. >> Four. >> Yes. >> Okay. It carries five to zero. It's kind of hard to say. Carrie's rejected five to zero, but we're happy. >> Um, Miss Barnaby. >> Well, Mr. Mayor, I I now that we have
done this, I want to make it very clear that I am expecting to discuss this today at the CRA board meeting. and so that that we can answer
um Pearl Holm's questions and make sure that they're >> comfortable. What was that? Due diligence due diligence extension. Wasn't that for this? >> That was already approved. >> Yeah. Until when? >> Oh, >> end of July. >> Oh, end of Okay.
>> Okay. >> Um and >> now we need met. >> And by the way, just for the record, it's already on our agenda. This this We follow right behind city city city council. So it's on our agenda. >> Well, but >> we did not have a motion. >> New
>> Yes. And I just want it for the record >> that it was a city councilman that wanted this put on the agenda immediately without having any due diligence period in front of this like a week ahead of time. I'm just saying I don't want to get in trouble. >> What?
>> I don't be cute. Just don't be cute. So that so we have to then vote for the second part of which is the shuffle board >> right >> that we're still saying that 70% if he's 7030 >> but Mr. Gabbouti is saying that it will be a harder number to pay the additional
30 on that project going forward. And that being the case, the Met the MET three, which is the shuffleboard court, the developer is paying the city for the land upfront. >> And in discussion with the city
attorney, the on this one, because there is that payment uh coming from the developer to the city, the city is willing to to will recommend waving the 30% of the impact fees. The CRA will pick up the other 70 on that also.
>> So we get % on the impact fee and the 30% at some level by the land. >> So, but the impact to the city is great because of >> right >> what it's bringing to the city. >> So, that's getting rid of. >> So, how does that motion sound?
>> Wait, before we make that motion though, but Dr. Burton, you Dr. Burton, real quick. Dr. Burton, >> talk to her. >> Dr. Burton, >> the shuffle. We can do that though even though it's not located within >> the CRA. >> It's in the CRA.
>> Oh, okay. I was confusing the two. I was >> Oh. Oh, okay. Got you. Okay. Yes. Thank you. >> So, what's the motion, >> Mr. Ruticle? >> Right. Hold on. I'm >> It would Mr. Rousel probably would be the same motion where the city now is not party to the Laura
>> because they're waving the Oh, no, they are. I'm sorry. It would be >> We're waving 30% and the other. >> This one is different because this one is an agreement with the city instead of with the CRA. >> Um, >> I think we can leave it the way it is.
I'm looking at the language now. What it says is basically the city agrees that when we put together this development and incentives agreement that it will include the waiver of of impact fees. So if we want to change up the balance of
which you know where it comes from right we can we have the flexibility to do that. Should it specifically should it specifically say though that we agree to wave 30% of the impact fees subject to 70% being paid by the CRA?
because I don't want I don't you know I think it's easier if we kind of get it just fairly clear so we don't come back later and say geez we kind of all thought this was the way it worked and >> yeah I mean I understand we'd have to draft language into the into the
agreement for that and the CRA is not a party to it I don't know how we do that I mean I think all we can do at this meeting is to have the city council say that we're agreeable to paying >> that's a different board that's going to >> or what if he just said it was
contingent upon him getting the approval of the CRA for the 70%. >> I think that would be fine. Yeah, here we go. >> Is that the motion you're making just >> I'm a realtor. >> Yes, >> I write contracts all the time. Employers love me
>> with a caveat, >> a contingency. >> Contingency >> and it specifically has to say 30%. Basically% that we're willing to to wave 30% of the impact fee. I think the the contingency is that the CRA is agreeing to cover 70%.
>> That the buyer will or is it buyer? Is he buyer in this now? >> Yes. >> Okay. That the buyer will um obtain approval from the CRA for 70%. I don't know. See, that's why real we keep you lawyers in.
>> All right. So, we have a motion by Miss Coker and is there a second? >> Second >> by Mr. Sheller. Any further discussion? Seeing none, we'll start the vote in W one. >> Yes. >> Two. >> Yes. >> Three. >> Yes. >> Four. >> Yes. >> Five.
>> Yes. >> Approved. Five to zero. And we have video evidence of whatever we did. >> And Mr. Mayor. >> Yes, ma'am. >> Um, I do think it is important that we put impact fees on a workshop. >> Yes, ma'am.
