WEBVTT

METADATA
Video-Count: 1
Video-1: youtube.com/watch?v=UyVu5oWPsio

Part: 1

1
00:00:00.160 --> 00:00:18.240
It is June 16th, 2026. We are Cape Canaveral City Council regular meeting at the City Hall Council Chambers located at 100 Pulk Avenue in Cape Canaveral, Florida. It is 6:01 p.m. I call this meeting to order. And with

2
00:00:18.240 --> 00:00:34.079
that, Mayor Pro Tim Jackson, would you please lead us in the pledge? I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation

3
00:00:34.079 --> 00:00:52.640
under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Thank you. City clerk, please call the role. >> Mayor Prom Jackson, >> here. >> Council member King >> here. >> Mayor Morrison >> here. >> Council member Shiaak

4
00:00:52.640 --> 00:01:07.680
>> here. and council member Willis >> here. Thank you council for being here city staff and all the members of the community. We appreciate your time to be a part of the meeting. At this time we are on item number four which is the approval of agenda as

5
00:01:07.680 --> 00:01:25.360
written or with amendments. >> Mr. Mayor. >> Yes. Um I would like to propose that we take item 9.4 4 the beach in paid parking program and take no action tonight but move it to a workshop

6
00:01:25.360 --> 00:01:40.240
later maybe in coordination with the uh budget meetings. >> Okay. Thank you. So uh under the approval of agenda as written or with amendment the amendment I believe I'm hearing is to to take no action with

7
00:01:40.240 --> 00:01:59.640
item 9.4 four and at that time or now uh move it to a workshop. >> Yes. >> Is that right? >> Yes. I mean we can hear from the public but you know not not take a vote on it. Let's let's get more information.

8
00:02:00.479 --> 00:02:16.720
>> Thank you council. That uh request has been made by council member Willis. I I think um >> take >> we will I have one comment card. Um I think if that is the end intent, uh we

9
00:02:16.720 --> 00:02:34.800
can certainly consider that or take action now, but knowing that upfront is appreciated, especially for the community. Uh it's really a decision the council will need to make. So >> Mr. Mayor, uh I'm sorry. Um what item number are we discussing right now?

10
00:02:34.800 --> 00:02:52.239
>> The 9.4 titled Beachend Paid Parking Program. >> Thank you. Yes. Thank you. >> Question, mayor. >> So, if we table it for the evening, can we at least have discussion on when the workshop would take place? Either maybe when we get to that item to do that if the council's prepared that prepared to

11
00:02:52.239 --> 00:03:11.440
have that conversation. That way, the staff can plan. And I had a I had a couple little things that I wanted to mention just, you know, on this topic. Um, I agree with council member Willis that we need to move it,

12
00:03:11.440 --> 00:03:28.560
but I think that maybe we should spend a little bit of time discussing the workshop date like you were requesting, city manager. And so I don't think I want to strip it completely out of the uh discussion or maybe moving it from

13
00:03:28.560 --> 00:03:46.480
items for action to discussion. >> Mr. Mayor, >> yes. My intent was not to strike it from the >> agenda, but just no no action, no vote, and to plan a workshop in coordination with it.

14
00:03:46.480 --> 00:04:03.120
Yeah, I guess one way to handle this under as we're discussing this proposed amendment, if it if no one uh on the council objects to the intent of taking action um to set that intent for the community. I

15
00:04:03.120 --> 00:04:19.120
do think it's important. Uh I don't see a reason why we would have an issue with it. So, >> we can discuss it. We can talk about it. I think it's saying upfront >> we don't stating the the intentions

16
00:04:19.120 --> 00:04:35.440
um and if this council is okay with that we can proceed. I think when we get to item 9.4 you'll have an opportunity to work through what you stated and I guess the benefit would be stating that intent in intention upfront for the community and

17
00:04:35.440 --> 00:04:59.360
for the council. So, if that is uh something this council wants to do, just need to either second that motion or make a new motion. >> So, do we need a new motion?

18
00:04:59.360 --> 00:05:12.320
>> Well, I think it might be helpful to state the the intended motion of the amendment. >> Yes. So, I make a motion to take item 9.4, take no action by this council, and to

19
00:05:12.320 --> 00:05:38.800
schedule a workshop at a later date. >> Is that sufficient? >> Yes. Do we have a second? For the sake of discussion and not the vote, I will second it so that we can proceed with discussion. Second the

20
00:05:38.800 --> 00:06:03.120
motion. Council, any concerns with the motion. I just have things I want to discuss and I can't make that motion yet until we get to the point that we're discussing those because I think there are other options than just going straight I don't

21
00:06:03.120 --> 00:06:18.479
want to take an action on it as far as voting to approve it today. But we have a five-step process and I want to discuss that process and also discuss some other options that I think are important to our citizens. So that's why

22
00:06:18.479 --> 00:06:34.240
I'm not seconding you. I'm sitting here quiet because I don't know how that would work if we approve this um to go ahead and move forward with a workshop when we had that five-step process. So, I think it takes more discussion than

23
00:06:34.240 --> 00:06:54.080
that. Personally, >> the item stays on the agenda as it is. We're just >> I understand but you're saying take no action and move to work >> as a vote on it. Yes. And I'm saying take voting on taking no action now and moving it to a workshop when there's a

24
00:06:54.080 --> 00:07:09.520
five-step process that council has not discussed. I have things I want to discuss in regards to that. So, I'm I don't feel comfortable voting on taking an action in the agenda to do that yet because I think the discussion needs to

25
00:07:09.520 --> 00:07:26.400
occur. the I think discussion can >> the intent is discussion would happen. I mean, we're not changing anything, >> but we're already voting to go to a workshop. And there's something I want

26
00:07:26.400 --> 00:07:42.400
to say >> to discuss a workshop. >> That is, but the motion says we're going to move it to a workshop. Correct. >> I I don't It's I'm hearing no. I think that it's to discuss moving it to a workshop. My understanding is the only

27
00:07:42.400 --> 00:07:58.639
benefit is set those intentions upfront in this agenda so that as we get closer to it, the one thing it would I think preclude the council from doing anything would be to take we would affirm that we are not going to take action on the item. That's what the

28
00:07:58.639 --> 00:08:14.240
motion is. We can discuss it as much as we want. >> And I'm good with that motion. >> Okay, that's my understanding Willis. If unless a council member I think says that they want to take action on the item, um I have no issue with the

29
00:08:14.240 --> 00:08:31.840
motion. We can discuss it as needed. We can discuss scheduling a workshop. I don't think this motion identifies a date and time of the workshop. Uh we would certainly need to discuss that and and a new motion would be made to schedule the workshop. Okay.

30
00:08:31.840 --> 00:08:51.680
City attorney, as we're working through this, is there any issue or concern with what we're considering? >> No. >> Thank you, council. We got a motion and a second to uh essentially uh the decision would be to take no action

31
00:08:51.680 --> 00:09:06.320
tonight. We can discuss it, I think, as much as we want, and we would still need a new motion to actually schedule that workshop. Is there any further discussion? >> Nope. I'm good with it stated that way.

32
00:09:06.320 --> 00:09:24.000
>> Thank you. >> Seeing none, city clerk, please call the role. >> Mayor prom Jackson >> four. Council member King for C. Mayor Morrison >> four. >> Council member Shriak >> four. >> And council member Willis

33
00:09:24.000 --> 00:09:42.399
>> four. Let the record show the amendment and the motion related to 9.4 is adopted 50. >> Are there any further amendments? And if not, looking for a motion to approve as

34
00:09:42.399 --> 00:09:57.839
amended. >> Yes. Council member King. Well, um before we get to the um the section, and I'm I'm hoping I'm appropriate with my timing of this, um to discuss item number five, the proclamation celebrating the year of American liberty

35
00:09:57.839 --> 00:10:13.920
and the 250th anniversary of American independence. Um I would like to um make a motion for consideration to council to have a discussion on having an America uh 250 celebration. Um, seeing as how we've

36
00:10:13.920 --> 00:10:30.480
really done le very little to next to nothing to uh observe the 250th birthday, I would like to uh uh have a discussion on it. I have some suggestions and if this is the appropriate time to make this motion, I do make the motion.

37
00:10:30.480 --> 00:10:44.880
>> My understanding it would be is that I think this would fall under consideration of matters uh to be added on to the agenda. And if I hear you correctly, you'd like to add an agenda item on during the discussion portion. I don't see any items for discussion under

38
00:10:44.880 --> 00:11:01.200
item 10. So, uh, that motion, if I've repeated back, I think is clear. >> Um, city attorney, I don't want to confirm, but I think add on agenda items requires a consensus of the council at

39
00:11:01.200 --> 00:11:19.360
this time in the meeting for discussion in this case. >> Yes, it does. Okay, thank you. So, council, the motion's made. Is there any one opposed or do we have consensus to add on the discussion item regarding the

40
00:11:19.360 --> 00:11:36.399
250 year >> anniversary? Not the proclamation. I think you're >> in addition to the proclamation. >> We'll proceed with the proclamation, right? >> And then we will also add on in a discussion item. >> Any opposed? Record that as consensus is taken. Thank

41
00:11:36.399 --> 00:11:53.839
you, city clerk. Are there any other further amendments to the agenda? >> Seeing none, looking for a motion to approve as amended. >> I'll make a motion to approve the agenda as amended.

42
00:11:53.839 --> 00:12:09.120
>> Second. >> Got a motion by Mayor Perm Jackson and a second by Council Member Shoryak. Any further discussion? >> Seeing none, city clerk, please call the role. Mayor Prom Jackson >> four. >> Council member King >> four. Mayor Morrison >> four.

43
00:12:09.120 --> 00:12:23.920
>> Council member Shiaak >> four. >> And council member Willis >> four. >> Let the record show the agenda was approved as amended 50 which now brings us to our first presentation here which

44
00:12:23.920 --> 00:12:41.040
is a proclamation celebrating the year of American liberty and the 250th anniversary of American independence. And with us here today, I believe we have the Daughters of the American Revolution and the members there. And I

45
00:12:41.040 --> 00:12:56.079
think we have some representatives here who are going to receive it. I'm going to come forward and present this proclamation. And then uh after if you would like to take a photograph with the council, we would be honored to do that with you. Thank you so much for being

46
00:12:56.079 --> 00:13:25.279
here. And uh and if you have any words you'd like to share at the end, you're more than welcome to do that. So thank you. This is an official proclamation of the city of Cape Canaveral. Whereas 2026 marks the 250th anniversary of the

47
00:13:25.279 --> 00:13:42.000
Declaration of Independence, commemorating a quarter millennium of American liberty, self-government, and the enduring belief that all people are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights. And whereas on July

48
00:13:42.000 --> 00:13:59.519
4th, 1776, the American colonies declared their independence and announced to the world that governments are instituted to secure the rights of the people and derive their just powers from the consent of the govern. And whereas the

49
00:13:59.519 --> 00:14:15.839
Declaration of Independence, principally authored by Thomas Jefferson, affirmed that rights do not originate from kings, governments, or legislatures, but are inherent rights bestowed by the creator which governments are established to

50
00:14:15.839 --> 00:14:33.760
protect rather than grant. And whereas the American Revolution was inspired by a desire for self-government, individual liberty, representative government, and freedom from arbitrary exercises of power. And whereas events such as the

51
00:14:33.760 --> 00:14:49.920
Boston Tea Party demonstrated the determination of ordinary citizens to defend the principle that government must remain accountable to the people it serves. And whereas generations of Americans have preserved and expanded

52
00:14:49.920 --> 00:15:06.880
the blessings of liberty through civic engagement, constitutional government, innovation, entrepreneurship, military service, volunteerism, and a steadfast commitment to equal justice under the law. And whereas the city of

53
00:15:06.880 --> 00:15:24.480
Cape Canaveral recognizes that the freedoms enjoyed today were secured through the courage, sacrifice, and perseverance of those who came before us and must be faithfully preserved for future generations. Now therefore, I,

54
00:15:24.480 --> 00:15:42.000
Wes Morrison, mayor of the city of Cape Canaveral, Florida, on behalf of the city council, and the citizens of Cape Canaveral, do hereby proclaim 2026 as the year of American liberty and the 250th anniversary of American

55
00:15:42.000 --> 00:15:59.759
independence and encourage all citizens to reflect upon the enduring principles that inspired the Declaration of Independence, liberty, and self-government, personal responsibility, equal justice under the law, and government by the consent of

56
00:15:59.759 --> 00:16:16.000
the govern. Be it further pro proclaimed that as we commemorate 250 years of American independence, we honor the generations who secured and defended our freedoms, celebrate the remarkable achievements of a free people, and

57
00:16:16.000 --> 00:16:32.920
recommmit ourselves to preserving the blessings of liberty for the next 250 years signed and sealed this 16th day of June, 2026. Thank you. Council, if you'd like to come forward.

58
00:17:04.240 --> 00:17:42.160
Yeah. >> 3 2 1 2 3 2 1 And again congratulations as the daughters of the Cape Canaveral

59
00:17:42.160 --> 00:17:59.280
chapter of the National Society of Daughters in the American Revolution. We are honored and to accept this proclamation um for the 250th anniversary of our country. Um it this

60
00:17:59.280 --> 00:18:17.520
is a um our pillars in the D are patriotism um sorry uh veterans and history and um this definitely handles all of this and we're

61
00:18:17.520 --> 00:18:34.240
very grateful to acknowledge since our family members served in the revolution that's why we are in the daughters um that this is a wonderful uh opportunity for us and we thank you very much for this privilege.

62
00:18:34.240 --> 00:19:04.640
>> You thank you. >> What an honor to to time it out at the 250 years. An incredible >> Yes. opportunity to be amongst all of you who were here since the beginning. So, thank you. >> At this time,

63
00:19:04.640 --> 00:19:22.039
we are at the public participation portion of the meeting, item number six. I do have one card here. If anyone does intend to speak again, we ask that you please fill out a card. Seeing no others, I will call the one. Dr. Shannon Roberts.

64
00:19:32.080 --> 00:19:47.200
Shannon Roberts, 703 Salon Shores Drive here in the city. Um, thank you so much for your service. I want to start out with that, but I did want to mention something that has become particularly prevalent on North Atlantic and to bring it to your attention and the sheriff's

65
00:19:47.200 --> 00:20:02.880
precinct as well. Um the prevalence of electric vehices in particular has been very harrowing I think for anybody that's driving down North Atlantic. Uh what's happening is the bikers are just crossing over at will you know not even

66
00:20:02.880 --> 00:20:19.280
stopping for stop the stop signs and it's very very dangerous. Even on my trip here there were two that went right across North Atlantic to get to the major intersection of Central and North Atlantic you know because that's what they were looking at. But the cars that

67
00:20:19.280 --> 00:20:35.760
are trying to figure out their direction, it's very very harrowing. Um so I just wanted to bring that to the attention. I as I recall um our commander was going to look into what Cocoa Beach is doing about electric bikes and I'm just mentioning that is potentially something that's already

68
00:20:35.760 --> 00:20:51.120
been followed up on is maybe some ordinances or some kind of provisions that enable us to enforce safety. Um but it's really a major issue. I know I'm just one driver, but there were five over the weekend at one time that were

69
00:20:51.120 --> 00:21:07.440
going christening and crossing North Atlantic and then tonight, you know, the two um riders. So, I don't think there's anything that's governing their behavior and it's hard for the sheriff's precinct to enforce it um given their limited staffing, but I don't know. The only

70
00:21:07.440 --> 00:21:23.120
thing I can think of is an ordinance that might be have some teeth that would help govern the behaviors of those that are on electric bikes for safety purposes. And I would like I know that uh our city manager has got some wonderful agenda items on his uh

71
00:21:23.120 --> 00:21:39.440
management matters and I just wanted to applaud him for having I'm not sure what he's going to say but the employee handbook is on there and also the electric uh charging stations and I just I ask if you don't mind for me just listen to what he has to say to maybe

72
00:21:39.440 --> 00:21:56.880
make some additional comments if if that's so called for. Thank you. >> Thank you council. Do we have a I don't know city manager has anything but at a minimum when we get to managers matters ebikes I think we are all familiar with the concern in the community and I don't

73
00:21:56.880 --> 00:22:13.280
>> anyone opposed to our city manager having the opportunity to at least give some update on that if >> please do >> if if he's if he's able >> if not I know he will address it as soon as can so thank you Dr. Roberts. Seeing no other cards, I will assume that is it

74
00:22:13.280 --> 00:22:34.280
for public participation. Before moving on, I just want to make sure that there were some written comments that wanted to be I think stated on the record or written on the record. Want to um I need to find that.

75
00:22:35.840 --> 00:23:07.280
We have it if anyone has it >> from Ann Migleprank. >> Thank you. Acknowledging on the record that there are at least three uh resident emails here

76
00:23:07.280 --> 00:23:23.919
uh that were requested to be submitted on public record and uh the first one is from resident Ann Mitchell Brink which came in on June 15th. The second is from Eric Holland which came in on the same

77
00:23:23.919 --> 00:23:43.520
day June 15th. The third is from uh Sebastian Ortega Schuber on the same date, June 15th. Uh these are a little lengthier emails. I just want to confirm if the council all had a copy of these

78
00:23:43.520 --> 00:23:59.679
and we're able >> There's also one that we got an email about this afternoon from Esther from Sean >> Shaner. Okay. Yes. Uh, and I would say a fourth one from Sean Shaner which came in

79
00:23:59.679 --> 00:24:20.400
today. I have that here as well. Council, I'm more than happy to to read these emails into the record. I don't want to move past the intent of the council. Some are short, some are a little longer. Uh, what do we want to do here? >> Uh, Mr. Mayor, I think they deserve to

80
00:24:20.400 --> 00:24:36.559
be read. >> Okay. Thank you. And I will say if that's four, a fifth which I did not acknowledge at the last workshop um came in from Mr. Patrick Campbell regarding beach parking. I know we're going to get

81
00:24:36.559 --> 00:24:53.279
to that item and I think at that time I'm happy to discuss anything that this council desires with that. The other one that we received during that workshop uh was physically present at the meeting and referenced it during public participation. So, council, is anyone

82
00:24:53.279 --> 00:25:09.360
opposed to me uh going through these public statements that were submitted in writing? Seeing none, I will take uh them as I have them. The first one here is

83
00:25:09.360 --> 00:25:26.320
this is all in regards to item 9.4. This is from Ann Mitchell which says, "I am writing to include what I hope are thoughtful considerations as the city works through the questions that exist around a potential paid parking program. First,

84
00:25:26.320 --> 00:25:41.840
let me acknowledge that although totally free parking would be wonderful, I understand the reasons and support a parking program if it will be beneficial to the finances of the city. You seem to be aware of most of the obvious potential expenses to the city for the

85
00:25:41.840 --> 00:25:58.240
system. you are looking at. But one thing I do did not hear specifically mention was the cost of data storage that will be needed either onsite or remotely for maintaining necessary parking records. One of the workshop discussions was

86
00:25:58.240 --> 00:26:14.159
about the possibility of dynamic pricing particularly related to the launch traffic. Sounds good on the surface, but it brings to mind the following questions. Would it be for only certain launches or all launches? How many administrative time How much

87
00:26:14.159 --> 00:26:29.279
administrative time would have to be redirected to consistent management of when these launches were occurring? Especially since they tend to get delayed and rescheduled. If the pricing changes are not a pro applied consistently, I see that it's a

88
00:26:29.279 --> 00:26:45.600
potential area for problems complaints related as it seems that illegal street parking is a problem during these special events. I would support the ability to have patrol having a device so tickets could be easily issued. Also

89
00:26:45.600 --> 00:27:01.919
during the workshop, the vendor mentioned that it was possible to have things such as coupons for local businesses or information included when visitors are paying for parking. As we only have one seasonal lifeguard station, this option would be a good

90
00:27:01.919 --> 00:27:17.120
opportunity to inform visitors of weather related events and RIP current warnings when they exist. One additional item that everyone seems to be in agreement on is that no full-time resident should have to pay to park. The

91
00:27:17.120 --> 00:27:34.159
vendor indicated that there is a charge parenthesis $3.50 question mark for each registration processed. The idea of the city paying that fee for residents was floated. The question in mind was would the city pay for all registrations for

92
00:27:34.159 --> 00:27:51.840
each address? I'm thinking of homes where they may be multiple vehicles, excuse me, adults, adult children, golf carts. It may be worth considering a limitation on the number of registrations sub subsidized by the city to maybe two

93
00:27:51.840 --> 00:28:09.600
and the $3.50 fee would have to be paid by a resident for any vehicles per address over the number. This would allow you to control cost. Will it even be possible to track registrations by address? Thank you for listening. Sincerely, Ann Mitchell Brink, 134 Manny

94
00:28:09.600 --> 00:28:26.559
Lane, Cape Canaveral, Florida. So, that was the first comment. And uh, city clerk, if appropriate, I assume you should put the timer on me and I'll read as expeditiously as possible, but I think it would it would be a bit unfair if a seven minute email

95
00:28:26.559 --> 00:28:43.279
came in here u at my reading pace. But I'll do the best I can to finish the time. Um, the next one is from Mr. Eric Holland. Uh, the comments here. Please share the members. Please share with the members of the city council that may be

96
00:28:43.279 --> 00:29:02.720
voting on the issue in the future. A link was provided titled Beach Parking Ticket Sparks Federal Lawsuit against South Florida City's apps. That link was made available to all of the recipients of the email.

97
00:29:02.720 --> 00:29:24.559
The third and final printed copy that I have here is from Sebastian Ortega Schuber. This email states, "Hi, Laura. Uh, this is to our deputy capital projects director. He's our He's our

98
00:29:24.559 --> 00:29:41.200
vendor. Mayor, >> this is our vendor. >> Yes, it is. Yes, he is. >> Thank you. This is our vendor to our city manager with T2 Systems, the uh representative who also spoke at the the meeting and presented to us.