>> Absolutely. Um, and I don't mean to speak for the board, but I will speak for myself and say that um, let he who has ears hear and I think that uh, we're going to be
working on this. So, I would not recommend anybody come to us and say, "Well, you did it this time and you did it this time and so you need to keep doing it that time." Um, I >> think there's going to be opportunity over the next five months, six months to to
>> workshop some things that will actually >> we can't workshop to whatifs all the time. You're going to have to workshop to where we are now, figure out what we are now, and then go forward after that opportunity. >> All right. So, um, Mr. Paris F, was that
>> N? That was the second one. >> That was the second one. All right. Um, unfinished business. >> No, sir. >> All right. So, we're just going to eliminate council reports today. >> No, you're not. >> All right. And >> you would be so wrong. It
>> started council reports under uh one. >> I'll keep it working. >> Okay. Um, >> start with me. >> Yeah, you're on the list. >> You're the list. >> Well, I just um I I I know everybody's
going to want to talk about it, but I we'll just start the bandwagon on thank you to the mayor and for all those that were involved in yesterday. It's exciting. It's not It's It was just the ceremonial beginning. I know it's been going um for many years, but the city
park, it it just is going to bring so much of a gamecher, I think, to our community and and in so many ways. So, I want to thank um everyone who really did the yman's work to get that going and I'm very excited in the future. Um
that's really all I had. I just did my council corner. You can read it there. >> Thank you, Councilwoman Barnaby. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I too want to echo the words about City Park. I think that um we have we've thrown a pebble into
that water and how it's going to grow and resonate out. I'm not even sure we can fully grasp what that can bring. But speaking of a park that is near and dear to to Ward two people, Lewis Park and
we've had some individuals lately, I guess, that don't necessarily have a lot to do except go over to Lewis Park and try to damage some of the the memorial benches that are there. They did some
items. They they they caused some issues at the Manatee uh garden club and I know it's the end of school and kids are out now. So I would say parents make sure you know where your kids are and make sure
you know what they're doing because when we catch them because we will catch them when we catch them. Please, please don't call me and tell me my little angel would never do that because I'm telling you right now, I'm going to laugh.
And again, the Bible says, "Let he who has ears hear and vanilla, I said word to your mother." And one other thing, oh boy. Is anybody else scared? >> I know.
>> No, I'm not. I know. >> Should I be >> a You just got >> I kill my wife for posting something. >> You look like you're about 12. Babies in the
>> How tall she is. Take a gander at that. >> Very cute. >> Oh, that is so cute. >> Mr. Mayor and Gina Brown, congratulations on your anniversary today. >> Is it 38? >> 37 years.
>> 37 years. >> Congrats. >> And And the smiles are bigger in the >> in the more current one. That's awesome. I told her this morning, I said, "You know, did you think 37 years ago the dorky little kid that never spoke or
talked or did things would be doing what we're doing now for our community?" >> You know what they they say behind every successful man, there's a surprised uh mother-in-law. So, >> I'm very lucky.
>> But um also, Mr. Mayor, >> y >> I would be remiss if I did not say this. Happy birthday to you tomorrow. >> I planned it. Get married the day before my birthday so I never forget the anniversary. >> I will be a nine.
>> Smart move. >> But >> oh yeah, one more year. >> That's why I wanted to cancel council >> reports because he knew I would remember. >> That's right. >> Y
>> um and that's all I have, Mr. Mayor. Thank you for giving us the opportunity to to do council reports today. >> Thank you. >> Don't forget your phone. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um I do want to reiterate City Park. That
was uh fun and excellent the forward momentum of the city. I just got back from the Institute. I had to write it down because I didn't know what EMO stood for until uh two days ago. But the Institute of Elected Municipal Officials uh Florida League of
Cities is the sponsor of that. Uh I learned a lot uh as a as a newly elected. Um the takeaway from that meeting was pretty cool pertaining to Bradenton. Probably in my estimate 35 to 40 people in the room. Um and for some reason I
became Mr. popular not because of me but because of Bradenton. I did talk to Lance and Rob about it. I have not mentioned it to the mayor or council. Um but uh individual on the east coast walked up to me and said uh oh wow you're from Bradon. I need to talk to
you. I just really want to thank you. I spoke to our city administrator and we have a lift station. And so I said you have a single lift station. And he said yeah we do. But it, you know, in the budget, it was really hard to overcome this. So, I was able to Google
and look up and model what your city staff and administration did and sure enough, you know, I uh got a grant to take care of that. So, thank you very much. He took a selfie with me and please pass on thanks to city staff and
city admin and uh and the mayor. And I was like, that was great. And then >> two hours later after that, oh you're from Bradon. I would, you know, tell me about fire station 2. That seemed like a great initiative. And oh, uh, city of Boca Raton. We're thinking about, um,