99
00:29:41.200 --> 00:29:56.159
>> So, it's not a it's not a public comment. >> No, that's that's not a public comment. >> So, council, do we need do we need to read this? It's no mayor. It's not a public comment. >> I see him here. Hey, Mr. Ortega. Thank

100
00:29:56.159 --> 00:30:12.240
you. Appreciate our city manager, I think that one is captured. And uh as stated, I think um when we get to the item and discuss it further, uh I would like to make sure that we acknowledge

101
00:30:12.240 --> 00:30:28.640
the the other ones that were provided at the workshop, which is one other Mr. Patrick Campbell. And so with that, are there any other public comments that we received that need to be stated in Oh, Mr. Sean, >> thank you, Council Member Shoryak. I have that one here in front of me. That

102
00:30:28.640 --> 00:30:45.919
one says, this is from Sean Shaner, 7028 Civil Court, Cape Canaveral. Hello, West City Clerk, City Manager, and Council members. This item is not on the agenda, but I would like the council's city manager, city clerk, and mayor to look into this. It has come to

103
00:30:45.919 --> 00:31:01.520
my attention that my HOA has requested that the city arborist approve cutting down 15 mature oaks at Salana on the river. I've been informed that the arborist has approved the HOA request to cut down 15 mature oak trees. I have not

104
00:31:01.520 --> 00:31:16.880
received any notification from my HOA board. The only reason I know about this issue is the yellow tape wrapped around the trees. I ask that you take a drive down Civilia Court and Marbella Court and think about what this approval will

105
00:31:16.880 --> 00:31:32.640
do to our property values and overall community appearance. I understand that some of the trees are doing damage to the roads and parking lot, but not all 15 mature oaks are doing damage. City of Cape Canaveral is a tree city, and I am

106
00:31:32.640 --> 00:31:49.760
surprised that an arborist approved removal of 15 mature oaks. The city just had a tree giveaway in April and plan to plant trees, more trees in the future. Yet, we approve cutting down 15 mature oak trees. The city of Charleston, South Carolina, and other cities throughout

107
00:31:49.760 --> 00:32:06.640
the world have figured out how to not cut down trees that are hundreds of years old. Cape Canaveral has a very old oak tree near the library that we have protected and it has done damage to the sidewalk and we didn't cut it down. Please advise how the city council can

108
00:32:06.640 --> 00:32:23.600
review this approval and provide additional solutions versus approval for cutting down 50 mature oak trees. Thanks for your time and support, Sean Shaner. >> Are there any other further public comments the council would like to be read into the record?

109
00:32:23.600 --> 00:32:40.320
>> Mayor, perhaps a public response to that email is in order. >> For the record, our city arborist did not approve the cutting down of any trees. He was asked an opinion and he rendered an opinion in conjunction with an opinion that was offered by an arborist that was hired by that uh condo

110
00:32:40.320 --> 00:32:56.559
association. Uh he cannot approve per our ordinance. It must be approved by the um building official and at this point in time and it we view this as a private property issue. the city has authority to approve a permit to cut those trees down when a permit has been

111
00:32:56.559 --> 00:33:12.320
properly applied for this condo association or no representatives from this association have applied for a permit at this time. So that's the city's view on this issue. Um it's a private property issue and we've issued no permission or authorization to cut

112
00:33:12.320 --> 00:33:30.880
any tree down. >> Thank you, city manager. Any further comments? Seeing none, we will go ahead and close public participation and move on to managers matters,

113
00:33:30.880 --> 00:33:47.279
which is item number seven. I think just to reaffirm um the request during public comment from Dr. Roberts was to address an issue regarding ebikes. city manager if prepared. I know you're on the spot on

114
00:33:47.279 --> 00:34:02.960
this one. It would be appreciated. >> Oh, we're not on the spot. We're ready to go. >> And one thing prior, if uh anyone who would like to if we want to take a two-minute recess for anyone to to leave, you're more than welcome to. I sure this meeting is thrilling, but uh

115
00:34:02.960 --> 00:34:19.760
we completely understand if you we'd be honored if you stayed, but if at this time you are free to go at any point. So, we thank you for >> for joining us this evening. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Yes. Thank you, city manager. Absolutely.

116
00:34:19.760 --> 00:35:22.240
Thank you. Yes, Mr. City Manager. >> Yes, Mayor. Thank you. And so, regarding uh the electronic electric bicycles operating on our streets, uh in conversation with our sheriff's office and Commander Neil is here. Um, we

117
00:35:22.240 --> 00:35:39.040
learned that there was a a specific House and Senate bill pending in the legislation that would make certain um provisions for operating electric bikes legal or illegal. So, the state is has regulated this issue. And so, rather than enact an ordinance, uh, we thought

118
00:35:39.040 --> 00:35:55.200
we would wait to see what that law looks like and how it could be enforced. Uh the the bills did pass and the law goes into effect July 1st and Commander Neil is here to talk about the provisions of that statute and how the sheriff's office will go about enforcing it. >> Thank you, Commander Neil. Thank you.

119
00:35:55.200 --> 00:36:12.400
>> Good evening. How are you? >> Good. Thank you. >> A good city manager says I'm not on the spot alone. So, no. uh to to his uh uh point, we have had many discussions about this subject and we were waiting for this bill to be signed uh uh 382. Uh

120
00:36:12.400 --> 00:36:29.119
and what it does, it adds some uh some into law that he will sign on or it'll go effective, excuse me, July 1st. Uh one of the things it does is uh limits their speed to 10 miles an hour on sidewalks within 50 ft of any person because that's one of the biggest complaints when they're wisdom by people

121
00:36:29.119 --> 00:36:45.119
on sidewalks. So, that'll address that issue. The second part of that is they'll have to signal whether through a bell or horn or some type of noise or or or audible device that they're about to overtake a person walking on the sidewalk. The other thing it does, it establishes a task force and law

122
00:36:45.119 --> 00:37:00.880
enforcement will be responsible for reporting uh injuries, crashes, things like that. So, this is the first step. I think you can see this will probably progress as we learn more and we start reporting it. I think that's one of the problems is it's a hodgepodge of reporting, right? But now this law will

123
00:37:00.880 --> 00:37:16.800
require law enforcement to start reporting those stats so the state can take a better look at what's going on. Uh and there are other laws already on the books, ma'am, as you well know. And we do enforce and I can tell you come July, we will be uh running an operation

124
00:37:16.800 --> 00:37:33.440
to be a soft start. It's kind of the honeymoon phase, the warning phase. We never want to come out heavy-handed. We want to start educating first and then start enforcing. So yeah, there definitely things in the works. >> Thank you, Commander Neil. >> Okay. Thank you.

125
00:37:33.440 --> 00:37:50.880
to um and if it was stated I apologize but is there anything that we I understand the statute is coming but from an ordinance the city's control is there anything that we could do that my understanding is we we were limited

126
00:37:50.880 --> 00:38:07.760
by what we could do due due to the state law and >> well it depends on how the law is written. Uh this is one of those issues where it's a statewide issue. And so uh the legislature decided to attack to tackle this at the state level as opposed to this for lack of better

127
00:38:07.760 --> 00:38:25.119
hodgepodge of ordinances that are going to be going all over the you know the state. uh you can drive through one city, you know, and and there the ordinances and then you come to another city and but there's a different ordinances and and so to be more effective in enforcing making it a state

128
00:38:25.119 --> 00:38:41.359
law. uh it would be more effective. And I think the best guidance I would offer is let's let the sheriff's office enforce state law and and see if it satisfies all of those conditions that we would like to see met. And if and then, you know, we can, you know, follow

129
00:38:41.359 --> 00:38:57.359
back up with the sheriff's office and listen to the community and if there are other provisions that maybe um need to be addressed, we can certainly speak to it from an ordinance standpoint. or it might behoove us just to go back to our legislators and say, "Hey, you did a great job on this statute, but we're

130
00:38:57.359 --> 00:39:12.000
seeing this. Maybe we can go back and amend it uh amend the statute." And and we've seen that happen with other laws. So, >> thank you, council. Any further comments on that? >> I'm just glad to know that they're doing something about it because it's very,

131
00:39:12.000 --> 00:39:29.040
very dangerous. It really is, especially at our intersections in the city where the intersection of Buchanan and Orange where they fly through and they they don't even stop and it's a four-way stop. So, I'm hoping that the legislature will address that as well. Traffic adhering to traffic laws. We'll

132
00:39:29.040 --> 00:39:43.119
see if they do or not. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Question. >> Yes, Mayor Perim. Um, city manager, do you know if, and maybe this is for Commander Neil, but are we locally as

133
00:39:43.119 --> 00:40:01.760
BCSO keeping up with ebike incidences as far as accidents in Cape Canaveral, um, tickets and that kind of thing. >> So, we have ran an operation before and posted pretty good numbers on ebike

134
00:40:01.760 --> 00:40:17.520
enforcement. Same thing we started out kind of warning phase and then we started issuing citations. So we have done that in the past year. So it is ongoing. Um I think the intent of what the law is is certainly for us to better do a better job of tracking those incidents of you know injuries and

135
00:40:17.520 --> 00:40:34.240
accidents and such. So like anything we can always do a better job on that side. And that's I think you're going to see that law graduate to the city manager's point. I think this is just the beginning. Well, and my curiosity is um for us as legislators

136
00:40:34.240 --> 00:40:52.079
working with you all as our partner, if we don't know the events occurred, we don't know if because we can wait for state law and I understand that, but it's still ultimately our responsibility to make sure our safety in our community

137
00:40:52.079 --> 00:41:10.000
is handled properly. So, we may have things that they put in at a state law level and we need to add one thing or something like that, but if we aren't getting a report of incidences with ebikes and scooters or anything else, we

138
00:41:10.000 --> 00:41:25.920
may not know those. So, is there do you do you all share that information? >> If there's a serious incident, uh, you know, a lot of times I'll text the city manager if it's something severe. If it's a minor incident, maybe not. You know, I I you know, certainly, you know,

139
00:41:25.920 --> 00:41:42.079
we can look at how we're capturing that data overall. I'll just have to look at that and see how our analysts are capturing that data. >> Okay. And thank you, Commander Neil. You have to understand, I was in tech and I love reports, right? >> You're like, no, we don't like them, but

140
00:41:42.079 --> 00:41:58.240
it's a lot of work for people >> that are not that it's capturing that data. But I think as we look at the new law going into place, it would be good for us to keep up with it locally to be able to tell what's going on and is it really are we just seeing it every now

141
00:41:58.240 --> 00:42:14.400
and then or do we have a real problem? >> Yeah. And I want just want to clarify one other thing. You know, bikes that are on our roadway do have to adhere to traffic laws like a vehicle. So those are enforceable when they run stop signs and things of that nature and it is enforced. So I think a lot of people

142
00:42:14.400 --> 00:42:30.400
misunderstand that. So those laws are already on the book that applies to bicycles or ebikes. >> Okay. >> And just to add to that, if we're talking about incidents like crashes, crash reports are filled out. They become a state record and that data is collected annually and and it can be

143
00:42:30.400 --> 00:42:46.560
acquired at any time once it's available. Um uniform traffic citations uh also being issued in that regard. It wouldn't surprise me if they have to amend the uniform traffic citation to include an eBox uh or ebike box if they haven't already. Same thing for crash

144
00:42:46.560 --> 00:43:02.960
reports. We classify the vehicle and as it's scanned in, it automatically records it in that regard. So, the data now that this state law is out here and crash reports are done, the data will be out there for us. Um, now if you're looking to collect data on any other type of incident involving an ebike that

145
00:43:02.960 --> 00:43:19.599
didn't necessarily rise to the level of a crash report, uh, then we can certainly, uh, I would like to know what maybe you're maybe at another time find out what you're interested in or now and we can work with the sheriff's office. >> And I was thinking ticketed instances, >> okay? >> Like total number of ticketed incidents.

146
00:43:19.599 --> 00:43:36.319
And the thing is, I know you guys are enforcing. I see that. But just this past week, I rode all the way down Ridgewood 5 miles an hour while while someone on a bike in the traffic lane, not on the bike path rode, and did not

147
00:43:36.319 --> 00:43:52.960
stop at one stop sign. >> So, I ended up, and that's okay, but he's back in traffic up behind me, you know. Um, so we all see it and you can't be everywhere at the same time. >> That is absolutely correct. And I think

148
00:43:52.960 --> 00:44:08.800
you know in the city the volume of bicycles and >> so you know being able to identify is how big of a problem it is or if these are oneoff issues where you can't control human behavior and they're going to do what they're going to do. You know

149
00:44:08.800 --> 00:44:23.760
there's those cases. >> You know we're talking about ebikes here but it's it's bicycles as well. you know, they're they're blowing through the stop signs as well. So, >> yeah. And I was just >> it's a dual issue. >> Yeah, I was using that as an example, and I know y'all can't be everywhere at once. Well, that's what my question was. Thank you.

150
00:44:23.760 --> 00:44:41.599
>> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. Any further comments or questions? >> Uh yes, Mr. Mayor. Um Senate Bill 382 uh does allow shared path regulations for the local municipalities. So we

151
00:44:41.599 --> 00:44:59.599
could if it rose to that we could restrict the types of vehicles, bikes and wear. So we could and I I appreciate saying that something I did want to say earlier is we can provide the Senate bill to the council for their own review and um if not whatever

152
00:44:59.599 --> 00:45:15.680
statutes also um are referenced in that so you can see for yourself what what's going to take place effective July 1st. >> Thank you. My comments would be what we heard today is one of many stories uh as Dr. Roberts said would the the Senate

153
00:45:15.680 --> 00:45:32.480
bill the statute if passed and implemented would that address that issue? You know, if we were to run it through and if so, that's that's a good thing. And with that, I think we're good. Thank you for taking that

154
00:45:32.480 --> 00:45:50.640
up. >> The clerk has put it on the screen if you wanted to have any further dialogue or we can just make sure you get it for review later. It's your discretion. >> Thank you. I think we'll have take time and monitor what's going on at the state level and

155
00:45:50.640 --> 00:46:08.000
>> uh be aware of what we experience every week in our city. Uh we'll have that resource available and thank you Dr. Roberts, city manager. The floor is yours. >> Thank you, Mayor. And thank you,

156
00:46:08.000 --> 00:46:23.680
council. Uh for the first item under manager matters is a facility update. Uh as you know, we've been revising our bid package, our bid documents uh when we put something out uh to invite someone to do some work in our city. And so our

157
00:46:23.680 --> 00:46:40.079
bid package, our final documents are completed. And now that we've done that revision, we're going to put the Nancy Hansen wreck complex out to bid. And if I've not said this before, all all projects like this that are put out to bid are are under Tim Carile, our

158
00:46:40.079 --> 00:46:56.720
capital improvements uh director. So it doesn't matter what department is needing that project. He oversees all projects like that. Uh San Piper Park, if you haven't heard the good news, uh we did get it up and running and it's open uh for the public to use. Um, as we

159
00:46:56.720 --> 00:47:12.240
talked about in the past, we had some some issues with the equipment. Uh, measurement of the placement of that equipment with the vendor and all that equipment was delivered on time in the very beginning and was ready to install. What happened was the, you know, the fact that the measurements were not

160
00:47:12.240 --> 00:47:29.359
completely accurate and so that held things up. Uh, but everything is complete and ready to go except for uh, we have a um swing arch uh, that uh, we're waiting to replace. And I, you know, the ship date for that item is August. So, but that apparatus I believe

161
00:47:29.359 --> 00:47:45.359
is still o is open anyway. I'm not sure. Molly can attest to that. Um, if she if she's here, is that open? Yes, it is open and we're waiting on that replacement part. Uh, Manatee Sanctuary Park Lighting. Uh, that project, if it

162
00:47:45.359 --> 00:48:03.920
didn't start today, will begin this week. So, we'll get that moving. Item two, city personnel update. We have uh several vacant positions that uh we are uh entertaining remaining vacant or filling at this point. Records management tech, we have decided to fill

163
00:48:03.920 --> 00:48:20.560
that. Uh we have a full-time and a part-time recckle leader position that are open. Uh we are uh scanning applications for the full-time recleer position and currently the part-time recck leader position is being held as open. and we want to get into some employee

164
00:48:20.560 --> 00:48:36.079
recognition and we have three uh things to cover under that item and I'll turn the floor over to you mayor to take on the first one. >> Yes, thank you very much. This is something uh I'm excited to do. Our city manager brought it to the attention

165
00:48:36.079 --> 00:48:52.640
under managers matters and I know the council will support and recognizing employees. We've over the past few meetings recognized new employees, but uh those that have served us for some time. Annually, we would do like a city managers hosted, you know, Christmas

166
00:48:52.640 --> 00:49:08.240
time of the year employee recognition. We'd recognize employees 5, 10, 15, 20 years. And tonight is a special one because we're going to start or at least attempt with good intentions start recognizing employees uh who served our

167
00:49:08.240 --> 00:49:23.760
city. And uh tonight is Mr. Tim Davis who is celebrating 30y year employment anniversary. 30 years of dedicated service reaching his work anniversary on

168
00:49:23.760 --> 00:49:38.880
June 10th. Mr. Tim Davis served since 1996 as the city arborist and lead infrastructure maintenance specialist. Professional leadership. He holds credentials as an international society

169
00:49:38.880 --> 00:49:54.720
of arbiculture ISA certified arborist and is an active member of the urban and community forestry society. Tree city USA legacy. His passion for arbiculture has been vital in retaining Cape

170
00:49:54.720 --> 00:50:12.880
Canaveral's prestigious tree city designation for the past 30 years. Tree planting and maintenance. He has planted thousands of trees citywide and cares for a massive urban canopy which includes over 1,200 palm trees in parks,

171
00:50:12.880 --> 00:50:30.160
medians, and the right ofway, public education and outreach. Mr. Tim Davis leads annual Arbor Day celebrations and regularly educates elementary students and the public on the importance of our urban canopy, public safety and

172
00:50:30.160 --> 00:50:47.599
compliance. Tim maintains safe roadway height clearances for Cape Canaveral's fire and rescue trucks and conducts private property inspections to ensure specimen trees are protected. Broad infrastructure impact Mr. Davis is vital

173
00:50:47.599 --> 00:51:03.440
to daily city operations, executing storm drain maintenance, sidewalk repairs, pothole filling, beach cleanups, and dune crossover repairs and staff safety training. Tim shares his expertise with colleagues by running the

174
00:51:03.440 --> 00:51:45.839
annual chainsaw safety class for the city staff. Tim, are you with us here today? I'm looking out. >> Tim, if you want to come forward and our city manager, come down and join. We'd like to present you with this certificate. All right. It's a little awkward now.

175
00:51:45.839 --> 00:52:03.520
Just hearing that one comment from the Salana Rivers, you know, residents. We do take being a tree city very serious. You know, you know that as well. You know, I've gone through a lot of council members, a few mayors, and a few city managers, but um we've always had strong

176
00:52:03.520 --> 00:52:20.240
for our urban environment and um when I got here, you know, 30 years ago, the vision statement was to have street uh you know, treeline streets and um that's where I came in. So, um we do take that very seriously. It kind of upset me a

177
00:52:20.240 --> 00:52:35.760
little bit. I ain't going to lie. Uh, but them people are mitigating stuff too if there ever comes to removal. So, they're not just removing stuff. It's just a wrong species in a wrong space. Everybody loves oak trees, but you can't put them in in little areas. So, you you got to pick the right tree for the right

178
00:52:35.760 --> 00:52:54.319
spot, you know, and uh it's been a pleasure. It really has. I don't know where the times went, but um like you say, if you find a place you like to work, and I've had always good employees. I've got a good director, June and Cheryl. the only two that's been here longer than me and uh awesome

179
00:52:54.319 --> 00:53:27.440
co-workers and it's just been a joy for me and uh I hope I can hang out for a while longer but um thank you. >> Thank you. I think it's I would be the fourth mayor, but we that includes the famous

180
00:53:27.440 --> 00:53:43.599
Rocky Randos who served multiple terms and served this city for a long time. And u Thank you, Tim. Impressive. tree removal does get political because once their specimen it comes to this council

181
00:53:43.599 --> 00:53:59.040
and I've always appreciated that your scientific approach to it, the evaluation, the whole process kind of allows us as a council to make a well-informed decisions. We've been through a few of them. They've been controversial, but without you, I think

182
00:53:59.040 --> 00:54:14.480
uh we would have been in a tough spot. So, thank you for all that you've done and continue to do for our city. and I live on Ridgewood. Every time you come by in the truck drive in, I wave and you're you you wave back and you're not just me, the community, the people love

183
00:54:14.480 --> 00:54:29.359
you here and and I know this council does, too. So, thank you very much. >> With that, I think uh back to you, city manager. >> Thank you, mayor. And I think it goes without saying if you hear everything that heard everything that you said

184
00:54:29.359 --> 00:54:45.280
about Tim's career and you look at his suntan, you know he spends the majority of his time outdoors and it's arduous work and he's been doing that for 30 years. So good job. So thank you. Um the next item u we'd like to recognize um

185
00:54:45.280 --> 00:54:59.839
from time to time we receive things from our public safety professionals and in this case uh we received a letter um from our sheriff's office authored by uh Judge Justice and I'm not making that name up. He is a circuit judge six

186
00:54:59.839 --> 00:55:16.640
judicial circuit of Florida and um he wrote a letter to um the Bvard County Sheriff's Office commending one Corporal Andrew Marunis. He went on a ride along with Corpal Marunis and um I don't know if Commander Davis, would you like to add to it? The letter is in the record.