you know, we we need to build a new police station. So questions about that. So it was uh very interesting to hear from lots and be there amongst a small crowd of people that uh you know just really proud of the fact that everything
that is uh going on um in our city. It was really nice to to hear feedback in regards to that. >> Thank you, >> Councilwoman Moore. >> That's great. I love that we're famous for lift stations
>> and fire stations. >> That's right. Yes. and all the good things. Um, and um, and I will just I mean I know everyone has already touched on it, but um, the city park ground or groundbreaking was great mainly because like I said earlier, I um, I just feel
like it's those type of things that let us be responsive to our most local community and let us really make us special. It's it's that it's investment in those type of projects and having the flexibility to make those determinations that really make um make
us the special unique thing that is Bradenton. Um so that was a great thing to be a participant um of. Uh real quick, I'll just say we are officially in hurricane season. I know everyone knows I know Miss Shadik has been sharing. Uh I participated in a tabletop exercise called Project Phoenix with the
Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council about a month ago. was really illuminating from a small business standpoint. And they are going to have a webinar uh followup if anybody or if you know small businesses that are interested in resources and and preparation and that sort of thing uh
from that exercise. It's it was a good source of information for planning if you're a small business owner and you are concerned about being prepared in hurricane season. So that's June 25th and you can find out more information on their website. Um, other than that, we continue to make progress, like you all
said, on lift station 3. That's great. I can't wait to start tackling the collection system and the storm water things that we've got planned. And I see the survey are out there, which is awesome. >> Um, and that's pretty much it. Progress. >> Let's talk about a little bit about Lastings Manatee right now because if
you're out there, go to Lastings Manatee website, especially in affected areas, which yours was probably more affected than most. So, if somebody's watching this meeting, you have an opportunity right now to get on that website. Just because it's the county website, we are
included in it in the city. So, it's one of the things that you need to at least get your application in. Don't have to have everything in, but that's going to be something that I think over the next couple weeks that we're going to be trying to target an area, especially in Ward four and five, because it does
affect it affected a lot of places, but that's where it affected the most. And if you're a homeowner and you have problems with your laterals now, that was affected by the high water table was affected by the way it dried up and went
back and forth. So, it can count under that even though it may be an older system. So, we've got to try to figure out and I know I don't know how many people watch this, but if somebody's listening, get a hold of us here, get a hold of county. We'll get you in contact whether it's your council person or any
staff. Tiffany Shadic, PIO, will put you in contact. Again, I don't know. >> Yeah, I would like more information. We talked about it briefly, but I'm so glad you brought that up because I'm sure Miss Shikica will have um have some materials or whatnot for me, but I would like to I've already started alluding to
it in conversation, but I would love hard, you know, factual um either a website or materials that I can start spreading for people that I know were affected and could be eligible. >> Perfect. All right. Thank you, Councilwoman Coachman.
>> Okay, just a few things. Um, I always end my comments with War Five is alive, but I'm going to start it off with it today. War Five is alive. Since the last meeting, M. mayor and council.
We had the opportunity to uh witness a dedication uh of a habitat home that was built for a gentleman that it was a long time coming and it took a lot of people and a lot of moving pieces to make it
happen. Um so that that was really really really a a warm and fuzzy uh moment for me. I knew his mother when he mentioned Missy in the cafeteria at Bradenton Elementary. Man, that food was
good. Um, you know, I I knew I know his parents. I I knew his parents and uh I totally agree with him. I'm in my childhood home and it means a lot to hold on to them because
our parents went through a lot to get a home. Um, my parents had to go to Palmetto. That was there was a bank in Palmetto was the only bank that would loan money, you know, to a a black
family to build their home. So, I know how hard it was and and it was just really a joy to see all of that come together. And Mayor Brown, you I I can't take any credit for that. All I did was take a phone call and I said, "Hey, what
can you help this? What can" And then it was gone. >> It was done. >> It was done. Um, a lot of people, a lot of moving pieces, but this one right here, I tell you, when he gets when when that
bug bites or whatever, then he's gone. He's he is really gone. And that that leads me to talk about City Park. And know I'm not going to cry. I have no more water left in my eyes. Um,
again, a lot of moving pieces to make that a reality. And it was so exciting genuinely hearing everyone who's a part of it genuinely feel excited about whatever
part they're doing. And um I'm not I'm not um it's going to transform an area and it's going to take care of something that kept me up all night pretty much at
well from 2:30 to close to 400 a.m. Um, the teenagers in my neighborhood, they have reached that age that now they hang out at night. They just go up and down the street talking loud and whatever.
So, that's going to stop because they're the upand cominging uh youth in the area going to have somewhere to go and not be so bad. Um, oh, there's so much I can say about City
Park and you all know and you all feel it as well. And I'm just so appreciative to be on this council and have all of you, all of the county, the state,
the country and the feds uh help in that in endeavor. It's going to make a big big big difference. Okay, I'm g stop talking about City Park. Um, I just want to talk a little bit about
baseball. On June 13th, the tribute to the Nine Devils, that's the night at Leecom. They're going to, you know, do that annual event. And, um, June 19th is law enforcement night. And
that's the night I always grab. So, uh, I invite everyone to please come and and and share some baseball and watch me throw my third first pitch.
Does that make sense? Third first pitch. And let's let's hope that I make it three and three because Marty and I right now are two and two. So, I'm pretty sure we're going to be three and three. Uh other than that, um
before the next meeting, Father's Day will come around. All of all of you that take on the role of being dad, daddy, pop, pop, all of those names, have a wonderful day. War Five is definitely
alive. >> Thank you, Miss Coachman. And I'll start out with what you started out with was with was with was with was Habitat for Humanity. and obviously Mr. Bryant and we were just so glad to be able to go over and paint a little bit, do a little bit of rahrah with the the ribbon cutting, but all comes down to, you
know, our staff and and the CDBG money that we were able to figure out. And, you know, Vicky White and her crew, Dedra, just did a great job at working through that, you know, and again, I look at things, it takes a village. It's, you know, I mean, I guess I was the good kid in my family, but I never
had to be told no more than once. But I don't take no for an answer now as we go through things as we do it. But we try to figure out how to do it. And it's not about no all the time. And that's one thing I know our staff works through very well. So that was great. And seeing
him I think he'll be in his house. We did the ribbon cutting but it's still a little bit more time. Yes. Than he'll be in and really excited about that. Um June 14th is flag day. You see around the city and us in Palmetto at the Dotto bridge with the flags. see the flags up
here. Obviously, our 250th year is amongst us in this country. And you know, that's old old city compared to our ages compared to things, an old county country. I mean, but but when you really think about it, we're young. We're still growing as a as a a uh
country and how we make it better. So, hopefully everybody displays their flags with pride and and does what we can do for that. and coming up to the July 4th um celebration. Obviously, I have a nice shirt on today. Different than normal, but this is our last meeting before we
have a great celebration on July 4th with the county, the Palmetto and us really sponsoring up in the fireworks. Really going to do a a bang up fireworks and we're going to allow you to sit on the bridge up to a certain point. So, if
you're coming out, Riverwalk, bridge, um, fire department, police department, we're far away from it, but we've worked that out. Palmeta is going to have their side. Um, so the bridge will be closed the appropriate time, and then you'll be able to view from there. It's going to be a great great opportunity. I
appreciate Mayor West and his whole entire staff working with our entire staff here at the city to really change the venue. It's we we're not using the bridge like we do with the riata, but both sides of the river we're going to be engaged. So, um and Rossy Park all
the way down to the Main Street and then Main Street will gear up at seven. So, it's it's doing a great job and and Woodard and Curran has stepped up and been a great sponsor for that to be part of the city and and really made it where
it'll be a viable event. First 350 people that get to the event will get a free shirt. Seen them online with the logos. Palmetto has 350. We have 350 and they're going to be given out. Um nice nice shirts for So I think that's probably the first time that's been said
publicly, but that'll be if I come find your shirt, get there early and enjoy it. um going uh great event happened over the weekend with a golfer and obviously everybody knows of Nelly Corda if you're from our community and a great supporter
and obviously from here parents live here and whenever she gets on she talks obviously she's a great role model for young ladies and girls and women of all kinds but when she gets on she always talks about Bradon you know in her
hometown So, I'm working with um Vern Buchanan's office, with Senator Boyd, um Representative Robinson downtown. We're going to probably try over the next couple of weeks at some point when she's going to be in. It may be probably sometime towards the end of July, maybe
in August, but we're going to have a Nelly Cord day downtown and uh if Kelly's listening up there in her office, we're gonna have to figure that out and close Main Street a little bit, work with some of the businesses um to bring it in. But it's that again if we can get her into town for an evening um
>> two major one major state official might be here and one major um top executive in the country has shown interest in flying in. So you know it could be very interesting if
that happens chief theers. So, um, but you know, a lot of that's just whatifs, but there's opportunity to have the president and the governor here on our main street with Nelly Corda. So, if that again, it's going to be out there now. So, prove me wrong. Come on, get
here. Um, but it would be an honor. Obviously, the president's from our state. He obviously has a granddaughter that is a great golfer and does that. So, it would just be a fun thing for Bradenon. Politics aside, >> when when President Biden called me
after the hurricanes, you know, like I said, I stood up. Yes, sir. And no, sir, and you respect who's in the office and you do what you can to communication. So, opportunity, you know, that's what we're looking at. Um, last thing, obviously, City Park is
probably one of the staples that we're we're getting through. Face it and fix it is fun. That's a thing that people can go whatever they want to do. But but City Park is a community um driver. I think that's really going to change not only just the baseball
part of it, but when you talk about how our city can be connected, >> city, >> the whole city from the neighborhood to city park, Leecom, village of the arts, downtown, you can't just say Main Street, you got to say downtown. the whole downtown which encompasses
everything to Riverwalk to Old Manatee and we got to start you got to start crawling then walking before you get to everywhere and I think this as we saw do Cole today appreciated that getting kind of the next step again it was just the symbolic part of saying okay we've got
it now let's figure out what's going to make it work because Downtown by design was a great thing and they did some things right out of the box but then it sat on the shelf Because economies change, things change, mojo changes, a lot of councils change, but how are we
going to set this up? So, we will give opportunity to businesses that want to be here that don't have to close like a three keys, things that, you know, that may have been a one-off that was just a weird timing and all the things, but how do we try to set some of that up?