187
00:55:16.640 --> 00:55:32.960
It's fairly lengthy, but um you know, I could tell you for a circuit judge to go on a ride along with a local law enforcement officer, that's a pretty big deal. And uh that to see the the the um job from the level of the person doing it, it just creates a huge respect for

188
00:55:32.960 --> 00:55:47.280
the job at the um at the bench or on the bench depending. And um so we really appreciate you sending that letter to us, Commander Neil. And thank you. It's in the record and it will be in the matter of the minutes u for any the public who would like to see it and it's

189
00:55:47.280 --> 00:56:06.640
also on the screen. So thank you. And then finally, we received some employee recognition from uh department director uh Mike Schaefer, who's in charge of IT. And this one we'll read very uh quickly. Recently, the city of Cape Canaveral personnel installed a

190
00:56:06.640 --> 00:56:22.880
security camera system at the city of Cape Canaveral's public works facility and are worthy of recognition. Uh, in the words of director Mike Schaefer, the team successfully installed a security camera system at the public works facility to support compliance with requirements for securing the city's

191
00:56:22.880 --> 00:56:39.440
mission critical infrastructure. The project involved trenching more than 2,000 ft while carefully avoiding disruption to existing utilities and infrastructure. They installed 2100 ft of conduit and pulled over 3,000 ft of Cat 6 cable while deploying 28 security

192
00:56:39.440 --> 00:56:56.079
cameras and a dedicated server to aid in protecting the city's most valuable resource. By strategically procuring a high performance system at a competitive price and leveraging a highly skilled contractor for system design assistance, the IT team achieved an estimated cost

193
00:56:56.079 --> 00:57:12.400
savings of approximately $39,000 compared to the original project cost estimate. And so we are grateful for the following personnel. of course, our director, Mike Schaefer, Duncan Grant, IT manager, Jessica Erdman, um, Pedro, uh, from Digital Guards, Pierro from

194
00:57:12.400 --> 00:57:28.079
Digital Guards, sorry, uh, Duncan Grant, Josh Prior, again, Josh Prior, Mike Johnson, Gary Smith, Chris Whittington, Shannon Light, Nick Setliff, Donnie Robuck, and Milton Zaldunado. I never knew how to pronounce his name, so I apologize to Milton for butchering

195
00:57:28.079 --> 00:57:49.520
that. And um, and I don't know what a Cat 6 cable is, but it sounds pretty big. And uh we appreciate the efforts of that team who did all that. Mayor and council, thank you for letting me give me the opportunity to recognize our employees. And I get the next item, managers

196
00:57:49.520 --> 00:58:08.160
matters. I've lost my place in my book. Thank you. >> Take your time. >> Okay. Next item is grants update. Um we have not acquired any new grants as of yet. However, we are researching grants that can be applied toward research

197
00:58:08.160 --> 00:58:23.359
research that could help our city from its tourism base uh understand how we can research some data to understand the impacts of tourism on our community so we can appropriately advise council on measures that we should take to um you

198
00:58:23.359 --> 00:58:39.440
know manage the um you know that tourism impact. And so hopefully we can acquire some type of grant money to start researching data in that regard. Uh item number four is the employee handbook. As you know, two meetings ago, we brought

199
00:58:39.440 --> 00:58:56.240
it before the council. The council did weigh in with changes as requested. Those changes were forwarded on to our consultant who is um going to uh incorporate uh some of those changes into the manual. Our goal is to get that manual back to the council before the

200
00:58:56.240 --> 00:59:10.480
next council meeting so you can review the changes and then hopefully render a vote so we can adopt the employee handbook. Uh it just a reminder to the council but mostly the public as the council knows the purpose of the employee handbook is to deal with

201
00:59:10.480 --> 00:59:27.359
employee issues, human resource stuff and then there are certain policies there. Um it is a handbook for employees. It is not a city department manual where we have policies and procedures that deal with other specific things. So, we are working on drafting

202
00:59:27.359 --> 00:59:44.559
those department policies as we speak. And uh but again, we'll get that handbook back to the council for your review and adoption hopefully at the next council meeting. And the next two items, I'm going to turn the mic over to Zach IILs. Items number five, hurricane season

203
00:59:44.559 --> 01:00:00.960
preparedness update and six electric vehicle stations. >> Thank you, Keith. Good evening, council. We thought it would be a good idea to quickly review uh our status for the hurricane season. I don't think we've ever done that at a council meeting before, and we thought it would be a good idea to get it out in the public to

204
01:00:00.960 --> 01:00:17.520
showcase what we've done uh for your sake and for the public's. Uh there was an a piece of material submitted in the agenda packet called the hurricane prep checklist uh that you could have reviewed. I will briefly go through it. I'm not going to talk about everything on here, but if you have a question

205
01:00:17.520 --> 01:00:31.359
about anything, please let me know. I just want to tick off some of the bigger items. So, the National Hurricane Center is predicting a below average hurricane season, but we don't want to ever take that uh for granted because all it takes is one. You never know. Good example of

206
01:00:31.359 --> 01:00:48.400
that was Hurricane Andrew in 1992. Um, in terms of our preparedness, if you'll indulge me, our tropical cyclone preparedness and recovery plan has been updated. It is this document right here. It can be accessible to council if you wish. Uh, but it is not a

207
01:00:48.400 --> 01:01:05.359
public document for security reasons. It has been distributed to our local uh partners uh including Port Canaveral, Canaveral Fire Rescue, Bar County Sheriff's Office, and the City of Cocoa Beach's Fire Department. Um, our uh, hurricane FAQ for citizens has been updated and I encourage all citizens to

208
01:01:05.359 --> 01:01:21.200
take one. Uh, a version of this was emailed to you a few weeks ago and there are printed copies in uh, the lobby as we speak. Um, all remote sensor sites are up and running. We have nine now that are operational, most of which are publicly accessible in terms of

209
01:01:21.200 --> 01:01:38.079
reviewing their data. Lightning suppression systems have been checked and are operational. Um, we have had our staff hurricane training in place a few weeks ago that involved all staff members in Canaveral Fire Rescue and the sheriff's office. All facility generators fixed and mobile have been

210
01:01:38.079 --> 01:01:55.680
inspected. Gas and electric. Starlink is operational on the roof of this building for backup uh emergency internet if needed. Flood barriers and chainsaws and the Tiger Dam system has been checked. Uh, supply kits are up to date and ready to go. Um, our hurricane expo has been

211
01:01:55.680 --> 01:02:12.000
completed. That saw about a hundred individuals attend, which was fantastic. It was more than last year with great partners that showed up. Uh, the hurricane web page on the city's website has been updated, as well as all importantly all items for, uh, complying with Senate Bill 180 has been updated.

212
01:02:12.000 --> 01:02:28.640
>> Um, we have attended Port Canaveral's hurricane season stakeholder engagement meeting, uh, to discuss what they do for when hurricanes come. The city's municipal fleet has been taken care of in terms of determining ride out areas off island and on island which is good.

213
01:02:28.640 --> 01:02:44.480
Um we have our seasonal sandbag supply in place of about 6,000 bags with 15 to 20 cubic yards of fill material if needed. Um, our debris site authorization letter has been acquired from the Florida Department of of uh Environmental Protection, which is a

214
01:02:44.480 --> 01:03:01.280
requirement from Senate Bill 180 to have a yard waste disposal site in the city if necessary. The Center Street Pump Station has been checked and is good, as well as all mobile storm water pumps. And finally, um, we have attended BVAR County's annual, uh, hurricane training

215
01:03:01.280 --> 01:03:19.039
and exercise in collaboration with other municipalities and appropriate entities in the county, and we have confirmed the readiness of the city's mobile teleahalth trailer in conjunction with the southeastern telealth resource center to serve as a backup medical site if necessary. So, with that, we are good

216
01:03:19.039 --> 01:03:35.119
to go. Knock on wood. >> Yes. >> Any questions? council. No, >> I just wanted to I appreciate the invitation to attend. I thought Zach, you and your team did a wonderful job. I

217
01:03:35.119 --> 01:03:51.599
think uh staff I didn't see anyone fall asleep in the presentation, so you were very uh uh energetic with it and I appreciate everything you did for it. Thank you. >> Thank you. I'd like to mention that uh ever since

218
01:03:51.599 --> 01:04:08.319
we've uh uh ever since we have the warnings about the tsunami waves, that's all I've been reading about lately is tsunamis. I mean, do you have like an inside knowledge that we might get a tsunami wave? >> Just preparedness. That's all it is.

219
01:04:08.319 --> 01:04:23.920
>> My goodness. >> It was ironic that there was an earthquake not long after we became certified >> in off the coast of Cuba, right? Yes. Yes. >> Maybe the universe is saying we did the right thing. I I have to wonder. Thank you. >> Thank you. If there are no further questions, I'll move on to the next item.

220
01:04:23.920 --> 01:04:38.480
>> Question. >> Yeah, I had a question. Got one more mayor for 10. >> I'm trying to be patient. Everybody jumps. >> Yes, please. >> So, I'm just I'm being patient. Um, so, Zach, on the list that you have, we have the handheld radio test. That's all in

221
01:04:38.480 --> 01:04:55.359
yellow. Last year prior to our current city manager and it might have been even year before that, we had discussed the fact that I mean sta we had a huge number of staff that had handheld radios during hurricanes and none of the

222
01:04:55.359 --> 01:05:10.559
council out here had them at all and very at that time there were very few staff that lived out here. So we would be potentially going through a storm with little to no guarantee of a communic communication. So I know that

223
01:05:10.559 --> 01:05:26.720
you all had kind of counted and taken a look at these and I don't know mayor did you ever get a handheld? >> I did. I don't remember on if it was the last hurricane but when we raised that question I was provided a radio.

224
01:05:26.720 --> 01:05:42.960
>> Okay. on that >> and I know that we had discussed mayor pro Tim Kellum getting one at that time. Um but is it just one person and the reason I'm saying is because of you know how I am with the the emergency management training that I took and

225
01:05:42.960 --> 01:05:58.240
you've been through all of it more than I have. Um, and there's a level of secession that it should be covered for the council in case of an emergency because if I get knocked out cuz I'm sitting beachside and it's hitting over

226
01:05:58.240 --> 01:06:16.880
there and those of us on that side get knocked out, we got to have the legislative piece of it if you all needed something approved. So, um, city manager and Zach, I would request that we look at what that process looks like

227
01:06:16.880 --> 01:06:33.359
for this council as far as who has radios because right now, from what I understand, you have one. Does anyone else have a handheld right now? >> Not on council. I know my comments would be if I mean the whole council could have just a radio just from uh just to

228
01:06:33.359 --> 01:06:48.799
receive information and the radios would only be used in the event normal communication channels were down. My radio never made a sound. Well, >> that's a good thing. >> Yeah, that's a good thing. >> Which is Yes. But but yes, thank you for

229
01:06:48.799 --> 01:07:05.920
bringing that up. And the reason I'm saying this is not because I'm worried about Zach's ability to be uh able to handle things because Zach, you're on it. Um I'm going to be over with Zach under his desk at the Emergency Operations Center of Bvard County. So

230
01:07:05.920 --> 01:07:21.920
I'll be fine. No, I'm teasing. Uh but you know, we we need to make sure that people out here that are going through it that may not have evacuated are kept up to speed or can get to you if we need

231
01:07:21.920 --> 01:07:36.720
you because that's the the thing that becomes an issue. I remember storms that we've had here um that weren't even big storms for us. Matthew, for example, it knocked all the satellite dishes wonky.

232
01:07:36.720 --> 01:07:54.480
We had no internet. Uh, a lot of the cell towers needed to be adjusted before they could get cell signals up. So, that's that's why I was doing that. Landbased antennas communicate on different waves and just so I'm just

233
01:07:54.480 --> 01:08:11.119
looking at that because I knew we'd discussed that before. So, that was my only comment. That was my only comment. >> Yeah, we could certainly look into that. I will tell you that um we will need to do a radio count to just see how many are left over. Obviously, we've had some staffing changes. So, we need to reallocate some radios anyways and we

234
01:08:11.119 --> 01:08:27.839
need to still conduct the radio test and the reason we haven't done that is because of the recent staffing changes and whatnot, but we will get that done. My point that I was going to make was um we have access to uh getting additional radios if needed post storm through something like resource requests with

235
01:08:27.839 --> 01:08:43.040
the emergency operations center in Rockidge or through uh say insurance providers that can provide resources like through entities like blue sky uh as well as additional things like Starlink units for internet access. So, we do have means of getting that communications out if all else fails.

236
01:08:43.040 --> 01:08:58.719
>> And that's great except for that during a storm, if the mobile or Wi-Fi goes down, we can't get to you to let you know what's happening out here. And that's my point. Um, when I took my class, it was with a FEMA instructor for

237
01:08:58.719 --> 01:09:13.759
emergency management and there was a town in Alabama that had severe weather. three of their city council people, they couldn't find them >> and they needed something voted on to kick in the emergency operations within the emergency operations

238
01:09:13.759 --> 01:09:31.199
procedure and they didn't have a quorum. So that's you know that we are part of that process and if we're over here on the island by ourselves and we can't get to you let you know hey you know we got a big problem Zach there's like a title wave that just happened you know that

239
01:09:31.199 --> 01:09:47.279
kind of thing then we got a problem. So afterwards is fine and and y'all do great. But that's that's something that I was we discussed it back a couple of years ago or last year and I wanted to mention it again as the council has changed.

240
01:09:47.279 --> 01:10:02.960
>> Well, we'll definitely talk about it. So we have a tabletop exercise scheduled on Thursday. um pretty excited for. It's the first time we're going to try one in-house with the city's emergency operations team and that's something we can definitely discuss with all departments on hand to see what we could do for instorm radio assistance if

241
01:10:02.960 --> 01:10:19.360
needed. >> For sure. >> Okay, that was >> it's a great update. Thank you and all good points. >> Yeah, >> so much further along than we were in the past. So appreciate >> it all and the council does. Any other further comments on this? And maybe we

242
01:10:19.360 --> 01:10:35.840
need to after the tabletop. It's when appropriate. It's better to do it before we come together and add it as a discussion item so we can talk through. >> Sure. >> When ready. >> Yeah. Once we have the appropriate inventory for the radios and whatnot and see how it divies up with the emergency operations team, we could definitely

243
01:10:35.840 --> 01:10:50.880
bring it back and see what's left over and if there needs to be adjustments or additional equipment added, we can have that talk. >> Thank you. >> For sure. One thing I want to throw in just and I know Council Member Willis can confirm this. I've seen storms on on the west

244
01:10:50.880 --> 01:11:07.040
side of our island where the storm came in at a different direction and it was literally waves that were going up into people's homes and stuff and he's the only council member that would see that. >> See, so that's why you know what I'm

245
01:11:07.040 --> 01:11:23.199
saying? So it's just it we're in such a a unique position. Okay, now I will be I'm I'm done. >> Valid concern. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Any comments on the h word? >> Don't even want to say it. Knock on wood as you said. Yes. Hopefully we have a

246
01:11:23.199 --> 01:11:39.040
quiet season. City manager. >> Uh so Zach has one more item and we'll be through with managers matters. >> Zach's back. All right. Um the next item is uh a status update for the charging station upgrade project. Um some good news. We're coming going to come we're tracking to have the item come back to

247
01:11:39.040 --> 01:11:54.960
you in July for review. Um and we have identified companies that I believe are in line with what you requested from the business model of a leasing style. Um so we're excited to bring that to you. Uh good five companies. We we'll definitely have suggestions which ones we think

248
01:11:54.960 --> 01:12:10.239
will probably be best to go with. Um and we even discovered that the current entity that we have, Nova Charge, actually has that service which they did not have when we started. So, good research to do and we're excited to see what you think. >> Thank you for doing that. I appreciate that, Zach.

249
01:12:10.239 --> 01:12:33.280
>> Yes, it'll be in a nice little chart for you. >> All good. That's all I got. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Mayor. That concludes uh manager matters. >> That concludes manager matters. Yes, it

250
01:12:33.280 --> 01:12:47.120
does. >> I see Dr. Roberts is out there raising your hand. Doc, would you like to a brief statement? I can speak it into the record, but our city clerk and we do need you. >> I

251
01:12:47.120 --> 01:13:07.600
ask. >> Oh, okay. So, the request is you would like to come forward and speak during manager at this time. >> Yes. Okay, council. Any opposed to Dr. Roberts coming forth? Take your time.

252
01:13:07.600 --> 01:13:32.960
Yes, I I see no no issue. Thank you. >> I'm probably going to just ask a fundamental question about the electric charging stations. I know from my community there's been some questions about what the city is doing in the electric charging station business. And I'm just asking the fundamental question

253
01:13:32.960 --> 01:13:49.920
here. I'm also noticing for those of us that have maybe parking challenges like tonight there was there the electric charging stations are those those spaces are staying empty and then those that really need to park, you know, they're sort of reluctant to park in the

254
01:13:49.920 --> 01:14:06.159
electric charging station areas. But I think personally there may be a a cultural and a practical u issue here for our city in this regard. I'm not sure, you know, that I'm not sure why we need the electric charging stations to be honest. And secondly, I think they

255
01:14:06.159 --> 01:14:22.480
preclude some of our residents from parking in areas that are very critically located um just because they see, you know, the notice that it's only for electric charging stations. So, PE vehicles. So, I'm just I hope you don't mind. This is something that's very significant in my opinion for our

256
01:14:22.480 --> 01:14:37.600
community to address. Is this something we want to be doing? uh since we have private charging stations available now um that others have provided in the city and is this really a government function that we'd be wanting to take over especially if it's precluding residents

257
01:14:37.600 --> 01:14:54.800
from parking in normal parking spots in the past that have been available to our residents tonight was completely full and and I'm just mentioning you know because we had a presentation and those two charging station parking places were empty so I'm just using that as an

258
01:14:54.800 --> 01:15:11.199
example of where I just would ask council to reconsider the need for them and the appropriateness of them in our city. >> Thank you, Dr. Roberts. Your timing is good. This issue has been raised. We are all looking at it. I know our city staff and ourselves and I don't think anyone

259
01:15:11.199 --> 01:15:26.480
would disagree about the comments that you've stated. In fact, I'll go on the record and say I had to park for the first time ever in an EV spot in a panic. I was coming up. There was no spots, but we're working through it. And I think uh I think we'll be hearing

260
01:15:26.480 --> 01:15:43.440
about that very soon. Council member Shoryette, >> I I was also going to say it's I agree it's a business the city should not be in. We don't run gas stations and there's a lot of businesses that we're in that we shouldn't be in, but that's when we can probably save a little bit of money out if we get out of it. And

261
01:15:43.440 --> 01:15:59.840
and this is exactly why I brought the um model together of going at least going to a lease situation because right now we're paying for those. We're paying software costs, monitoring costs for the

262
01:15:59.840 --> 01:16:15.440
software that monitors them and that sort of thing. And when you go to the lease model, they all they pick up the costs. They pay us a lot of times. they will pay you for lease space where they

263
01:16:15.440 --> 01:16:31.440
have them installed. So now we took it from we pay them to have this to they pay us to put it on our property. And that's what Zach will be bringing to us in July. Although I appreciate your

264
01:16:31.440 --> 01:16:47.679
comments, Dr. Roberts because we've looked at this for three years almost three years for me and it has to be something that we want to do and there's been changes in that market. So I'll be looking forward to what Zach has to

265
01:16:47.679 --> 01:17:03.840
provide to us about what the options are if we let them put their equipment there and we get paid for them to do it. That's that's a better scenario to me. So I'll be looking forward to that. >> I agree Dr. Roberts. There has been a lot of changes in the market lately and

266
01:17:03.840 --> 01:17:20.400
moving to the the leasing model would probably be in the best city's best interest because it could become a nocost endeavor or a cost positive endeavor um because they will be be able to provide revenues back to the city where we don't have to take on that cost and obviously it's the council's

267
01:17:20.400 --> 01:17:40.480
prerogative to do what the council wants. So we'll just follow your direction but hopefully what you see is a different way we could go that's much better. >> Thank you. That's all I have, >> Mr. Mayor. Great. Thank you all. That concludes the manager's matters and

268
01:17:40.480 --> 01:17:55.280
that is greatly appreciated. You'd have to imagine this meeting going forward without all of those hot topics, you know, being brought up or the, you know, not discussing. And so, you've been doing that since the beginning, since August, Mr. Touchberry and the team.

269
01:17:55.280 --> 01:18:13.040
Thank you all. It's greatly appreciated. Okay. So, we are now at item number eight. I think uh we got which is the consent agenda item approval of minutes. I need to touch base with our city clerk's office. I think we got a revised agenda. Do we are we deferring to the next meeting on that or we're taking no

270
01:18:13.040 --> 01:18:27.760
action here? Is that >> correct? >> Okay. So, there is no items on the consent agenda or uh formally uh council. Unless anyone's opposed, we're going to take no action on this and it'll show up at the next meeting.

271
01:18:27.760 --> 01:18:45.520
Any opposed? Consensus. Good. Okay. Uh before going on items for action, I would like to take a brief uh recess. As soon as we're all back, we can reconvene at 7:20 p.m. So, uh try to get back as we're all back in five. Great.

272
01:18:45.520 --> 01:32:51.760
Hopefully, no more than 10 minutes. We'll reconvene no later than 7:30. So, thank you. >> I got We're about to get into the meat of it. All right, >> ready to go. >> Yes.

273
01:32:51.760 --> 01:33:07.920
>> Awesome. Call the meeting back to order. It is 7:34 p.m. We're in our June 16th regular city council meeting. We just finished up with managers

274
01:33:07.920 --> 01:33:26.000
matters. Got through uh the consent agenda item number eight and we are now on item number nine which is items for action tonight. Nine has five items. The first one is 9.1 titled the villas

275
01:33:26.000 --> 01:33:41.440
at Filillmore. It's a revised version. Just want to confirmed or confirm, excuse me, that the council's got the revised version. >> The villas at Filillmore project drainage improvements status update

276
01:33:41.440 --> 01:33:57.679
addendum additional material. This time I'm going to hand it over to our city manager. >> Thank you, mayor. So, if the council recalls last council meeting, we brought this item before you for discussion and

277
01:33:57.679 --> 01:34:13.440
action. And the action that was taken was to direct uh staff to get back with Allen Engineering and present them with an option um for his consideration. Uh

278
01:34:13.440 --> 01:34:29.199
another a third above ground drainage uh plan that that option was presented by one of the four residents that live at the Villas of Filillmore. And so as directed staff presented the engineer

279
01:34:29.199 --> 01:34:44.480
with that plan with that option and Allen Engineering produced a code compliant plan which is listed in your backup documents as option three.

280
01:34:44.480 --> 01:35:01.199
So to date, the city of Cape Canaveral, per the initial directions provided by this council in August of last year, has acquired three code compliant plans to

281
01:35:01.199 --> 01:35:17.199
improve a defective drainage system at the Villas of Filillmore. All code compliant plans are within the limited legal authority that this city has to affect repairs on a private drainage

282
01:35:17.199 --> 01:35:33.040
system with our dollars. And I do not see any residents here. All were notified of this meeting. One um email was sent to us by one

283
01:35:33.040 --> 01:35:50.639
resident and it was inord included in the backup documents um for this presentation and it's there should the council want to address any of the resident's um statements or questions. The resident is not here to do that

284
01:35:50.639 --> 01:36:07.840
themselves. Um at this point, if the council um were to so direct to move on one of these three code compliant plans, option three would

285
01:36:07.840 --> 01:36:25.679
require that the residents in effect sign over or deed over or agree, that might not be the legal terminology, the attorney can correct me if necessary, but make available uh for um this that drainage system or that that plan I

286
01:36:25.679 --> 01:36:42.239
should say at least 2 ft of their property that spans the backyards of all properties and that property would have to be included in the city's utility easement for purposes of constructing

287
01:36:42.239 --> 01:36:59.520
the option three drainage system. In order to do that, all four residents would have to agree and any if any one resident does not agree, then the city would be in a position to execute one of the other two

288
01:36:59.520 --> 01:37:15.520
options and we do staff does have a recommendation on which option option to execute. So the matter before this council now is to discuss the work that has been done since the last council meeting and to direct staff

289
01:37:15.520 --> 01:37:32.560
and if I can offer a direction should you go in this in this manner direct staff to engage the residents on option three and and see if they are willing to allow their property to be used to expand the city's utility easement

290
01:37:32.560 --> 01:37:50.400
and if one of at least one of the or residents does not agree, then further direct the city manager to execute another option. In this case, staff would recommend option two and staff will execute that option and

291
01:37:50.400 --> 01:38:11.080
put this job out to bid um as discussed in prior meetings. Thank you. Okay. City attorney, any comments or clarification from our city manager's comments?

292
01:38:11.840 --> 01:38:48.320
>> Thank you. Just give me a second. All right. So we have three options to repeat back. City managers looking for direction for uh option

293
01:38:48.320 --> 01:39:05.760
three which would be contingent on four of the four property owners to approve. And in that same motion, in the event that that did not occur would not need to come the benefit, we

294
01:39:05.760 --> 01:39:21.040
would not need to come back. >> Correct. >> That you could init uh proceed with next option two. And is it wise to say and if that did not occur, maybe you address this option one would

295
01:39:21.040 --> 01:39:37.119
be the third. Well, I would need clear direction from this council if if I were directed to approach the residents to uh get them to sign whatever document that our city attorney would draft for them to allow for the use of their property

296
01:39:37.119 --> 01:39:52.480
to expand the city's uh utility easement. Then we would present them with that document, acquire their signature, and then I would proceed uh to put the project out to bid to execute option three plan. If one or more

297
01:39:52.480 --> 01:40:09.920
residents does not like option three, then the fallback direction from this council to me would be to go with option two, which is the option staff recommends. The reason option two is our recommendation is option one uh is without the bamboo. Uh the residents

298
01:40:09.920 --> 01:40:27.119
have expressed the desire that that be put back in. It was we started to demolish as you know uh started this project and the bamboo was removed. They would like the bamboo replaced. So option one really is not one that they would favor. And then option two uh as

299
01:40:27.119 --> 01:40:44.320
stated during our last council meeting uh the guidance given to us by Allen Engineering is when this project was initially con entertained several years ago. had the air conditioning units been presented to them and had the bamboo

300
01:40:44.320 --> 01:41:02.000
been part of the um drainage system plan then option two is the plan that Allen Engineering would have drafted 5 years ago. Therefore, this that appears to be the plan that um would they would have now had things happen the way that they

301
01:41:02.000 --> 01:41:23.040
should have then. So, that's why our recommendation is option two. >> Thank you, council. Any initial comments, questions? Yes. C Mayor Perim. >> Okay. So, option three is the 4:1 swell

302
01:41:23.040 --> 01:41:40.960
with the slope towards their patios that um they would have is that option three that they would have to approve all four of them? >> They would all have to approve that, but that's not the slope. And uh >> Okay. Well, I have the slope problem,

303
01:41:40.960 --> 01:41:58.080
but I understand the option then. >> Yes, that's correct. >> Okay. And I have concerns with that option. Um because as you go back and look at the storm water plan from the original um documents, >> it's not talking about a 100redyear

304
01:41:58.080 --> 01:42:16.159
storm or whatever. And we're talking about water being close to 2 feet away from the backs of their houses. So, to me, that really concerns me. It concerns me as a council member that is worried about flooding in our city. Um, and I'm

305
01:42:16.159 --> 01:42:33.040
not sure that if I was one of the homeowners there that I would want to do that. Now, as we look at option one, which was the alternative design without bamboo,

306
01:42:33.040 --> 01:42:48.480
um, one of their concerns in the past has been that they had the bamboo before and that gives them some privacy on a small lot where they have very little yard to work with. And so I understand them wanting the bamboo. And I feel

307
01:42:48.480 --> 01:43:02.960
lucky that um bamboo can be covered in the storm water plan under that second option that gives us the ability to put that into place with bamboo using storm water resource money.

308
01:43:02.960 --> 01:43:18.960
>> Yes. Um I I did read the email from uh the hearse and that made me delve into the storm water capacities in more detail

309
01:43:18.960 --> 01:43:36.880
because whatever option nothing has been as it was said from that builder and developer um and the plan that they had. So, we are tasked with the hard job of taking care of this and making sure these

310
01:43:36.880 --> 01:43:52.159
residents get this build correct and that or this swale correct in their backyards. And there were things even, you know, structures underground and things of that nature. So, there's been many challenges. I'll say I've been

311
01:43:52.159 --> 01:44:08.800
dealing with this. I'm I will be on the council for three years in November and we've been dealing with this my entire term. So, as I started looking at this, I do I did some diving into the storm water

312
01:44:08.800 --> 01:44:25.199
document that was provided in 2020 on the property itself because I want to make sure that whatever our options are that we have done our due diligence to ensure that the water can be handled

313
01:44:25.199 --> 01:44:41.520
with option one or two. Um, and I definitely, if I was in their shoes, I'd want at least two because of the fact that that gives them some privacy with the bamboo. Um, understanding that, you know, that

314
01:44:41.520 --> 01:44:58.000
builder didn't put the I'm not sure where the air conditioners were originally supposed to go. I don't have the blueprints um to know, but in most cases with properties like that, if there is no place on the lot, they go on the roof, which would be ridiculous to pay for at

315
01:44:58.000 --> 01:45:14.960
this point with the property built out. So, we've tough choice. We've got a tough situation. And I put together this that you're seeing on the screen tonight. And um it's a comparison because in the storm water diagram it gave us pre-development

316
01:45:14.960 --> 01:45:30.239
um information and postdevelopment information for the inches that it can handle with a 5year or 24-hour storm, a 10-year with a 24-hour storm or 25 year with a 24-hour storm. It gave us

317
01:45:30.239 --> 01:45:44.320
pre-development maximum flow rates into the inlet and postdevelopment maximum flow rates into the inlet, total discharge into the inlet, uh predevelopment and post-development,

318
01:45:44.320 --> 01:46:01.280
and peak peak stages in the swale um postdevelopment for 5-year 24-hour storm, 10year 24-hour storm, or 25-year 24-hour storm. And I think everyone knows that's listened to me on council

319
01:46:01.280 --> 01:46:19.040
to this point knows that I am concerned with our flood waters. I'm concerned of making sure that we can handle them. Fillmore is the lowest point in our city and we need to make sure we can get it right. But upon researching this, you'll

320
01:46:19.040 --> 01:46:35.760
see the information for approved option one for those measurements in inches approved option two as well as uh the max flow rate into the inlet um uh for option one, option two, the discharge

321
01:46:35.760 --> 01:46:51.600
into the inlet with option one, option two, and the approved uh or the approved option one and option two peak stages in the swailes. And so upon investigating that with the storm water actual storm water capacity

322
01:46:51.600 --> 01:47:06.000
calculations, we found that indeed option one or two will work as function from the original design. So, I'm going to ask Rich to go into

323
01:47:06.000 --> 01:47:22.719
more detail with that or explain to us if and or maybe council has some questions on this diagram, but we want to make sure that we we handle the capacities as it was originally proposed to these owners in this property and we

324
01:47:22.719 --> 01:47:43.040
get their property to where they can utilize their property. So, Mr. Rich Thank you, Mayor Pro Tim. Um really uh and now now

325
01:47:43.040 --> 01:47:57.760
the the engineer of record designed a system to and and with a goal of meeting and I don't know how deep we want to get into pre and post and u initially

326
01:47:57.760 --> 01:48:15.840
there's a quality volume that we collect under our code uh so we designed it for that That's an amount that stays on site. It percolates through the system. Then there is a peak discharge.

327
01:48:15.840 --> 01:48:31.760
And when you take a a site that was um a large grass field that there's very little discharge if any. when you cover it you know with

328
01:48:31.760 --> 01:48:49.360
impervious then suddenly you create the opportunity for a much greater discharge. This system was also designed to uh discharge at the same or a lesser rate than the original and and that's

329
01:48:49.360 --> 01:49:06.480
how our code's written. And and the the point being we don't want to do harm to the neighbors, overwhelm our system, but we also do want to make sure that the uh you know it has to be designed such that the owners of the property aren't

330
01:49:06.480 --> 01:49:24.080
overwhelmed as well, right? Um the engineer of record put all these numbers together. Um the uh I'm not sure what question do you have any questions

331
01:49:24.080 --> 01:49:38.320
regarding I mean the goal of the storm water uh it's I believe in in the the bottom line if I could put it this way is maybe do no harm right you you want to build a

332
01:49:38.320 --> 01:49:55.760
nice property but you don't want to h have a negative effect on your neighbor s on the community on the system. This the the calculations that Allen Engineering has provided

333
01:49:55.760 --> 01:50:11.600
tell us this. It's designed to do that. >> Okay. Would you tell us, Rich, a little bit about um the flow not even needing to reach the inlet in the two options, approved one and two, because we're

334
01:50:11.600 --> 01:50:27.600
looking at the um 5-year 24-hour storm plan on approved option one and two with the max flow rate into the inlet. And you see those are at zero as well as discharge into the inlet. Um which once

335
01:50:27.600 --> 01:50:44.600
again those are at zero. So, does that mean during that 5-year 24-hour storm that's 5 in it will drain naturally in the back in the soil itself? >> Yes, it should. You've got a um >> I believe

336
01:50:45.520 --> 01:51:03.199
>> Yeah, the the discharge pipe should be at 9.25. >> Mhm. >> And the peak stage only gets up to 9.133. So, >> okay. So we look good there on both option as far as peak stages in the soil

337
01:51:03.199 --> 01:51:19.440
meaning how deep the water gets right as well as it being able to drain in a natural fashion because of the zeros going into the um the max flow rate into the inlet

338
01:51:19.440 --> 01:51:38.080
or discharge into the inlet. Okay. So you and what we're com what we're looking at there is a 5year storm 24hour that's 5 in in 24 hours right okay and then you go down and look at um 25 years

339
01:51:38.080 --> 01:51:55.440
in a 24h hour and you'll see that those numbers are slightly higher on the approved option one and approved option two um with 22 on the 25-year 24-hour storm and 22 for the max flow rate into

340
01:51:55.440 --> 01:52:11.520
the inlet. The max flow rate um in to the inlet for both of those options. And then the discharge is uh 0.91. And you were saying the 92

341
01:52:11.520 --> 01:52:30.719
9.292 is also okay in this case for the depth of the water and the swell. But that the it will overflow a little bit into the inlet at that rate. And that's a 25-year storm,

342
01:52:30.719 --> 01:52:45.520
>> correct? >> With 9 and 12 in >> of rain in a 24-hour period. >> Okay. So my point is, and I know that we've gone back and forth on this, um,

343
01:52:45.520 --> 01:53:04.000
you know, over four years, but as we look at the letter that, uh, requesting to look at pipes or underground storage. Um, I have concerns with underground storage. And the reason being is from what what I understand is that we have a

344
01:53:04.000 --> 01:53:20.639
a couple of condo complexes in our city that installed these in the 70s and they were not maintained correctly. Is that correct? >> I I'm I'm not familiar with those specific cases, but maintenance is

345
01:53:20.639 --> 01:53:35.040
critical. >> Okay. >> And it's life life of the system. >> Yeah. the complex that I that I investigated that had the underwater tanks um on private property um they're now denoted by our capital improvement

346
01:53:35.040 --> 01:53:51.440
projects director who is aware of them and they're literally concrete blocks now underground and if we put something in not knowing if they will be maintained in that swell area to accommodate this flow that's going to

347
01:53:51.440 --> 01:54:09.679
happen naturally for nine nes rain uh with just a little overflow into the inlet. I'm concerned because where our Filillmore residents now, I feel like they would pay and take care of any storm tanks that may be there. However,

348
01:54:09.679 --> 01:54:25.840
I don't know who's going to own that 5 years from now or 10 years from now and whether they will maintain it. and a concrete block under the ground is what we're already dealing with removing and definitely does not drain. So, under the

349
01:54:25.840 --> 01:54:42.960
ground storage tanks are concerned to me because I do know that there are these complexes in our city that have those tanks and if you don't maintain them right, that's what happens to them over time. So drainage to me is important for

350
01:54:42.960 --> 01:55:00.639
our residents in those four town homes. So that being said, council, that's that's why I put this together. I was wanting to do some investigation into the original storm water plan. Um, I wanted to see with my own eyes from the

351
01:55:00.639 --> 01:55:17.280
original storm water plan what capacities we had with the two options that are given to these to the council to move forward with as well as that. Um, as well as talking about the swale, you know, being on a slope that's more

352
01:55:17.280 --> 01:55:33.360
slope gradually sloped to their homes. I don't want water in anyone's home. I've had my I've been in a house that floods. It is not fun. and you move out and all of your stuff is ruined. So for me, when we're trying to eliminate storm

353
01:55:33.360 --> 01:55:47.760
problems, to me it becomes important which option. So I'm just saying in my case with what I've seen with this I'm more in line to recommend if I was recommending I would want option two with the bamboo where they have their

354
01:55:47.760 --> 01:56:08.719
privacy and we're still using utilizing as well that is very close to what they had and handles the capacities that I'm seeing that option handle. >> Thank you council member Willis. Um Rich uh these these numbers were supplied by

355
01:56:08.719 --> 01:56:24.560
Allen Engineering. >> Yes. The um option one >> Mhm. >> on he submitted a um set of calculations updated calculations on I believe they're dated March 9th and we have

356
01:56:24.560 --> 01:56:41.679
those okay in hand. I talked to him yesterday. uh the the criteria generally are are the same. We we're holding the same or providing the same volume and the discharge elevation is the same. So I

357
01:56:41.679 --> 01:56:57.599
talked to him yesterday and I I said we both agreed that we would expect largely the same results for flow. So you can see a note I put down here. The

358
01:56:57.599 --> 01:57:13.520
the calculations for option one and two are actually the option one calculations. He didn't rerun them because criteria didn't change for option two. We added bamboo but we picked up volume. >> Mhm. So

359
01:57:13.520 --> 01:57:31.040
>> but nothing was done on the option three. >> No. No. That was not No. >> So we have no comparison. We we don't have a float now. The volume captured the same. >> Okay. >> It it it should effectively be the same

360
01:57:31.040 --> 01:57:48.320
amount of water, the same recharge and flow rate offsite. >> Okay. So, the water reaches a certain level and then starts discharging out of the out of the swale. >> What is that level? >> The Well, the level should be roughly

361
01:57:48.320 --> 01:58:04.159
the same. I >> Okay. on the >> I don't he didn't run >> three >> on the option three he did not run them. >> Okay. >> So I I wouldn't >> venture to to guess what that number is without running those calcs. >> Okay. So we're presented with an option

362
01:58:04.159 --> 01:58:20.800
with no supporting data. >> Right. Okay. >> Which is option three. Three. >> Yeah. which and we'll get we'll have time to get supporting data if you wanted to get on that if you choose option three because we have to get agreements legally from all four of the

363
01:58:20.800 --> 01:58:35.679
the owners. >> Well, but if they if they have no data, they're not going to agree to anything >> that would I would agree with the nature of the >> So without the supporting data,

364
01:58:35.679 --> 01:58:52.239
>> we're we're shooting in the dark to go with option three. Mhm. >> My my comments. Thank you both. And and well, before speaking, Council Member Shriek, Council Member King, >> I'm it makes s I have to say option two

365
01:58:52.239 --> 01:59:09.480
makes sense to me because it it it makes them whole, gives them the privacy and the and the land, not landscaping, but also the ability of the bamboo to take up a lot of that water. I mean, it's to me it's a no-brainer.

366
01:59:10.880 --> 01:59:28.800
I I would have liked to have had supporting data for all options. >> Yeah. >> That we were presented with. I know these numbers were given to us just a few minutes ago. >> Mhm. >> So, not all of us have seen these numbers prior. Well, today on the screen

367
01:59:28.800 --> 01:59:49.280
today and and I >> I see a tab for option three >> on on the Excel. >> Well, and council member Willis, this is something >> tab option three. >> And this is something that I put

368
01:59:49.280 --> 02:00:06.800
together. Okay. All right. This is I I put it together to compare option one and option two with pre-development and post-development to make sure those were in line. And the reason I did not include option three is because there's

369
02:00:06.800 --> 02:00:24.159
legal aspects to it. But also, we don't have storm water calculations on that. That was an option that was thrown out there. I was looking at the available storm water calculations and and does that swell option one and two meet what the

370
02:00:24.159 --> 02:00:41.840
original design was. Now, why I did that? I'm the one that did this and he and Rich helped me fill in the data. Um, I pulled this original storm water plan from BSNA. The reason I'm not delving into option three is because I don't

371
02:00:41.840 --> 02:00:58.800
feel comfortable with water creeping up towards her house on a gradual slope. Now, if we want to pay, you know, more money to Allen or maybe I don't know if there'll be additional costs for storm water calculations on option three when

372
02:00:58.800 --> 02:01:14.719
we have two viable options that have been presented to us that meet what they purchased when they bought their town homes. So, if we want to do that, that's fine. Um, but it's not the way that I handled this. And this was something I put

373
02:01:14.719 --> 02:01:32.480
together to assist cal uh council on understanding that the two options that we have do meet the storm water requirements because I had not seen any sidebyside comparison. And it's pretty hard to guess if you

374
02:01:32.480 --> 02:01:46.159
don't know if it's carrying the same amount of water. Sorry, Mayor Pro Tim and Councilman Willis. It to let you know that the water I would expect it to be up in the

375
02:01:46.159 --> 02:02:04.000
roughly the same elevation, say 9.1 9.2 elevation and with the flatter grading >> Mhm. >> that elevation as we've seen is fairly close to the patios.

376
02:02:04.000 --> 02:02:21.440
>> Yeah. So, So the water So the water's going to get up there and and that's um I I think initially >> I you know I the water will will be up there. Um so and I'm not advocating for any one

377
02:02:21.440 --> 02:02:37.679
option over another at this point. I just want to know why we don't have all the information on something we're supposed to be picking on. Now I am curious as to what is the legal oblig the legal issue with option three then

378
02:02:37.679 --> 02:02:57.440
>> question >> Mr. Mr. City attorney is there a legal >> of course there's a legal issue because it would require the expansion of the private easement the private drainage easement and the expansion of the p of the public emergency easement. Okay. So,

379
02:02:57.440 --> 02:03:12.800
as Miss Hurst indicated in her email, the property owners would have to quote surrender additional land for drainage purposes. So, that's that that would require a legal instrument, >> right? >> Expanding

380
02:03:12.800 --> 02:03:29.760
>> that uh drainage area. >> Okay. Well, I mean, that was purely >> and that would require the four lot owners, >> right, >> to execute. >> Mhm. because it's a private swale drainage swale system and a private easement. They are responsible

381
02:03:29.760 --> 02:03:45.119
technically under existing documents to maintain it. >> Mhm. >> Collectively for the benefit of each other. >> So, >> right, >> it would require a legal instrument. >> I I understand that. If I can speak to

382
02:03:45.119 --> 02:04:00.320
the calculations quickly, the the data in front of everyone again was offered to compare um options one and two are the calculations uh sufficient based on the um two 2020

383
02:04:00.320 --> 02:04:16.000
storm water analysis and they and they are but we have three code compliant plans. Option three is a code compliant plan, but it is a bit different than option two and a bit different than option one in that they have a different

384
02:04:16.000 --> 02:04:32.880
slope. Uh but and it's more gradual, but the water could, as as Rich said, come up um differently toward the homes as it would if it if these other plans were implemented. So, I just want to clarify that the the data in front of you is is

385
02:04:32.880 --> 02:04:48.400
offered as a consideration in comparison to 2020 for two of the plans, but we have three code compliant plans for consideration. Option three requires the residents, as Anthony said, to execute that document

386
02:04:48.400 --> 02:05:05.840
to sign that document. I have a question. With the with the work that's being con uh considered for Filillmore, the street itself, does that play into this decision making at all? Does that ameliorate the situation at

387
02:05:05.840 --> 02:05:21.679
all? >> No, that's a separate project altogether and there will be some work done on the front of these properties as it relates to the street project, but this is the rear of these homes and it is a separate drainage uh area. >> Okay. Thank you.

388
02:05:26.000 --> 02:05:51.840
Thank you. I think option three requires all four property owners. But ignoring that, it encroaches on the private property. Right.

389
02:05:51.840 --> 02:06:11.599
I mean, that's no one's debating that. That's clear. That's what our city staff presented as our city attorney, the legal side. Option two, which was my issue last time,

390
02:06:11.599 --> 02:06:29.520
the pressure was put on that a 4:1 slope had to be met. This option two is not a 4:1 slope, right? And so my concern with option two remains

391
02:06:29.520 --> 02:06:48.159
it today with the elephant in the room is that the original contractor had created what we believe is defects. the city is trying to remedy those and

392
02:06:48.159 --> 02:07:06.239
the direction given by council is that we can hopefully recoup those dollars. And so if we move the goalpost, for lack of better words, and say, well, we did a 3 to one, I think that weakens our case

393
02:07:06.239 --> 02:07:23.360
very much when we go to pursue any remedy from the contractor. And so neither option to me would be um ideal.