Because we're not going to be sitting in the seat forever. But, you know, you think about the people that did Downtown by Design. Some good things came out of that. But those people aren't sitting here anymore. So, how do we Well, I'm sorry. Those people in their first lives
weren't sitting here, but in the second live, you're right, but some of those things are just what I look at every day in City Park. Um, one of the things I want to apologize and there may be others, but the housing authority and the CRA, we you know, and all you're you
always say you're going to forget somebody. You try not to, but we didn't. And then when you look at the hat >> Oh, no. >> What I love about this hat is they had a hard time >> figuring out how to get everybody on it. >> And that's the collaboration part. When you look at that and you go through all
the collaboration and then when you look at who is always so nervous that wants to make us so proud of what she does and how she does it is Miss Tiffany. So there's nobody that works harder for this city and the role she's in with a
lot of people still sitting in the room. what she does to make these things happen. >> And I thought the funniest part about most of the people at the end were like, "How did you think of hot dogs to have?" >> Well, that was great and making it happen with everybody doing it
>> from that. But but again, baseball, hot dogs, and it just the press were getting out of it. And and the last part about everything that we do daily and try to make it happen is no matter what situation we're in in the moment, we're
going to work through where we're at. And we can get one day love each other and the next day be mad at each other. But we're going to get through that and make it better because every one of us in this room, especially the key leaders and the ones that are working the
dayto-day job, want this to be a great place to live, work, and play. And we're all going to live, work, and play here after we're out of this job. So, >> yep, >> that's what we want to do because we're not going anywhere and uh helping people. So, just going through it. I mean, coming up, we're not going to have
a meeting till the end of July. We may have a special meeting here or there if something comes up that we have to do. Obviously, we're in hurricane season. >> It's the early part of it. No PTSD for for Miss Moore more than anybody, >> but um you know, we had a good season
last year. Hopefully, we get through it. But whatever happens, Mr. Perry and his staff has done a great job at being prepared and that's what we got to be proud of. that peace that we got a couple of years ago that really opened up at the right time to make us get
through it. And everybody in the room, I appreciate what you do every day and making things better for the citizens. I don't have a meeting at two o'clock. I think you guys do. >> I think I might have just mentioned that. >> Um, any department heads? Anything? All good.
>> All right, Mr. Williams, you look like you got something. >> So, I just real quick any kind of you kind of already mentioned it. I just with city park obviously there's a lot of community players and and noted on the hard hat and so forth but the teamwork that happens within the city of
Bradon with Mr. Perry, uh, you know, Miss Tiffany Shadic, um, you know, I mean, it goes John Todd, I mean, it's it, you know, Aaron Jones, Heidi Warnomy. I mean, it's just it's not one person that pulls this together. It
truly is a a group effort and I couldn't be more proud to work with that team. So, thank you. >> And that that's again what we talk about and we kind of keep it going, but others see that too outside of us >> and I think that's what makes them want to be involved with us.
And you know, again, we can disagree on things and we can get frustrated at times, but you know what? In the long run, it's about how you're the village and we're going to make this keep going because we know even today's stuff. We want more people here. Not that we want
more traffic and all that, but we want more to grow our internal city that makes us better. And that's that's a a fifth generation, seventh generation family. and I don't know 11 or 12 generation Florida family but Manatee
County got to be better. So and that's what you see and and truly all of us believe that. >> Thank you. Anything else? We'll be adjourned.