394
02:07:23.360 --> 02:07:40.560
Which leads me to my question. Is there a way? because I know the direction given by council was really off of residents drawing up something but uh and I'd have to go back to the meeting and listen and and and go hear it but I

395
02:07:40.560 --> 02:07:57.520
I think I did my best to communicate that yes this uh uh proposed design from residents not engineers would be pursued or if there is a better option and I guess I can further define what better

396
02:07:57.520 --> 02:08:14.079
option would be is that it would not encroach to address Mayor Pro Tim and I think all of our concerns. It's not one against we're all working together through this. We don't want to encroach on the property if we don't have to. We didn't ask we didn't give the contractor

397
02:08:14.079 --> 02:08:32.239
the ability to do that and then to not lower the threshold from a 4:1 to 3:1 which we did not allow the contractor to do. So before we pursue options two or three is it has Allen engineering or any

398
02:08:32.239 --> 02:08:49.440
engineering firm if Allen said that that that it's not possible I would think a second or internal engineer and thank you so much for the work you're doing with this is it possible to stay within the easement and meet a 4:1 slope or

399
02:08:49.440 --> 02:09:07.560
at minimum utilize our city engineers approval at a 3:1 on slope and not encroach on the 15t. Has that been explored or looked into by our Allen engineering?

400
02:09:09.040 --> 02:09:24.400
>> If I understand, option two actually does that. It it stays within the 15t easement. It provides the bamboo um barrier shading

401
02:09:24.400 --> 02:09:39.199
and it is a 3 to one slope on the back side. >> You're right. >> The reason it's a 3:1 slope is to make room for the bamboo. >> The bamboo we needed space along the back of the property line. So, and and

402
02:09:39.199 --> 02:09:54.639
adding that those two feet and and what we're doing is or I shouldn't say what we're doing, what the engineer of record is doing is providing code compliant volume for as we discuss the water

403
02:09:54.639 --> 02:10:10.480
quality and the water quantity to make sure it complies with code. The 3:1 I I have said I agree that it's acceptable in this case. Uh, it's a relatively shallow. It is a a

404
02:10:10.480 --> 02:10:25.760
shallow pond. If it were um I believe I would I would have think twice if it were a deeper pond. It's relatively shallow. Um, but I the three

405
02:10:25.760 --> 02:10:43.360
to one I've been behind I I think since day one when we wanted to return the um bamboo to the design. So option two, if I understand you correctly, does meet

406
02:10:43.360 --> 02:10:57.520
that. >> And I think you did because I didn't I think state it the way I should have and intended is yes. Uh but is a 4:1 I think we asked this last a

407
02:10:57.520 --> 02:11:13.599
4:1 is not possible without encroaching has that has Allen Engineering explored that problem that challenge >> you can't do a 4:1 and provide the

408
02:11:13.599 --> 02:11:30.880
required volume without leaving the 15t easement correct it it would be some distance into the yard into the easement rather out of the easement into the private property. So >> yes, Mayor Bertam Jackson, thank you.

409
02:11:30.880 --> 02:11:46.159
>> Um, sure. >> So I have a question for our city attorney. So if we looked at option three and the 4 to one and it slopes more into their yard and ends up that a flood occurs up

410
02:11:46.159 --> 02:12:02.960
into their property because this is the option we chose. What legal liability does the city have in that case? >> I think we would have to address that legal liability in the legal instrument. I mean, that's a plan that's been

411
02:12:02.960 --> 02:12:19.040
proposed by the lot owner. It obviously uh presents, as the city engineer said, additional risk to the lot owner. So, if the lot owners want to go in that direction, I think they need to assume the risk, not the city. So would that require that if we chose

412
02:12:19.040 --> 02:12:36.079
that option because the lot owners want that that there's an agreement drawn up a hold harmless or something like that for the city. >> That would be my recommendation. >> Okay. Thank you. That was my only question. >> Yes.

413
02:12:36.079 --> 02:12:51.280
>> Now option option two with the bamboo. Now the bamboo is considered part of the uh water mitigation issue. Correct. It's not just putting a screening up. This is

414
02:12:51.280 --> 02:13:09.520
part of the the plan to remove water. >> Yeah. >> Part of the drainage system. Yes. >> Yes. >> Okay. All right. That's my question. Thank you. Sure. And a more broad ask is was that the the

415
02:13:09.520 --> 02:13:27.599
resident's plan proposed the option that encroached the lease. There are no other options that would overcome the resident's concerns. My major concern with option two, while I understand it doesn't encroach, is that

416
02:13:27.599 --> 02:13:43.440
it's very different than the expectation we put on the contractors. And and I don't I don't understand how that puts the city in a good position. >> If if I may address that, mayor, we did talk about this last time. >> Yes. >> And if that expectation and I just want

417
02:13:43.440 --> 02:13:59.119
to clarify, if that expectation was based on the original plans >> that did not include the air conditioner units >> or the bamboo being part of the drainage system, which is allowed by our ordinance, then those were, for lack of

418
02:13:59.119 --> 02:14:16.159
better, false expectations. We got the uh placement of those AC units which they are where they were always supposed to be to your point Mayor Protown. Thank you. >> Um once that data was incorporated in the

419
02:14:16.159 --> 02:14:31.920
calculations i.e. the placement of the AC units and the bamboo. Then the correct slope calculations were revealed to us and they were not 4:1. That may have been the expectation based on the plans that were drawn without the

420
02:14:31.920 --> 02:14:49.199
AC units. But it all goes back to had that information been available at that time and calculated at that time then option two is the plans that they would have had and their expectations would be the 3:1 not the 4:1 and I think that's

421
02:14:49.199 --> 02:15:04.480
the position of the city but the attorney is can advise on that. >> Thank you. >> City attorney any comments on that? I think the manager addressed the uh impact that the air conditioning units

422
02:15:04.480 --> 02:15:19.199
had on the original location of the swale on the sideyards. We've mentioned underground I think and and I I'd spoke, you know, the emails come a lot of emails come in and I think

423
02:15:19.199 --> 02:15:35.040
that um the hearse and I that's the hearse. There's four property owners. I would assume that it's reasonable to say that the property owners would appreciate less. You know, 3:1 is more

424
02:15:35.040 --> 02:15:49.040
steep than a 4:1, right? And so that's one of the issues. But so so being able to stay within the 15 ft and keep a 4 one dimension shifts can be possible

425
02:15:49.040 --> 02:16:06.639
that that that I think is a win. But the the owners presented I wouldn't I I guess underground has been used as terminology using tanks that require maintenance but what they sent over was

426
02:16:06.639 --> 02:16:23.360
a stone and pipe which the maintenance requirements with the weed barrier or the fabric right my understanding is actually less less than

427
02:16:23.360 --> 02:16:42.240
like a traditional tank a where you're burying a a a container is is the cost of that I guess is is that something that we are just ruling out if

428
02:16:42.240 --> 02:16:57.760
that could stay within the 15 ft keep the water away from the house are we saying no to that because of the maintenance requirements or cuz I I just want to make sure when we say underground there's two types we get like I did under little leak fields we

429
02:16:57.760 --> 02:17:14.719
buried big uh infiltrated pipes and or plastic excavation or um I don't have the right terminology but underground plastic containers or the stone and pipe

430
02:17:14.719 --> 02:17:30.479
which would satisfy or exceed a 4:1 or make the 4:1 in a hybrid system of some sort. Like that's what I hope that the the the engineers would do is to go how can we

431
02:17:30.479 --> 02:17:46.080
make if it's not a 4 to one that can be done within the how can we respect the the the property rights of the owners and still create some solution. maybe half the yard is a hybrid like going out

432
02:17:46.080 --> 02:18:00.639
of the way a little bit here under these circumstances that that that Allen engineering could say if we have to do it or is it saying no none of those options work a 3:1 is the only way to do it

433
02:18:00.639 --> 02:18:16.880
um have we looked outside the box to ways that does not put the city in a position for flooding which I agree when you get that close. All of them, all three options bring the water very

434
02:18:16.880 --> 02:18:33.359
close to their home. I mean, really, some more than others, but they're all very close. And I uh for I mean, the people in this room were not a a part of this. Like, we are all trying to fix and solve this problem. And so, I appreciate

435
02:18:33.359 --> 02:18:49.200
everyone here. I I just have to know that the direction given was not one path. We got the one path that was presented from the residents, but it's just hard for me to to think

436
02:18:49.200 --> 02:19:05.359
that like residents came up with the only option that we could do that requires taking property as opposed to like I said a hybrid system. Maybe half

437
02:19:05.359 --> 02:19:23.120
maybe the the lower areas could be a stone and pipe. First question is stone and pipe and underground. Are we talking about the same thing? Is the maintenance requirements the same? Are there any other solutions outside that could respect the 15 ft? If not, we are back

438
02:19:23.120 --> 02:19:40.719
to what tonight is about. So, thank you. >> Have a question. M I say something at this point. >> Yes. Council member King, I think, was just >> Thank you. Um, okay. First of all, what I've seen so far is communication from Miranda Hurst. Not to get personal

439
02:19:40.719 --> 02:19:55.840
about this, but I'm stating a fact who seems to be speaking for all of the owners, but I know personally one of the owners, and that owner has told he is extremely frustrated, extremely vexed, used to be friends with the Hursts

440
02:19:55.840 --> 02:20:12.800
initially, but won't have anything further to do with them because they, as he put it, keep throwing a monkey wrench into the gears. He's frustrated because he want he said, "I can't sell this place now. I can't do anything with it and I would like to because I don't want

441
02:20:12.800 --> 02:20:27.760
to be here anymore. I mean, he's just fed up with it. And I'm thinking that, you know, we're we're we're looking at the granular level of all of this trying to figure out the right solution. To me, the right solution is pick one and do

442
02:20:27.760 --> 02:20:45.040
it. The hearse be damned. I'm sorry. Caveat mour. They are construction people. They are builders. They should have known initially and done due diligence when they looked at that property and decided to purchase it. They've been nothing but

443
02:20:45.040 --> 02:21:02.240
chronic complainers ever since. Much to the much to the the the like I say the frustration and vexation of this other owner who is just do it. And that's that's kind of how I'm getting the sense of this. We as a city have to protect

444
02:21:02.240 --> 02:21:17.359
ourselves. I'm sorry if the Hursts don't like it. We have to protect our taxpayers. We represent them and I feel for them, but again, caveat mtor and of all the people of all the people who

445
02:21:17.359 --> 02:21:34.000
bought in that complex. They're the ones who should have known better from the first pl in the first place. I find it hard to have sympathy for them even though but I can see the others points of view and they're tired of it. They want

446
02:21:34.000 --> 02:21:51.760
resolution and and if we keep getting information from Mrs. Hurst that just prolongs the agony. I say let's vote on it. Let's do it. Let's move forward and and if they don't like it, fine. Get it fixed and sell it. She's already said

447
02:21:51.760 --> 02:22:08.640
she's admitted. I've heard not directly that she's they want to sell it. They want to get out from underneath it. Oh, we don't like blah blah blah. Well, okay. Let's make it easy for you to sell it. Let's fix it and let's protect the city

448
02:22:08.640 --> 02:22:24.640
at the same time. And that's what I want to say. Thank you. >> Thank you, Council Member King. I think um we got people in the audience that don't own or live in either one of these properties. They live across the street from these properties and and from the

449
02:22:24.640 --> 02:22:41.359
very beginning they expressed concern about it. Um I certainly understand where you're coming from and we can't do anything on one of four property owners. Uh I don't think the the Hurst have ever claimed that they represent all four

450
02:22:41.359 --> 02:22:57.760
property owners, but I think that it would be hard to find if at all concerns that the hearse raised whether the other owners agrees that were not

451
02:22:57.760 --> 02:23:14.720
valid. I'm with you on resolution and I think the property owners are with resolution and I that's the one thing I do like about the our city manager having all four property owners that will speak for itself right so whatever

452
02:23:14.720 --> 02:23:33.080
is decided all four will speak I'm concerned about obviously option one was a concern uh but resolution is the goal uh item two I I have concerns about u

453
02:23:34.080 --> 02:23:56.399
from the city for in the interest of the city. I understand our city manager's ex explanation. Um and then option three I do think is the the better of the three but

454
02:23:56.399 --> 02:24:13.200
each each of the property owners all four unanimous would have to agree and so that would overcome that issue. Uh there's way too much details here. The truth is, and if I could be as frank as

455
02:24:13.200 --> 02:24:30.720
you, is none of those property owners, in my opinion, are at fault of anything. >> Anything. Uh, and I mean that. And it's I mean, we can quibble over some stuff, but there's

456
02:24:30.720 --> 02:24:47.680
there's three parties involved, and they're the one party that I would have a very hard time. They as all four property owners, not the Hurst, any of them and all of their frustration, pain, it I can't even call it impatience. I it

457
02:24:47.680 --> 02:25:07.200
is they have been extremely patient and through all their frustration. It's one of those circumstances for uh I I I I can't say anything other than they've they've been beyond patient and

458
02:25:07.200 --> 02:25:23.920
I would not want any of our engineer or city manager or any of this council with an exception of council member Willis and and Mayor Pro Tim Jackson who's been through the the vast majority if not all of it to know that there's just too many

459
02:25:23.920 --> 02:25:41.359
moving pieces to put it all together on how we got here. So, I get where you're coming from, but uh resolution is the goal. And so, we agree on that. You just get to a point to where

460
02:25:41.359 --> 02:25:57.120
it's been so long. you do not want and that's what I'm sensing out of the comments from Mayor Pertim is and and council member Willis is we're not going to slop it up here in the final moments without good data without doing it right. If we're going to do it let's do

461
02:25:57.120 --> 02:26:13.200
it through. So the real cost is time like the time we put on tonight and um those are my comments. Thank you very much. And I do understand uh and sympathize with with all the

462
02:26:13.200 --> 02:26:31.120
property owners uh respectfully. So >> yes, Council Member Willis, >> can the city attorney give us an opinion on option two or option three if we were to have any

463
02:26:31.120 --> 02:26:52.640
legal action somewhere in the future? Does anything assist the city or is detrimental to the city on any recoupment >> or if it if it's better not to answer.

464
02:26:52.640 --> 02:27:07.439
>> I think you all understand I think the facts of the situation. you understand, you know, a lot of the legal issues because I talked to each one of you about it. >> Mhm.

465
02:27:07.439 --> 02:27:26.080
>> So, if you in terms of the city's legal authority and the city's abil potential ability to collect, option two is is your best. I don't that in my my opinion. >> Okay, that's that's what I wanted. Thank

466
02:27:26.080 --> 02:27:42.560
you. Yes, please. And we we can discuss. My permission is not seek during this phase. So just speak up respectful of each other. Um, so Rich, with the option of the pipes and concrete or rock or

467
02:27:42.560 --> 02:28:05.840
whatever, um, instead of having a swell, a normal swell, where would that discharge? It would have to yet to be designed. I, you know, it it holds a certain volume.

468
02:28:05.840 --> 02:28:22.880
uh if it were to discharge, it would have to go out towards the street. >> Okay? So, it would have to discharge into the storm water system >> the way it currently is designed to do, >> which means if we if we entertain that option whatsoever,

469
02:28:22.880 --> 02:28:37.520
we need new storm water data because that goes into Filmore that we're getting ready to work on the storm water system for Filillmore. So then effectively then using that option

470
02:28:37.520 --> 02:28:55.760
instead of a swell if we use that as the in only option then that would mean we take away all natural drainage in that swell area >> well >> or is it just discharging out into the

471
02:28:55.760 --> 02:29:12.640
dirt you know the soil to percolate down >> you mean the stone Stone and pipe. >> Yeah, the stone and pipe option. Yeah, >> my understanding the stone and pipe system I believe would capture and percolate.

472
02:29:12.640 --> 02:29:28.000
>> Okay. So, it would capture and percolate. >> But I think whatever you do, if under our code, if you're not going to discharge, >> you need to capture a 100redyear storm and retain it on site. >> Okay. So, >> so it's a whole it's a different

473
02:29:28.000 --> 02:29:46.240
ballgame as you said. It's new calculations. It's it's going to be re engineered because it's not >> okay. What >> So then we're looking at city cost to re-engineer that project as well as you know uh

474
02:29:46.240 --> 02:30:01.200
we're going to have to do some storm water calculations on that. >> So there's going to be some storm water design on that. Um, and instead of our storm water calculations like I showed you being 25 years, we have to look at

475
02:30:01.200 --> 02:30:16.640
we have to accommodate for 100 years. Is am I understanding that correctly? >> That's my understanding and I'd have to look more deeply, but I know if we plan on no discharge from our site, we have to hold a 100redyear storm. >> Okay. So,

476
02:30:16.640 --> 02:30:32.080
>> under our code. So, that becomes a question that I have for our city attorney and our city manager and maybe even you, Rich, because I've worked in construction, too, and understand what a change order is. And when you sign the

477
02:30:32.080 --> 02:30:48.160
site plant map and sign that that's what you're getting. Then if you make a change that changes that after that design is approve is approved and signed off on then you have to pay for that change order

478
02:30:48.160 --> 02:31:04.319
>> normally. Am I correct on in this particular environment? Okay. So in the original plan we accommodated for the 4 to one the 3:1 4:1 swell right and but we can't do that because the bamboo on

479
02:31:04.319 --> 02:31:19.840
the back correct >> okay >> my understanding all right so if we look at changing to the pipe and the rock or whatever then we'd look at we've got to

480
02:31:19.840 --> 02:31:36.080
get Allen engineering to engineer a new solution We have to get new storm storm water calculations, which storm water calculations aren't free either, right? Um, city attorney, would that be considered a change order?

481
02:31:36.080 --> 02:31:51.280
>> I think it I think you're mixing apples and oranges. It's not a change order. That is a material different enhanced system. Let's go back to where the city's legal authority lies. is the city's legal authority lies

482
02:31:51.280 --> 02:32:07.520
um to to um exercise its right under an emergency drainage easement. This is private property. It's a private drainage swale. The city has an emergency drainage easement to go in and and make repairs to the existing

483
02:32:07.520 --> 02:32:22.399
drainage swale system. What you're talking about, yes, I guess would be a change order, not in a technical sense, but a material change to the entire system. That would be, as Rich indicated, would have to be totally redesigned.

484
02:32:22.399 --> 02:32:39.439
>> That is not what was originally constructed. And frankly, and I'm going to be perfectly blunt because you all know in private conversations, I have serious legal and ethical concerns about doing anything other than the city staying within the guard rails of

485
02:32:39.439 --> 02:32:56.560
exercising its rights under the emergency drainage easement and repairing the existing swale system. So, I'm on record and that's my advice. You all do what you want to do.

486
02:32:56.560 --> 02:33:14.399
>> Okay. Here's what I I want to take a Yes. Council member Shory. >> So, that's would be option two. Is that the closest to that, city attorney? option two of the of the options that have been presented in my in my view from based on Councilman Willis's questions

487
02:33:14.399 --> 02:33:32.240
from a legal standpoint is the best option that I've heard. >> Thank you. >> This meeting can convene I need two minutes uh at minimum. Uh we can all take a recess here for a few minutes and let's come back and try to make a

488
02:33:32.240 --> 02:44:48.880
decision at a minimum. Be back by 8:40 if possible. Thank you. What? Council member King disappeared. your leg. We'll get started here in about 1 minute. >> As long as y'all not wear coffee, you'll

489
02:44:48.880 --> 02:45:22.880
be doing good. >> As long as you don't try to dress us in it. That's one on Friday. >> Okay. >> Ready. >> Call the meeting back to order. It is 10:47 p.m.

490
02:45:22.880 --> 02:45:43.359
>> Oh, man. I hope my >> y'all got to check on me. >> Something's not right. >> Watch. >> Gee, it's as clear as day. 8:47 p.m. Wow. Uh, so

491
02:45:43.359 --> 02:46:00.080
>> maybe I should have got some coffee. Uh, call the meeting back. Thank you. The, uh, call the meeting back to order. The item we are in uh facing right now is uh 9.1.

492
02:46:00.080 --> 02:46:17.200
The bill is at Filillmore. We just took a recess after some lengthy discussion and I think we we've got uh to a point to where we've heard from our city manager, city attorney. We've all discussed kind of the pros and

493
02:46:17.200 --> 02:46:34.479
the cons and I think taken serious consideration of the residents um in in bringing the meeting back to order. We can continue to ask more questions if we choose. I'm not saying that we should be done with that.

494
02:46:34.479 --> 02:46:52.600
Option three requires all four resident signatures. Um option two does not right that's my understanding it would be I think

495
02:46:54.080 --> 02:47:09.920
the best option would be to pursue option three and if all four signatures were pursued uh we would then obviously go forward with option two

496
02:47:09.920 --> 02:47:33.040
uh that that would in in discussion to me would make the most amount of sense but open to prior to making a formal motion on that discuss it. Um I don't see a whole lot of risk in that. Um

497
02:47:33.040 --> 02:47:50.319
while one property owner to Council Member King's point has been largely more outspoken on the issues, um the silence of other employ or uh residents does not necessarily mean that

498
02:47:50.319 --> 02:48:06.880
they're going to be in support of one or the other. And so I I I don't know. They will have to speak for themselves. So that would be what I think would be the best direction would be to pursue option three and then give this city manager the authority to move forward with

499
02:48:06.880 --> 02:48:22.640
option two in the event that did not want. I can't imagine a scenario where option three was provided signatures from all four residents and then option two was the best option

500
02:48:22.640 --> 02:48:39.120
considering the change. >> Mr. Mayor. >> Yes. >> In Miranda Hurst's letter to uh to us dated on June the 4th. >> Yes. >> In the second paragraph, I want to make

501
02:48:39.120 --> 02:48:56.319
sure this is noted. Thank you for your concern that the storm water will be within 2 feet of the patios. We were trying to eliminate the storm water that every plan has shown within two feet to our side foundations that has been reduced now to 1 and 1/2 ft in

502
02:48:56.319 --> 02:49:15.120
crosssection D. Flooding the patio seems less damaging than the foundation, but it appears both are equally possible. As you stated, there's not enough property, which has been our concern the entire project. Um, then she goes on to state,

503
02:49:15.120 --> 02:49:33.040
"Have we looked at any other options?" Um, and that's why I'm not a fan of that option three. There's a reason for it. It's because I don't want water in their home. Um, I don't want it on a patio. When you have flooding that happens and

504
02:49:33.040 --> 02:49:49.760
pooling that happens, concrete degrades and um spalls and then people will have problems going forward. And if it's around their if it floods their patio, it will go up under if it's over the patio, it's going under the patio as

505
02:49:49.760 --> 02:50:06.080
well. That's what I've experienced with flooding. Now, is that is that correct? uh I'm ask our city engineer instead of me making the being an expert on it. >> I mean if the if the yard's flooding

506
02:50:06.080 --> 02:50:22.640
it's obviously there there would be nothing I mean to if it's flooding the property it's flooding the property. I mean >> right >> um >> so I'm that this is my concern for

507
02:50:22.640 --> 02:50:39.680
option three. This is why I'm concerned is because I don't want water getting up in their homes. I don't want that. Um, and that's what my concern becomes because option three is where we're doing the slope that's going up to their

508
02:50:39.680 --> 02:50:57.520
house. And with option three, is that a 25-year storm we have to accommodate for or a 100redyear storm? that would still be a 25 year because it would still discharge to have a positive outfall.

509
02:50:57.520 --> 02:51:12.800
>> Okay. >> Um so without me having data, let's put it this way, without me having data on the possibility of water encroaching up on their patio or under the patio

510
02:51:12.800 --> 02:51:31.840
foundation. I'm I'm I'm worried about that option. Is is one option more risk flooding than the other? Between two and three to simplify it. >> Well, two keeps water further away from

511
02:51:31.840 --> 02:51:48.479
the pro from the house itself, the structures, >> but they both can hold the same amount of water. >> Yes. >> And one of them, what's the benefit over three and two? I think the homeowners would allow in three to not only have

512
02:51:48.479 --> 02:52:05.439
the bamboo as option two does, but also have more usable space in their backyard. >> Uh I think the the effectively the edge of your treatment system is flatter,

513
02:52:05.439 --> 02:52:22.080
>> but it's still part of your treatment system. I mean, you can't build any structures. You can't put a barbecue. I mean, that's now all going to be easement if all four property owners agree.

514
02:52:22.080 --> 02:52:35.600
>> Yeah. >> So, there there's no it it's flat out there, but there's no building any other structures, adding I would say even a a shed or something like that. So, it it's

515
02:52:35.600 --> 02:52:52.560
going to tie up that property. It It is flatter. I mean, if we're um I I don't know. I >> I think as the city's discussed, >> you know, option two is in in my opinion, option two would be

516
02:52:52.560 --> 02:53:09.200
the best of the three options. >> Yes. I think to me, if option three got all four signatures, that puts the city in a strong position to go against any issues.

517
02:53:09.200 --> 02:53:24.880
I I understand if option two floods, right? I mean, there's no difference. Just because it comes up closer doesn't mean it can't hold the same amount of water. Like you said, if it floods, it floods. To me, it

518
02:53:24.880 --> 02:53:41.040
would be clear that option two is the point by not getting all four signatures and put us in a stronger position. Um, that's my opinion. I think it's the lowest risk. It it would confirm that

519
02:53:41.040 --> 02:53:56.960
all four property owners sign as opposed to option two does not get any consent of the property owners at all and they're both equal in regards to treatment and volume according to

520
02:53:56.960 --> 02:54:13.920
professional stamped engineering requirements. I do get the obvious optics of it coming closer, but one of them dramatic or changes the way I don't know what the slope is of option three

521
02:54:13.920 --> 02:54:30.399
compared to option two or if it's a 3 one on two. >> There's a document. >> Is it um Thank you. >> It's in the backup and we'll put it on the screen. >> Okay. >> To show the general in the backup

522
02:54:30.399 --> 02:54:46.720
documents. >> So, we're talking about 7 to one, which almost doubles. And >> I mean, I'm just putting myself I'm a town home owner myself >> right there. >> Uh my backyard uh is usable for the most part. It was built much earlier. And I

523
02:54:46.720 --> 02:55:05.279
can tell you that uh if I signed a document that said this option is better uh I I don't know my recourse which would be the major concern with the city um being that I I agreed to it and most

524
02:55:05.279 --> 02:55:26.160
importantly I'd be able to use that space much more efficiently than a steeper slope than what the contractor ctors were obligated to to to install and to to do um or and so

525
02:55:26.160 --> 02:55:43.120
or the 3:1 is a much steeper slope. In fact, it'd be argued that they actually had a 3:1 slope at some point. I don't know. We can't go back in time. So, to me, if option two is the pick, it would be well, let's see if option three can

526
02:55:43.120 --> 02:56:00.000
get across. It's been engineered. it's been stamped. If not, we're rolling with option two. Both of them get the resolution as I think we all agree with council member King. Um, and the concern valid without data. Mayor Prom and

527
02:56:00.000 --> 02:56:14.399
Council Member Willis. The only other option to me would be if if we're going to move with option two, I would say that's riskier. We should at least have data for that before moving forward. And I'm not sure all four property owners

528
02:56:14.399 --> 02:56:32.399
are going to be happy with option two. >> I don't know what data you're talking about. I'm sorry. It's a code compliant plan. >> It's code compliant. >> What is that? >> It is a code compliant plan. What data data are you referring to for option

529
02:56:32.399 --> 02:56:52.960
two? The data would be that the city enforced the former engineer enforced a 4:1 slope and never gave the other contractors any option for anything less than that >> and made them revise that multiple times

530
02:56:52.960 --> 02:57:10.479
and never disclose that the city engineer could in fact change it. So, if I could make a recommendation, um I know of at least two out of four residents uh appear to uh want option three and uh they presented it. It was

531
02:57:10.479 --> 02:57:27.439
engineered for them. It didn't turn out exactly like their uh rendering because it wasn't a professionally engineered rendering, but it, you know, Allen Engineering got option three as close to that rendering as it could and it is a code compliant plan. So my

532
02:57:27.439 --> 02:57:43.279
recommendation to the council would be direct staff uh to approach them on signing the document that the attorney has to um present with them and and if they agree to that because they asked for us to do it and we've done it and it

533
02:57:43.279 --> 02:58:00.000
is an option for them then we'll present that option to them and we should um give a time limit for when they sign. we have to move so that get that time limit. Um and if we get the the signatures by all four within that time

534
02:58:00.000 --> 02:58:15.680
limit then we will execute option three and we will put this job out to bid. If we cannot get all four signatures or we cannot m meet a reasonable time limit then direct the city and staff to execute option two. >> That's exactly what I'm saying.

535
02:58:15.680 --> 02:58:31.040
>> Perfect. And so I just would recommend that you that that be the direction that this council goes. Mayor Prom's concerns notwithstanding. Uh they are viable concerns and they've been, you know, kind of the engineer has brought that to everyone's attention, but it is

536
02:58:31.040 --> 02:58:46.800
nevertheless what they asked for and we have at least two out of four that say that they like that. >> So direct us to find out if we get all four. If not, we'll proceed with option two. >> It couldn't have said it better myself. Yes, that that is it. Pursue three and

537
02:58:46.800 --> 02:59:04.880
and if not, it's clear. We're going forward two. We have resolution >> is that >> absolutely. So >> and option three is code compliant as well. >> It is. Yeah. So if it would be framed in the form of a motion uh recommend that we direct the city manager to uh

538
02:59:04.880 --> 02:59:22.479
approach residents on um signing or turning whatever language that the city attorney drafts for uh the property becoming part of the uh storm water retention system. Establish a timeline for that. And in the event that we do not meet that timeline or do not get those signatures,

539
02:59:22.479 --> 02:59:38.399
then the city manager is authorized to execute option two. >> So, council, assuming option three is something we even want to pursue, a time limit, I agree, would be a reasonable time limit, uh, would be prudent. And then unless there's folks here that

540
02:59:38.399 --> 02:59:55.760
don't want to pursue option two, they would obviously be able to execute on that. So, any discussion? What if we option three? I guess this is directed to the city attorney. How because I know option two is probably our best bet for being able to

541
02:59:55.760 --> 03:00:10.800
recover what we're spending from the original builder. Is option three so far off that we that would lessen our chances? That's my concern. I want to see if we can get that money back from the developer. No, >> I don't. No, I don't. When I was asked a question about the

542
03:00:10.800 --> 03:00:26.160
fast option two is the closest stays within the existing boundaries of the easement. Both both options address the um construction defect in my view regarding the air conditioning units. Something has to be done to accommodate

543
03:00:26.160 --> 03:00:45.200
for for that problem. But the air conditioning units were mentioned on the back side of the property. >> I mean to say that they didn't exist, right? that that that was a part of community appearance board review

544
03:00:45.200 --> 03:01:00.399
then it moved and but on the back side of the property to council member Shoryak's question it was still a 4 to1 slope and I understand if you move it it might change the water quantity and quality requirements

545
03:01:00.399 --> 03:01:18.920
I'm not sure why option two is is better than option three to address council member Shriek's question on recouping dollars both of them make major changes. And to me, uh,

546
03:01:20.160 --> 03:01:36.800
if if if they're both at risk, I would at least rather give something that would mitigate the property owners from one of their major concerns is I can't use the back of my property and it's a steep slope. Now we're going steeper.

547
03:01:36.800 --> 03:01:52.479
And so at least you take two I mean both parties could sue the property owners and the contractors, >> right? They both one of them at least would have to sign saying, "Hey, this is

548
03:01:52.479 --> 03:02:10.800
better." And then that would isolate the the recoup ability. I I think that and I'm just talking out loud. That's >> and Mr. Mayor, I'm going to say because I keep hearing usability and I've owned

549
03:02:10.800 --> 03:02:27.439
a bunch of properties. I've I've had them in multiple states and there's no guarantee of usability of the lot. Um that lot was covered with a huge townhouse and it then there's drainage required in the back of it for storm

550
03:02:27.439 --> 03:02:44.479
water. So when I hear use Billy, I cringe a little bit because when you buy in real estate and you look at that, there's no there's no obligation uh for anyone to provide you with usability for something you're buying.

551
03:02:44.479 --> 03:03:01.920
If there if the plan is that that lot coverage is that lot coverage and there's a swale in the backyard that it's an easement. >> But one of them said, "I can't maybe I can use it or not. I got a four to one. Now we're going to change it to I maybe

552
03:03:01.920 --> 03:03:17.840
I can use it or can't but it's much steeper as opposed to something all of them would have to sign and agree to. >> I think that the biggest difference and I don't disagree with what you're saying is one has all four private property

553
03:03:17.840 --> 03:03:34.160
owner signatures which is powerful. >> Right. That's I guess if to not get wrapped around because we don't have all the data and all the options and I'm I don't disagree. I think we're all this is not anyone up here's like but

554
03:03:34.160 --> 03:03:51.359
>> I just >> I think that four signatures is powerful and if not two proceeds one of them does not have four signatures and that to me is a higher risk. Well, one of the one that doesn't have four signatures close matches more

555
03:03:51.359 --> 03:04:07.680
closely the original design. So, there's arguments there in my opinion. >> Absolutely. >> So, >> but you now have two potential if one did not sign. >> Well, yeah. And and >> you now have two parties collectively.

556
03:04:07.680 --> 03:04:24.640
>> And really, when it comes down to what our city manager is recommending, go for option three. If all of the the residents are good with that >> and that slope, >> it doesn't matter what K's concern is. It's their property there. This is

557
03:04:24.640 --> 03:04:40.880
private property. >> If they want to sign off on it >> and and transfer some property over to city easement and have a little bit more of a slope or less of a slope, then you know what? I'm I'm good with that. I

558
03:04:40.880 --> 03:04:55.840
didn't gather that when I read Miranda's email. That's why I was concerned is because um she thanked us for looking at the how close it is to her within 2 ft of the patio and then discuss the fact

559
03:04:55.840 --> 03:05:12.880
that they were looking for, you know, a way to make sure the storm water was accommodated for. That's when I went into the sideby-side comparison >> because I don't know if it's accommodated for with all these options without looking at it that way. Although

560
03:05:12.880 --> 03:05:30.160
option three, >> we didn't have any storm water water data on it yet. >> Right. >> Okay. So, if we want to go forward with option three, um once again, um you know, I'm I'm

561
03:05:30.160 --> 03:05:47.680
I term out in November. So, no, I'm teasing. I don't term out, but I'm at the end end of my my term. Um, but seriously, I hope that we're able to move forward with it after this amount of time. And storm water calculations,

562
03:05:47.680 --> 03:06:04.479
we'll have to get those to make sure what we're doing. Or I think, am I correct, Rich? That if we do option three, when we need storm water calculations or we know that it's going to accommodate what we already have. I think if option three is chosen, it

563
03:06:04.479 --> 03:06:20.000
would make sense to go back to Allen Engineering and ask them to run the calculations. >> Okay. So, we'd have to run calculations, but we wouldn't have to re-engineer, right? >> That your concern? >> No, I mean, well, >> so we wouldn't have to re-engineer.

564
03:06:20.000 --> 03:06:35.840
>> And we know it's an approved plan because the city manager has told us that. We know that the city attorney is going to put together legal documents to So, you know what? I'm good with try the try plan three if the if the residents are good with it than I am

565
03:06:35.840 --> 03:06:50.880
>> and then >> yeah until they sign >> it's just going to take longer you know >> them moving forward with it so I'm good with it if that's what they want to do >> and we will see I I think we're saying yes to option two

566
03:06:50.880 --> 03:07:07.200
but if all unanimous option four works council member Willis do you >> didn't know if the city manager had a >> No Just needed clarification on what our engineers said about going back to Allen Engineering. Um, I thought we have everything we need from him to execute

567
03:07:07.200 --> 03:07:23.120
any one of these three options. >> Well, I I know he has given us the volumes. So, um, >> what question are we trying to answer? >> The only other thing with um

568
03:07:23.120 --> 03:07:39.760
the March 9th calculations he did. >> Yes. for option one. Option one and option two are very very close to the same. >> Yes. >> You know, with very little change. This other one's different. I mean, it it's

569
03:07:39.760 --> 03:07:55.840
different enough that I would at least like to talk to the engineer of record. Ultimately, he's going to have to sign and seal it. So, if he's >> Well, he's ready. I thought this is a draft. the backup document says draft

570
03:07:55.840 --> 03:08:11.600
because it was presented as a draft but it is will be the document >> um you know if that's what the the residents are going to go through I'm just trying to understand for the purpose of a motion what more work has to be done um if we're going to exe if

571
03:08:11.600 --> 03:08:28.319
we're going to approach the residents and and get their consent for the the use of the property what more work has to be done I'm under the impression all the work's been we have a code compliant plan. >> I would like to talk to him and make

572
03:08:28.319 --> 03:08:45.279
sure that he's agrees that the the discharge the pre and post discharge are met and they there's no reason they shouldn't be met with his design and it might even be better because of you're

573
03:08:45.279 --> 03:09:01.600
using more of the yard as treatment system. >> Where are we if they do not is the question. If they do not, >> we're being given direction tonight and coming back before this body >> uh is really not my desire.

574
03:09:01.600 --> 03:09:17.600
>> Sure. >> I want clear direction. >> If Allan, if the calculations don't if he doesn't run the calculations or >> I'm saying what if he runs calculations and now all of a sudden this is another wrench in this plan and it's no longer a

575
03:09:17.600 --> 03:09:33.680
a viable code compliant plan. That's why I'm confused. I thought I we have a code compliant plan. >> Well, he he hasn't run as you know. Well, he hasn't run the

576
03:09:33.680 --> 03:09:51.080
um calculations on option three. Now, I haven't seen them. To me, it's due diligence in that regard. Um the I

577
03:09:51.920 --> 03:10:07.600
I don't know why this plan was presented to this council as an option if it's not now an option is my quandry. >> Is that what I'm >> I believe it I believe it is an option. >> Okay. >> I'm just saying I would like to see the

578
03:10:07.600 --> 03:10:22.399
him to run the calculations with this exact configuration. >> Okay. So now we're in an if situation. The motion has to be phrased so that we're going to get back with the engineer of record and he's going to run

579
03:10:22.399 --> 03:10:40.240
these calculations and if >> they meet the standard then this is a plan for consideration that we present before the residents for signature or if not then where are we with option

580
03:10:40.240 --> 03:10:55.920
three? Right. Can Can I just say to Rich, I mean, on the plan that Mr. Allen prepared, >> he has the bubble and he says the proposed treatment volume is 1,312 cubic feet. Okay. The previously

581
03:10:55.920 --> 03:11:13.359
approved treatment volume is 1,243 cubic feet. So, he obviously ran calculations otherwise he would not have been able to determine what the proposed treatment volume is for option three. Maybe he doesn't have all the you know supporting data but it seems to me

582
03:11:13.359 --> 03:11:30.399
>> it he he did calculations >> he did run it and it does it does consider the volumes both volumes required >> the modeling hasn't been done is the only thing that I haven't seen the modeling >> okay >> of the system they you don't do models

583
03:11:30.399 --> 03:11:45.279
to do what he's provided >> modeling was done on options one and two >> on one on one. >> Yep. And it's significantly and that's where we come up with the peak discharge numbers, the actual

584
03:11:45.279 --> 03:12:09.279
numbers for peak discharge and the rates. So I have no reason. Well, >> we're happy to make the motion to accommodate that. I think that if I I don't want to interfere with any

585
03:12:09.279 --> 03:12:28.560
discussions, but um we'll address anything that you feel is needed in the motion to give to avoid any chance of coming back. Willing to I can speak for myself. Council member Willis. >> Well, I was hoping to make a motion.

586
03:12:28.560 --> 03:12:45.279
>> We have one drafted sort of to help that. Well, can I can I make a motion to direct the city manager to pursue option three and get the supporting data, confirm

587
03:12:45.279 --> 03:13:00.240
supporting data that is comparable to option two and or do we need to go all the way back to option one? >> Option one is not an option for the res.

588
03:13:00.240 --> 03:13:15.439
>> Right. But I mean, but the volume >> Yes. Okay. >> is what I I mean, if that's the only numbers we've got, >> I think if option three cannot work for the modeling or whatever reason, we don't necessarily need to state. I mean

589
03:13:15.439 --> 03:13:31.120
in good faith I believe you would we would have some expectation that for >> sounds like a chance that >> Thank you for not trying to speak for the the engineer of record >> in the event that a surprise I'm

590
03:13:31.120 --> 03:13:46.560
assuming when I say that would come back and something would change I think >> our motion doesn't need to state that our city manager would address that. I'll make a motion to direct the city manager to present option three with the

591
03:13:46.560 --> 03:14:04.080
appropriate legal ramifications uh to the property owners and if there is not unanimous support for option three we proceed with option two. >> And could you include a time limit?

592
03:14:04.080 --> 03:14:20.479
>> I would I would include that we give them 14 days to sign. That's reasonable. >> City clerk and city attorney just asking you to respond to that motion from each perspective. One from the clerks is that

593
03:14:20.479 --> 03:14:37.840
it was captured and understood and city attorney does it comply with your >> as what was stated. Um I don't know if the city attorney wants to add any additional language to that.

594
03:14:37.840 --> 03:15:04.239
>> You have it. Yes, city attorney. Whenever you're ready and then the second is at stake. >> I think just a couple of points. I I don't know if it was captured, but I think it may have been understood. I'm

595
03:15:04.239 --> 03:15:22.399
looking at the current the current agendas to talk about selecting the option. You know, the prior agenda that the council um had that's in your package from May. Um >> let me see. you know, had the other um

596
03:15:22.399 --> 03:15:40.239
um direct directives which I where are we >> are included >> in this motion that's once the option has been selected manager attorney they have to go out they have to go out and get the bid um

597
03:15:40.239 --> 03:15:56.800
get a new contractor and manager would be authorized to approve other incidental construction wave expenses is and then I'm assuming that authorization would be included in this in this motion

598
03:15:56.800 --> 03:16:12.880
as well. >> I don't think it was stated but that's an excellent point >> to put it out the bid imitation of bid. Yes. Yeah, >> was you know to the extent that he did go forward with actually completing this project is then uh the author previous

599
03:16:12.880 --> 03:16:29.040
authorization that was given for the mayor city to consider possibility of filing action against the development team regarding the cost incurred to uh repair the

600
03:16:29.040 --> 03:16:46.160
construction defects. So I would assume that would be included as as well. I mean all that stuff is written in prior directives. I don't think the manager recommended any change >> those prior directives. So we can just rely on what the council previously approved some time ago on those

601
03:16:46.160 --> 03:17:03.120
directives >> and for purposes of tonight I'm pulling up. >> It's just the selection of the option. >> Okay. Option three, unanimous cons need be need the unanimous consent of the property owners for the appropriate legal instrument to expand the easement.

602
03:17:03.120 --> 03:17:20.399
And if um that consent is not obtained within 14 days of of presenting that document to the property owners, then um the manager will then execute on option three. >> I'm captain if we get the consent of the

603
03:17:20.399 --> 03:17:37.760
property owners on option three, the manager is a rights to execute on opt option >> couldn't have said no issue >> okay so the big terms are pursue option three which would be represented by unanimous consent within 14 days

604
03:17:37.760 --> 03:17:53.200
councelor are we okay with that >> in the event unanimous consent is not obtained within 14 days city manager has full authority as city attorney said to pursue option two which would include going out to bid

605
03:17:53.200 --> 03:18:17.120
step before and uh in parallel or after at the time it's all best seek legal remedies and pursue those. So, those are kind of the four

606
03:18:17.120 --> 03:18:34.640
>> components as I'm not trying to restate anything our city attorney said, but I'm just summarizing as as I heard it. And >> if we all want to go through that exercise, we can. That's my understanding. >> Four big parts. >> Yes. >> And you mentioned invitation to bid, correct?

607
03:18:34.640 --> 03:18:53.279
>> Yes. >> Pursue option three, unanimous p. If not, option two require a bid. And then the fourth part would be legal remedy. >> So I think our council member Willis had

608
03:18:53.279 --> 03:19:09.760
stated uh the majority of or at least half those. I think that we could you could continue on with your motion and say and add on if if Robert's rules applies or

609
03:19:09.760 --> 03:19:24.399
we could let that motion die and you could restate it all again. To me, I think um be probably easier to add on the the bid and the legal remedy. Well, add to the motion that uh

610
03:19:24.399 --> 03:19:41.680
once the options are agreed upon, we put it out to bid and then follow on at that time with legal action. >> Council want to take a 30 seconds. Does everyone understand the motion before any second so that we don't have to

611
03:19:41.680 --> 03:19:59.279
amend it? Uh be easier to let it die for lack of second. Respect to council member Willis. And if we could go down, council member King, does that make Do you understand the motion? >> I do. I do. And I I

612
03:19:59.279 --> 03:20:15.760
>> Yes, I do. >> Council member Shoryak. >> Yep, I got it. >> Mayor Pro Tim. >> Yes. >> And then when ready, we will need a second. If our city attorney is okay, we'll we'll make a second. And I know

613
03:20:15.760 --> 03:20:31.840
it's that maybe the language is not in the motion per se, but I just want to make sure we're we're clear. I mean, if you look at the agenda for tonight on June 16th. >> Okay. >> Um I just you know notice that you'll see A, B, and C.

614
03:20:31.840 --> 03:20:48.160
>> Mhm. >> Um A is is is what you mentioned those key components. It's option three. If you have unanimous consent of the property owners on the legal instrument to expand the easement if that and that has to be obtained within 14 days of

615
03:20:48.160 --> 03:21:05.439
presentment of that easement in document if that consent is not given then the manager moves on to option three. I would just ask that you know the motion you know it doesn't need to be stated but B and C on page one of the agenda

616
03:21:05.439 --> 03:21:21.760
is the previous directive that the com council gave that sums up you know the the managers authorized right to approve construction related expenses deemed necessary etc. And then sub paragraph C is to approve initiating legal proceedings if warranted to seek

617
03:21:21.760 --> 03:21:39.760
recovery of any costs or expenses. That um that's the the direction that I would want to make sure that the council is clear on. Obviously, it would be subject all of this is subject to city manager approval. Um but th those are as the

618
03:21:39.760 --> 03:21:56.239
mayor indicated before I think key components. >> Council Oh, sorry. City attorney. Yeah. >> Take a second to read B and C in our screenings before you and uh just consent that the motion as Council Member Willis made. Your intent is

619
03:21:56.239 --> 03:22:13.520
represented in those as city attorney stated. I can amend it to authorize the city manager to approve construction related expenses deemed necessary to complete the draining improvements to include the replacement of any bamboo removed from

620
03:22:13.520 --> 03:22:28.880
the property for soil erosion and storm water management purposes in accordance with the final plans and approve initiating legal proceedings if warranted to seek recovery of any cost or expenses available under law against

621
03:22:28.880 --> 03:22:44.479
the developers related to a remedial project undertaken to repair drainage improvements. >> If any council member objects with those amendments or additions to the motion, please

622
03:22:44.479 --> 03:23:11.439
when ready, let me know. And I appreciate consent when ready. And then we'll go for a second if ready. So is that what is what council member Willis just read the final version

623
03:23:11.439 --> 03:23:26.479
>> amended >> or this is the amended version >> of the initial motion. Yeah >> of the initial motion. Okay. Was getting so long I don't remember what the initial one was. >> Well, I think there's very little change

624
03:23:26.479 --> 03:23:42.800
to what >> the agenda summary if if council member we all went through it all. There's very little change with an exception of the order of pursuing option three first. So, I'm not sure if we changed anything and the city

625
03:23:42.800 --> 03:24:00.399
attorney was adding in kind of some key points that >> So, it's these three points >> plus we're going to look at option three. If that is not acceptable, we will use option two. We will um get the

626
03:24:00.399 --> 03:24:16.880
owners to sign off on option three. >> And if not, we will use option two. And that's the full full >> motion. Okay. All right. I'm good. I'm good to go. >> Before all can anyone object? Council members and >> the the 14 days. Is that in there

627
03:24:16.880 --> 03:24:32.880
somewhere? Okay. >> With the 14 days, right? >> I that was clearly stated and I think we all agree with that. Okay. >> I think >> um with Councilman um Willis's description reading from B and C that it encapsulated everything.

628
03:24:32.880 --> 03:24:49.279
all the all the all the points that we want to make. Pursue option three with unanimous consent from the owners within 14 days. If none, pursue option two. Um and then and and then pursue a bid and then pursue legal remedies and these two

629
03:24:49.279 --> 03:25:06.560
things added on. There it is. One big package. Let's vote. That's good. >> The clerk has it down. Second the motion. >> Okay. A second by council member Shoriaak on that fancy motion.

630
03:25:06.560 --> 03:25:25.920
>> Jeez. >> Final check. City attorney. Are we good? >> Any further discussion? >> City clerk, please call the role. >> Mayor Prom Jackson, four. Council member King, four. Mayor

631
03:25:25.920 --> 03:25:38.720
Morrison, >> four. Council member Shiaak >> four. >> And council member Willis >> four. >> The record show item 9.1 passes

632
03:25:38.720 --> 03:26:04.399
50 as the motion stated. Which brings us to item 9.2. Woo. Resolution number 20263, parks and wreck and community affairs department fee schedule parenthesis revised

633
03:26:04.399 --> 03:26:21.760
confirming council's got the revised document as written. Mr. city manager >> just a maybe a brief overview or we've obviously had a workshop which certainly helps with this. Um

634
03:26:21.760 --> 03:26:37.359
absolutely mayor we did have a workshop on this item and the history of course goes back to the joint workshop that the city council did with our culture and le leisure services committee. Uh last um meeting our parks and recreation

635
03:26:37.359 --> 03:26:53.840
director presented the findings of the recommendations and presented some fee scales uh or fee schedules, excuse me, for consideration. Uh our director and staff is here to answer any questions uh continue on with any presentation that

636
03:26:53.840 --> 03:27:10.319
you may need um unless you're ready to vote. Council any discussion or questions? Let's start here. Let's handle it like a public hearing or any other item. Just to for the record show, this is a change in the

637
03:27:10.319 --> 03:27:27.680
fee schedule. This is one reading. Our city attorney can confirm we do not need to do two readings due to the nature of what these fees it's. It's nonutility related fees. So, I think we're we're going to be able to uh move forward on this tonight. This will be final. um

638
03:27:27.680 --> 03:27:43.600
we've discussed it. I don't think we had any amendments from our workshop as presented and so uh if there's any technical questions at this point before seeking a motion. >> Seeing none, I'll look for a motion. Oh yes, council member or mayor pro Tim

639
03:27:43.600 --> 03:28:00.399
Jackson. >> I'm sorry. I'll make it short. Um, city attorney, um, is this are the contracts with Silver Sneakers at a point where or I guess I should have asked maybe Parks and Recck or Molly what the date um, the

640
03:28:00.399 --> 03:28:15.439
ending date for the contracts are because we discussed them being boilerplate last time and really we need to try to negotiate every contract we have. Not nothing's boilerplate. When you negotiate, you can do that. So, um,

641
03:28:15.439 --> 03:28:32.000
what are the dates of the contract that the contract ends >> for Silver Sneakers? The contract expires on 4:30 2027. Um, for renew uh slop, that will be um, if we're going to make

642
03:28:32.000 --> 03:28:48.960
any changes or end our agreement with them, we'll need to let them know by 91206. Um, and then for Ash Fitness, that'll be a notice required of any changes or termination by 93 2026.

643
03:28:48.960 --> 03:29:04.080
>> Okay. >> 2026 >> is the last one. Okay. >> So, um, Mr. City Manager, when these contracts come up, I politely request that we try to negotiate these. um having been with phone vendors the

644
03:29:04.080 --> 03:29:19.439
majority of my life where all of them will tell you, "Oh, no, we won't negotiate that." All kinds of negotiation techniques come out when you're getting ready to leave them. So, um we really need to look at um those types of things when they're up for

645
03:29:19.439 --> 03:29:35.120
renewal. Um and then I was going to ask the city attorney, so Mr. city attorney. Do you find that these types of contracts are able to be negotiated with other municipalities? >> Um, I frankly don't have any other

646
03:29:35.120 --> 03:29:50.880
experience with any other municipality regarding these >> types of contracts, so I don't know. >> Okay. And do you feel like contracts can be negotiated? >> Of course. >> Okay. So, there's my my feedback, Mr. Mayor.

647
03:29:50.880 --> 03:30:08.880
>> Great. Quy any other questions at this time? Thank you, Mayor Perim. >> I just Mr. Mayor. >> Yes. >> I I just think that it should be standard operating procedure to seek negotiating contracts anyway. So, >> anytime they come up,

648
03:30:08.880 --> 03:30:25.359
>> as our director stated, it sounds like two of them are in September of this year. >> So, hopefully enough time to get in front of those. And the other one's got a little bit more runway till April of 2027, the first one you mentioned. And >> yeah. Yeah, we're locked into that one

649
03:30:25.359 --> 03:30:42.720
till April unless we want to um pull whatever uh process they have in terms of Well, rarely do I have to move a microphone up. Um, but in terms of their termination agreement, >> well, I think in good faith, you know, that that our city manager and the team

650
03:30:42.720 --> 03:30:59.359
here will pursue any termination clauses if it makes sense. If not, let it run out and and all that needs to happen to address this council is going to communicate a broad concern and I think we're going to address it and I'm confident thanks to

651
03:30:59.359 --> 03:31:14.880
the workshop that our city staff will work with our city attorney to um choose to exercise as Molly, our director, has stated anything beyond just the the end

652
03:31:14.880 --> 03:31:32.399
of the contract which both happen in September. Um, are there any other questions at this time for our director or city manager, city attorney, or anyone? >> No. I'll make a motion that we accept resolution or pass resolution 2026-03

653
03:31:32.399 --> 03:31:48.479
revising the fee schedule for u the parks and recreation. >> I'll second that. >> Got a motion by Mayor Pro Tim Jackson, a second by council member Willis. Was that Willis?

654
03:31:48.479 --> 03:32:13.800
>> Council member King. >> I need to choose one. >> I'll be it. >> Council member, a second by council member King. >> Is there any further discussion on item 9.2 resolution 20263?

655
03:32:14.399 --> 03:32:32.000
Seeing none, city clerk, please call the role. >> Mayor Prom Jackson, >> four. >> Council member King, >> four. >> Mayor Morrison, >> four. >> Council member Shyak, >> four. >> And council member Willis, >> four. >> Item 9.2, resolution 202603

656
03:32:32.000 --> 03:32:52.080
passes 50. >> Thank you. >> Thank you very much for all your work and the willingness to do the workshop on that item. 9.3 is our next item which is the titled save our Indian River Lagoon local infrastructure sir tax renewal of

657
03:32:52.080 --> 03:33:07.439
interlocal agreement the uh proposed motion to consider an approval of the Savar Indian River Lagoon SIRL soil local infrastructure certex lo renewal of the inner local

658
03:33:07.439 --> 03:33:23.920
agreement which has provided to us city manager any initial comments or overview of what's going on here. >> Uh just that the county commission appro um approved or is set to approve this referendum and it was subject for uh to

659
03:33:23.920 --> 03:33:39.279
voter approval for an additional 10 years and that attachment is um part of the backup and we do have city staff that can speak on this matter and we also have a representative from Save Our Indian River Lagoon who's walking to the mic now.

660
03:33:39.279 --> 03:33:55.040
>> Well, you been patient with us. Thank you so much. Please introduce yourself. >> Yes. Um, good evening. My name is Terry Breeden and I'm the program manager for the Bvard County Save Our Indian River Lagoon halfcent sales tax. Um, on I believe everybody was given a handout and then for everybody in the audience

661
03:33:55.040 --> 03:34:10.399
there's handouts on the um table outside, but this is the brief overview of the Save Our Lagoon plan. It's otherwise a 350 page book. So, here it is in a colorful uh pamphlet. It explains the half cent sales tax. So we

662
03:34:10.399 --> 03:34:27.200
started collecting funds January 1, 2017 to address the water quality issues, the fish kills, the unusual mortality events. Um over the 10 years, we are anticipated to collect $583 million going towards 14 different project types

663
03:34:27.200 --> 03:34:42.239
in the plan. So everything from public education, wastewater treatment facility upgrades, septics uh to sewer, septic system upgrades for people that cannot connect to sewer. um storm water projects, aquatic vegetation harvesting

664
03:34:42.239 --> 03:34:58.160
in storm water ponds, muck removal, oyster bars, planted shorelines, and we're doing clam restoration as well. Um this tax will end collections in December of this year. So, as um the

665
03:34:58.160 --> 03:35:14.399
city manager just said, uh county commission has authorized us to put it on the ballot in November. So, we are waiting to see what happens. But um part of this interlocal agreement is to uh have the county uh manage the

666
03:35:14.399 --> 03:35:29.680
trust fund and then continue with how things have been going. So um if you have any questions, we've I'm happy to answer. We have just completed 134 of about 400 projects. Um we've spent 120

667
03:35:29.680 --> 03:35:45.680
million of the 583 million, but we've also been able to leverage these funds to collect more grants. So the county alone has 115 million in grants going towards these projects and the cities have all been also working on leverage

668
03:35:45.680 --> 03:36:02.399
leveraging those funds to get their own grants as well. >> Thank you so much. The 583 million was collected from 2017 to >> that's the anticip we've collected 522 million to date uh around there. Um, so

669
03:36:02.399 --> 03:36:19.040
by the end of the calendar year, we should have close to 583 million. >> Okay. And is there a place that this council or the residents could go to see kind of >> annually how that came in? I wouldn't assume it's >> We have Yes, we have monthly meetings

670
03:36:19.040 --> 03:36:34.640
and everything is presented. The monthly financials are presented there. It's all on our website as well. And then we have quarterly meetings where we go through every project and give the status update on that. So our last one was what month are we in? June. >> June.

671
03:36:34.640 --> 03:36:52.239
>> Uh May. So um that meeting we presented um all the project updates. >> Thank you. >> And it's all recorded. It's all on our website. It's on our YouTube. And um happy to answer any questions if the public has any questions to our >> council. Any questions?

672
03:36:52.239 --> 03:37:08.000
>> I'm just amazed that uh we have a half a penny and over the course of what 10 years? >> Yep. You've raised that much money, half a penny. >> We've had a lot of uh crazy things happen with the economy the past couple years. >> That's amazing. That's amazing. Well,

673
03:37:08.000 --> 03:37:24.479
good. Congratulations. >> Yeah. Half a billion. Over a half a billion, right? >> Half a do. >> I have a question for >> Mr. Mayor. >> Yes, Mayor Burton. >> Thank you for being so patient. Bless

674
03:37:24.479 --> 03:37:41.840
your heart. We should have moved you up front. Um, but I do have a question. How and and the mayor did ask about how we could have uh or where we could find some of the projects and that sort of thing. And do you all give um I know

675
03:37:41.840 --> 03:37:58.160
I've seen some progress reports with you all. I know that um and I I'm little miss honest and blunt. You know, a lot of the people are questioning whether that tax is actually helping or not with

676
03:37:58.160 --> 03:38:14.239
the increased space launches and all the activity we have in Bvard County and all of that. So, um is there somewhere where we can point people that it gets into more information is one question uh that

677
03:38:14.239 --> 03:38:31.520
I have for you >> that. So, yes, our website has all of this information. We track all of the nutrient reductions for the projects. So once all of the projects are completed in the plan, we'll have 1.3 million pounds of reduction per year. Um with

678
03:38:31.520 --> 03:38:46.960
all of the projects combined that have been completed, we're just at a cumulative total of 1.1 million pounds of total nitrogen reduction. Our area um has seen significant growth in the past few decades. So

679
03:38:46.960 --> 03:39:04.160
it take how do I want to say this? Uh we haven't kept up the way we should have and so we've got to do better and this tax is helping us get better. Um the water quality has improved. Um our overall

680
03:39:04.160 --> 03:39:19.840
average of total nitrogen for all sublumes, so Banana and um North and Central was around 1.7 millig per liter of total nitrogen. when we started in 2016. We're now down to about 1.1. So,

681
03:39:19.840 --> 03:39:36.239
we've have seen a decrease, which is good. So, things are working. We just need to keep going. >> Okay. Perfect. And then, Mr. Mayor, I wanted to just make sure and say this for the public record, for our citizens and people that are watching, this

682
03:39:36.239 --> 03:39:54.080
resolution that we're about to accept is not necessarily the city being in favor of the lagoon tax. It's us being in favor of them adding it onto the ballot v for v via referendum. So, it needs to

683
03:39:54.080 --> 03:40:10.080
be signed by the cities saying we want it to go out to the voters for them to decide on the tax. And I just wanted to verify and make sure that we were aware that that's what this is. It's for it's to put the refere the referendum on the

684
03:40:10.080 --> 03:40:26.960
ballot so that our citizens can vote on it or not. >> It's an excellent point. Thank you, Mayor Pro Tim. Council member Willis. >> Uh yes, I I can look out my back patio and see the Banana River and how clean it has become. But we do have some

685
03:40:26.960 --> 03:40:44.399
significant issues with the shorelines >> along the Banana River. And I think it would be behoove us to uh participate in this to seek whatever funds we can to reinforce our shoreline along the Banana River here in Cape Canaveral. We do a

686
03:40:44.399 --> 03:41:03.359
lot of work on the beach front. We need to do some on the lagoon front. Thank you. >> Thank you, Council Member Shyak or Council Member King. Any comments? I can just say that start date 2017. We saw

687
03:41:03.359 --> 03:41:21.200
how fast things went down in the lagoon. The the algae blooms at Brown. I mean it was rapid like what is happening to our lagoon. >> Then we saw and when you say growth, we saw the COVID and the economy grow and then we saw the the the development. And

688
03:41:21.200 --> 03:41:37.040
so the fact that when that went into place, not only did it help, but it the net benefit in the face of that growth is clear. I mean, I go out on the lagoon, I see it. We all drive over the bridges. You can

689
03:41:37.040 --> 03:41:52.319
see in the summertime, you can see I mean, winter time when it's clear, okay? >> But in those summertime months when it when you can see that even a hint of aqua blue gives great hope. And the fact that we're measuring that nitrogen

690
03:41:52.319 --> 03:42:09.040
removal is amazing. So, as Mayor Perim said and all of us I think echoed here uh tonight, we I can speak for I support this. I think it's a good thing. Thank you so much for sticking with us and uh we will certainly go to your resources

691
03:42:09.040 --> 03:42:25.120
or at least point our residents to those resources. >> Looks like they pulled it up here. So yeah, everything's here if you just go to um Roardell Save Our Lagoon uh and everything's on here, all the latest documents and then all of our meetings are recorded and we do project videos.

692
03:42:25.120 --> 03:42:41.040
So it might be too much information, but no, thank you. It's up on the screen here as city clerk just helped us and um >> we appreciate. Are there any other further comments? And >> well, I mean, we we see a significant

693
03:42:41.040 --> 03:42:57.279
benefit economically >> Mhm. >> from a clean lagoon. >> Mhm. >> So, no one wants to go swimming or fishing in in a dirty place. So, thank you. >> You're welcome. And Mr. Mayor, >> yes. >> Our city attorney needs to clarify my

694
03:42:57.279 --> 03:43:14.080
comment >> when appropriate. >> When appropriate. >> I think we're good. City attorney. >> Okay. Just to clarify, um the county is already um commission's already decided to put the referendum question out. Um the what's being asked of the city

695
03:43:14.080 --> 03:43:30.800
council is to the approval of the interlocal agreement renewal, which is basically as a participating municipality. It lays out the framework of the um of the program itself and the city's ability to participate in the use

696
03:43:30.800 --> 03:43:46.960
and distribution of the sir tax. assuming um it gets approved for another another 10 years. >> So referendum's going out on the ballot. It's just >> this is a participation agreement. It's like a renewal of the existing in a

697
03:43:46.960 --> 03:44:03.680
local agreement. >> And I interpreted the point. Thank you, city attorney. Does council all understand the city attorney's clarification to make sure we understand? >> Yeah. I just have a question. If so, if the referendum fails, which probably won't happen, but if it failed, then

698
03:44:03.680 --> 03:44:21.359
this interlocal uh agreement would be null and void, right? >> Correct. >> Yeah. It would not uh go in really go into effect. This is being done in advance. >> Correct. Yeah. But the program would continue um through you know with the the sir tax

699
03:44:21.359 --> 03:44:38.560
collected under the first referendum is my understanding. So when that gets exhausted then the program would then uh close close its doors. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Okay. >> The average uh I think or it could be

700
03:44:38.560 --> 03:44:56.319
understood that we were voting on the tax increase. You know if you just tuned in I think that was your point. That's not what we're doing. >> But very important as our city attorney said. And uh most importantly, are there any other questions on this decision?

701
03:44:56.319 --> 03:45:17.520
Assuming it passes, as you as council member King said, um thank you again. >> All right. Thank you. >> If there's no other questions, I'll look for a motion to approve. >> Make a motion to approve the renewal of the interlocal agreement.

702
03:45:17.520 --> 03:45:34.080
>> Second. Got a motion by council member Shoryak, a second by council member Willis to approve which is item 9.3 save our Indian River Lagoon local infrastructure certex renewal of

703
03:45:34.080 --> 03:45:54.319
interlocal agreement. Any further discussion? >> Just one note that's ordinance 2026-06. What is >> that's the ordinance that we're voting on? >> No, that's that's actually the county ordinance. >> Oh, that one is >> calling for the referendum. That's backup.

704
03:45:54.319 --> 03:46:11.760
>> It's just the in local agreement renewal that >> So, we don't have a resolution on this one. >> No, just an in local. >> Okay. All right. Thank you. Sorry. Clarified that. >> Any further discussion? >> City clerk, please call the role. >> Mayor Pro Tim Jackson

705
03:46:11.760 --> 03:46:26.560
>> four. >> Council member King, four. Mayor Morrison, >> four. >> Council member Shriak, >> four. >> And council member Willis, >> give it four. I'll take it. >> Record show that 9.3 interlocal agreement as stated and discussed past

706
03:46:26.560 --> 03:46:42.000
the note. >> Brings us to item 9.4, which is beach paid parking. At the beginning of this meeting, we uh sort of uh agreed to an intention to not take

707
03:46:42.000 --> 03:46:58.319
action, but uh this item is an item for action. And so with that, we certainly can discuss. I think the intent was that we can maintain discussion. And so with that, I'm going to ask our city manager to give us a quick overview. Uh we are

708
03:46:58.319 --> 03:47:14.000
but prior I think it would be prudent to address the clock 9:48 p.m. and look for a motion to extend. >> Make a motion to extend to at least 10:30. >> I'll second the motion. >> Good.

709
03:47:14.000 --> 03:47:29.199
>> Got a motion by council member Willis and a second by Mayor Pro Tim Jackson to extend the meeting till 10:30 p.m. Any further discussion? City Clerk, >> Mayor Prom Jackson,

710
03:47:29.199 --> 03:47:44.160
>> four, >> Council Member K, >> four, Mayor Morrison, >> four, >> Council Member Sharia, >> four, >> and Council Member Willis, >> four. The record show that we extended till 10:30 p.m. We are addressing item

711
03:47:44.160 --> 03:48:01.120
9.4, beach and parking, as stated. I'm going to ask our city manager to give a quick overview after our workshop. and Mayor Pro Tim, please hold the gabble. I'll be right back. City manager. >> Thank you, Mayor. So, just a brief

712
03:48:01.120 --> 03:48:16.960
recap. We conducted a workshop on paid parking for the community to participate last week and um the council voted to continue the conversation at the meeting here this evening. The item was placed on this agenda as an action item for

713
03:48:16.960 --> 03:48:31.680
voting uh due to our deadline to get our action our our agenda together. Um and it was very clear after the workshop that um council needed some more time to discuss and it's clear you're going to establish a workshop date here this

714
03:48:31.680 --> 03:48:48.720
evening. Um so uh this is a big item for the community. We understand and that's why we have been as transparent as we can be with uh putting information out there. We've been uh giving updates uh along the way. We updated the community from our workshop. We put it on all the

715
03:48:48.720 --> 03:49:04.720
social medias, our weekly update, and we will continue to update the community on this important item. Uh we we want people to attend and weigh in with their comments so that the council uh can make the best decision for the community after hearing all input from the

716
03:49:04.720 --> 03:49:20.080
residents and that's really what government looks like and uh whichever direction the city goes with this item, we will execute that direction. Um so for this evening just to remind the council that the vendor Sebastian Ortega Chuber is here and if you want to

717
03:49:20.080 --> 03:49:36.960
discuss this item I think we should take advantage of his presence. He did drive up here from several counties to our south and um so he's here at your disposal. That's how important this item is to him. And we have Laura Gandandy from our capital projects uh division or

718
03:49:36.960 --> 03:49:52.560
department here uh to answer any questions as well. So mayor prom. Okay, thank you so much. And I wasn't wanting to derail another workshop, but I felt like we needed to discuss this a little bit more. It's been a very hot topic

719
03:49:52.560 --> 03:50:09.120
online with uh social media, and it's something that has not um has not been embraced in the past. And to me, as far as my thoughts, um, I really, we're at

720
03:50:09.120 --> 03:50:25.840
this point where we're getting ready to get engaged in budget season. And for me, budget season becomes important this year where we really need to look at the things, see if there's cost reductions that we can handle within our budget and

721
03:50:25.840 --> 03:50:43.520
make sure that we don't have any things that are literally things that we could cut. The prices have changed, contracts that could be looked at, various things like that. So, as we look at approaching and discussing parking,

722
03:50:43.520 --> 03:50:58.640
um I think it cutting expenses is extremely important and making sure that we've done that in the areas where we can do that before we start looking at we've got to charge you to park. Now,

723
03:50:58.640 --> 03:51:15.840
having said that, um I've seen people that are our residents and they don't want it at all. And I've seen some that are I've seen commenters on social media from Hawaii and California or at least that's what their Facebook pages and

724
03:51:15.840 --> 03:51:32.080
their social media pages say. We have had people from Orlando that come over and do business on our beach and they don't want it. We've had other people in our county that don't want it. U but when it comes down to it for me it's what do the residents of Cape Canaveral

725
03:51:32.080 --> 03:51:47.680
want? And unfortunately this is a broader discussion in my opinion because um it's one way to look at minimizing um or helping us with revenue while

726
03:51:47.680 --> 03:52:06.080
trying to minimize expenses and the minimization of expenses we're a little premature on because we haven't gotten to our budget meetings yet. So, for me, um, as I look at this, um, scheduling the workshop, I wanted to make sure that

727
03:52:06.080 --> 03:52:22.319
we're looking at, um, making sure that we've had that first budget meeting before we push this. I don't think that this is a topic that we should rush. And I feel like, and I'll be honest with you, okay, with

728
03:52:22.319 --> 03:52:38.239
and putting this on the record right now, I want the people to vote on it that live here because you know what? I do not want to make this decision for you. I will if I'm in a position to do that, but I would love to see this go on the

729
03:52:38.239 --> 03:52:53.920
ballot because this is too passionate of a topic with people. People are literally on fire with this. So, you know what? I I'm me I'm all for if the citizens want to decide on a ballot

730
03:52:53.920 --> 03:53:11.840
initiative, but one thing that we have to do is we're going to have to cut expenses and find ways to bring money into our city. And that's just the way that it is right now. We're looking at property taxes that'll be minimized next

731
03:53:11.840 --> 03:53:30.319
year. Um or potentially with the homestead exemptions going up if people vote on that. And you can't um and we're in a difficult situation where we're trying to make this um budget work for our city. And I'm I'm like the mayor. I

732
03:53:30.319 --> 03:53:46.080
am not someone that wants to tax everyone and keep taxing and tax and spend and tax and spend. So we have to look at what have our patterns been, what have we done in the past, how can we change those things, what ways can we

733
03:53:46.080 --> 03:54:04.239
be more efficient and um you know work smarter and not harder and things like that. our staff. We gave them a directive to go in and look at ways to generate revenue and to go in and cut expenses. And you know what? They've

734
03:54:04.239 --> 03:54:19.520
come to the table with these things for us. And there are hard decisions for us for us sitting up here on council. But I'm almost I'm almost at the point I want to look at the budget. I want to

735
03:54:19.520 --> 03:54:38.800
address looking at where we are right now and then look at what to do with parking. Um I also have concerns and I expressed this in the last meeting. I have concerns about um well and our rep

736
03:54:38.800 --> 03:54:55.439
told us at T2, these are sample numbers. And you know what I have seen all over social media where everyone thought those numbers were set in stone. Those were sample numbers. Do we really have a projection for Cape Canaveral? No, we really don't because you know what? We

737
03:54:55.439 --> 03:55:11.040
don't know what we're going to make. We've never done this before, right? Um but we know that in our city this time of year, beach parking's empty during the week. It's overrun on the weekends and then it's empty again on Monday. And

738
03:55:11.040 --> 03:55:26.560
this is a normal pattern for us. So, as we work with a vendor to look at this, we have to look at what's realistic. Um, our peak season is right before Christmas or about midappril

739
03:55:26.560 --> 03:55:42.720
and the month of January can be busy with families. Um, and then we have, you know, the weekends that are busy. So, are the numbers that you saw as um in the workshop, oh well, we're only going

740
03:55:42.720 --> 03:55:58.160
to make this amount of money on those comments that I've seen online. We don't know what we're going to make yet. This is a this is something there were no projected numbers that were really truly what we've chosen as a council or

741
03:55:58.160 --> 03:56:16.640
discussed. It was a sample of what could happen with our city with parking. But I think that we have to before we go in and charge people, we have to take a look at where are we right now and how do we make sure that we're um looking at

742
03:56:16.640 --> 03:56:32.080
our budget and ensuring that we don't have any fat in it that could be trimmed just like you know looking at contracts that have been in. I know that our city planner, he had looked at something he

743
03:56:32.080 --> 03:56:47.120
brought to council and he did our he did his first contract negotiation. He got a reduced rate on that. That's the kind of stuff we're going to have to do. So, that was where my concern was was going ahead with a workshop. I think at this

744
03:56:47.120 --> 03:57:06.160
point it'd be beneficial if we're doing the parking to do it a little bit later than the budget meeting, the first meeting that we have set up. And I think it's essential that we've got to look at expenses before we come at charging for

745
03:57:06.160 --> 03:57:21.760
making revenues. And then there's also a couple of emails that we received in regards to lawsuits um with municipalities and I had some questions for you on that if you don't mind.

746
03:57:21.760 --> 03:57:37.760
Um because that's being brought Thank you, city clerk. that's being brought up as well about beach lawsuits, federal lawsuits against South Florida cities of Boca Raton s um

747
03:57:37.760 --> 03:57:54.239
Palm Beach, West Palm Beach or Palm Beach and um Delray Beach I think was in there and they're saying the lawsuits I looked them up and looked on Pacer um the lawsuits were saying that it is

748
03:57:54.239 --> 03:58:10.880
because the signs didn't meet federal guidelines and there was another issue. But have has your how is your company how does your company address ensuring that we

749
03:58:10.880 --> 03:58:26.080
are covered? I know our city attorney would have to work with you but I know as a corporation that's a major corporation and you guys are literally a major corporation all over the US providing these services. what

750
03:58:26.080 --> 03:58:42.560
compliance um measures do you all take to ensure that we are following federal guidelines, state guidelines, local guidelines, and all of that? >> Well, thank you for your question. Um I

751
03:58:42.560 --> 03:58:59.120
can't go into too much detail because I just don't know. You know, we have our own uh attorneys like like you do. Um, so I'd have to give you details from them on what protections we take. Now,

752
03:58:59.120 --> 03:59:15.680
when we contract with different municipalities, obviously there's hold harmless and indemnity clauses and all kinds of stuff that can be negotiated. Um, and Del Re is a big customer of ours. I was just meeting with their city manager and their parking folks two

753
03:59:15.680 --> 03:59:31.279
months ago. Um, I did not hear about that lawsuit. I'm not familiar with those, of course. Um, but I can find out specific. >> Well, and let me tell let me tell you what I saw with the lawsuit that I

754
03:59:31.279 --> 03:59:48.160
looked up that included those cities. We had a retired attorney that went to the beach and he parked where he always parks and when he parked there, he got ticketed. And so when he returned, he decided to

755
03:59:48.160 --> 04:00:04.239
look at the companies that provide that service because he felt like the sign that had a dolphin on it and a sea shell and here's the QR code and all of that didn't meet the federal guidelines. So I

756
04:00:04.239 --> 04:00:21.680
think he was not happy, you know, with getting a ticket. Um, but it's a he's saying it's, you know, it didn't meet federal guidelines on the site. So, as we move forward, and I won't put you on the spot anymore on that, but because

757
04:00:21.680 --> 04:00:37.199
you hadn't looked it up, but as we move forward, you know, we want to work if if we ended up going with you guys, it's it's absolutely essential that we're working to ensure that our city doesn't

758
04:00:37.199 --> 04:00:53.120
get sued over a sign. you know that that was I was kind of astounded when I saw this the article and looked up the case. One thing I can say with the the signs that we provide you, well, we use your graphics and then basically we're

759
04:00:53.120 --> 04:01:10.239
providing the the QR code. Uh they meet federal guidelines, right? But of course, a citizen if he ends up being right and what happens with this uh lawsuit, those changes would have to be made. But in addition, our signage uh sometimes different cities have

760
04:01:10.239 --> 04:01:26.479
different aspects to ordinance that require some additional information. So that becomes part part of the signage as well. >> Okay. Well, and thank you. I know those are strange, but there these are things that we've had coming at us. We've gotten a lot of feedback from our

761
04:01:26.479 --> 04:01:41.920
residents, and we've had I mean, frankly, I've seen things in support. I've had a lot of people that have told me personally as I'm out walking on the street that they support it. Um, and they're tired of

762
04:01:41.920 --> 04:01:58.239
One of them gave me an example. She and her husband went to Sherry Down Park this past weekend early just to walk on the beach and see if the sargasm was still out there. Parked and someone came in and parked behind them

763
04:01:58.239 --> 04:02:13.840
their car and left. Went to the beach and they couldn't get out and they only wanted to go down there and see if there was sea seaweed. So, you know, these are the things that make it a challenge for people um for our residents and they

764
04:02:13.840 --> 04:02:30.319
give you these stories, the people that live here. Um but it's going to be, you know, as the mayor said, we're going to have to listen to everyone on this. And um you know, and so I didn't mean to throw you throw you some curve balls.

765
04:02:30.319 --> 04:02:47.760
And my opinion is I would like to see the budget meeting happen to see how we could cut expenses um and that sort of thing so we have a bigger picture. >> Mr. Mayor, I'm giving it back to you. >> Thank you, Mayor Pro Tim. Council Mayor

766
04:02:47.760 --> 04:03:03.040
Mayor >> or Council Member Willis. Uh we received a lot of information tonight that none of us have had an opportunity to fully go through. Um, that was the reason for possibly doing a workshop. But I did

767
04:03:03.040 --> 04:03:19.279
speak with uh, Supervisor of Elections Boanic, and if we were to put it on the ballot, we have to have the ballot uh, language into Supervisor of Elections by August 17th

768
04:03:19.279 --> 04:03:36.640
to make to make the uh, November election. And we have a I think it's a 75word or or so limitation on that item if it were to be on the ballot.

769
04:03:36.640 --> 04:03:52.000
So it's going to make it a little difficult with the time, but we just need to be aware of it. Uh but I I'm anxious to hear from anybody in the audience tonight and that was part of the reason

770
04:03:52.000 --> 04:04:10.319
to keep it on there as a discussion um so we could give everybody the opportunity to speak and uh I would personally I would like to go through all of this information that we asked for. We received the uh sensitivity analysis by the uh finance department

771
04:04:10.319 --> 04:04:26.160
and I appreciate that Joey. Thank you very much. and uh it at least gives us a little little something more realistic maybe to to consider. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> I do have a question, >> Council Member King.

772
04:04:26.160 --> 04:04:44.319
>> Thank you. Um how how long, this being my first goaround with the budgeting process, how long will it take us to firm up a budget and will it be will it overlap that date for the referendum question? I mean will we be timely with

773
04:04:44.319 --> 04:05:01.359
that or >> if I can address that uh the first the first budget workshop is scheduled for July 21st which is your next council meeting. Uh we will meet in advance of that in budget work budget workshop fashion. Uh so I think the question uh

774
04:05:01.359 --> 04:05:17.199
for this council tonight is when would you like to workshop paid parking in relation to that budget workshop? would you prefer to do the budget workshop and then no you know what whatever you find out then you can carry that information

775
04:05:17.199 --> 04:05:32.880
over to a paid parking workshop and I will remind council that we plan on having individual one-on-one meetings with all of you in advance of the July 21st budget workshop so when you get into workshop you will already have a

776
04:05:32.880 --> 04:05:50.960
good um sense of where we are headed from a staff perspective So, >> but we still don't know whether or not we will have accomplished the budget prior to that date. >> Correct. >> That supervisor of

777
04:05:50.960 --> 04:06:07.840
>> you you can work the workshop the budget as many times as you feel you need to at some point in time. The millillage will need to be established and that happens in August, right? >> And then uh a budget will be uh adopted at some point during the two meetings in September. And I would ask the clerk how

778
04:06:07.840 --> 04:06:24.319
long it would take to work up a referendum for the ballot in November in relation to that. >> Oh no. Um could I make a little correction? We have a regular meeting on July the 21st. >> Correct. >> We have the first budget hearing on

779
04:06:24.319 --> 04:06:41.680
September the 3rd, but we have no budget workshops scheduled to my knowledge. >> Yeah. So the timeline uh presented by the finance department is a workshop for July 21st and that's what what we need to discuss this evening as far as this council

780
04:06:41.680 --> 04:06:55.680
goes. >> Yes, >> that workshop would be at 5:00 p.m. on the night prior to as our city clerk said the 6 p.m. regular. >> Well, you have to establish that. Okay. We don't have a budget workshop, I'm

781
04:06:55.680 --> 04:07:16.080
afraid. I'm trying to look for um the what is it the dates for reserve meetings if necessary. I'm pulling that up on the screen. Um >> okay. So the calendar we approved. Yeah. I see

782
04:07:16.080 --> 04:07:33.920
it shows the first budget workshop is on July 14th. I would have to >> July the we have the budget workshop at 5:00 on July the 21st 2020 >> plus budget workshop >> right >> July 21st >> oh

783
04:07:33.920 --> 04:07:49.760
>> oh you're right you're right >> when everything has to be >> oh I see >> yeah right >> okay I followed thank you >> yeah okay >> I mean got this >> so the deadline per our code which I think

784
04:07:49.760 --> 04:08:07.520
our city manager is going for is the budget su or the budgets are received to the council by June by the end of this month. >> June 30th. >> June 30th. And it's your intent prior to the council receiving them to have a a

785
04:08:07.520 --> 04:08:22.960
workshop or you're okay with sending them out and then um having a workshop after. >> Sure. Let the council get a look at it on June 30th. Again, we'll have an advanced one-on-one meeting sometime between June 30th and July 21st.

786
04:08:22.960 --> 04:08:38.880
>> And then with the the budget in hand and the one-on-one meeting, you'll you will be prepared for the budget workshop on the 21st. >> Okay. So, we're okay with the July 21st as being the first budget workshop

787
04:08:38.880 --> 04:08:54.960
publicly, assuming, you know, we can all meet and hold the one-on ones prior to that. Yes. >> Okay. City Manager, any comments in regards to council member King's question or

788
04:08:54.960 --> 04:09:11.760
response to that further? I guess I should ask council member King >> to answer your question. >> Well, council council member um Willis gave a date that he got from U. Supervisor of elections Bobic. >> Yes. >> Of of what was it again? August 17th.

789
04:09:11.760 --> 04:09:27.680
August. So my question is, are we going to have the budget wrapped up and with a bow by then so that we can determine whether or not we need to put that on the referendum >> as a referendum question? That's my question. >> So if the I don't know if the those two

790
04:09:27.680 --> 04:09:44.239
are related, if the goal is to put paid parking on the referendum, is that contingent upon the budget >> or it sounds like we're hearing the council wants to do referendum? No. Well, that's not my view on it. My my

791
04:09:44.239 --> 04:10:00.720
view on it is is if the budget show if if during the budgeting process we we see we really could use some revenue from paid parking and but we want to put it out to the community to have them decide it. Um will we be done with the

792
04:10:00.720 --> 04:10:16.960
budgeting process like I said with a big bow on it before that August 17th date? No. Okay. So, it's a moot point. >> It's a moot point. Okay. Well, I think I can't speak for Mayor Pro Tim Jackson, but I think if I heard her correctly, I see you, Council Member Shriek, was that

793
04:10:16.960 --> 04:10:33.040
we will it's not so much that we have a, you know, bow on and a done budget to to by the the date that council member Willis shared, August 17th from the supervisor. It's that we don't hold that workshop

794
04:10:33.040 --> 04:10:49.760
prior to at least having those discussions. And we won't know until we get there. For all we know, we meet, we all receive our budget books on June 30th. We meet uh July 21st, and within a couple hours, we're like,

795
04:10:49.760 --> 04:11:04.640
>> we absolutely want to put this on the referendum. Now, that might be highly improbable, but we won't know. And I agree, if we were at that point where it's done and ready to go, we would absolutely know by then. But we might

796
04:11:04.640 --> 04:11:20.399
know very quickly within that budget the first budget workshop that we could do it. Let's just assume that for a second that like at the end of that meeting on the July 21st we said we absolutely want to put this out which I think meets your

797
04:11:20.399 --> 04:11:36.560
we have our first budget workshop. We decide on the 21st we want to put this out to referendum. we would then have to come back and meet with enough time to meet whatever the technical requirements are of Mr. Boanic's deadline is probably a formal

798
04:11:36.560 --> 04:11:53.520
submission and some format. City attorney could probably uh help us. We've done this before. Um I don't know if that's even let's assume that the 21st without creating any new dates we come out of that meeting and we say we want to go to referendum. Is it

799
04:11:53.520 --> 04:12:09.920
reasonable to think that in what is that 3 weeks we could actually have a deliverable to meet the requirements of the supervisor of elections? Reasonable. I think we met every day anything's possible. But is that

800
04:12:09.920 --> 04:12:27.120
>> well and we could literally make it a moot a true moot. If that's not possible, then >> we could literally approve the in the July meeting before the budget meeting the referendum and have them hold it until after

801
04:12:27.120 --> 04:12:45.040
the budget meeting. But for me, I like seeing a big picture and I already know that staff has gone in and made cuts to expenses, but I don't know what all those are, >> right? and I don't know what we're looking at and we're getting a little bit late of a start because of uh

802
04:12:45.040 --> 04:13:01.920
circumstances this year that we're all working on. And so in order to be ready, we could have the referendum ready in the end of July and then when we have the budget meeting, like you said, Mr. Mayor, we may walk in there and go, "Oh,

803
04:13:01.920 --> 04:13:18.640
yeah, we need to get this to voters. Let them vote on it because we're in need of this referendum." Mhm. >> Um, you know, it's that or we choose for our citizens instead of giving it on a referendum.

804
04:13:18.640 --> 04:13:34.399
>> Um, but I mean, I'm I'm willing as one of five >> for the citizens to vote on this. But I think that they need to be aware of uh our budget for the the year the coming year and all we have all our ducks in a

805
04:13:34.399 --> 04:13:51.359
row about what we're looking at because it's hard to vote just to to charge when this is such a hot topic without knowing the situation knowing where we stand. Council member Shy, >> I guess expanding on that, I'd like to

806
04:13:51.359 --> 04:14:06.560
see the referendum anyway, whether we need the money or not this year. Maybe it's kind of a vague language. We say we the voters authorized the city, not necessarily with anything specific dates or anything like that, but if we don't need it this year, get it on the

807
04:14:06.560 --> 04:14:23.199
ballot in November and we might need it next year and at least we'll kind of be authorized by the voters to do it. Can I >> Does that make s I'm not sure I'm fully follow Are you >> I guess we have a referendum either whether we need to determine during the budget season whether we need the money

808
04:14:23.199 --> 04:14:38.479
or not. Maybe we put a referendum out there and that answers the questions if if we need to do it next year this budget we don't have to go ahead and do a referendum again next year. We just got it out of the way. Hey just ask the people what do you think pay for parking or not pay for parking. >> Well I see you're saying the risk is low

809
04:14:38.479 --> 04:14:55.920
just to pursue it this year. >> Yeah. And then, okay, I I do want to go to our city attorney at some point, but I see council member King. >> Yep. If we put it out for referendum, we'd better be dogone sure that the residents

810
04:14:55.920 --> 04:15:11.840
understand all of the facts because right now they're running rampant on social media with all kinds of misinformation and all kinds of whatifs, etc. I think you don't put out a referendum, kind of like the property

811
04:15:11.840 --> 04:15:27.840
tax thing, unless you tell the people, here's the pluses, here are the minuses, you give them all the facts. If you have to spoon feed them, you do it because otherwise they >> they're not going to be making an

812
04:15:27.840 --> 04:15:43.760
informed choice. I think I think I think having the budget figures and and and keeping being transparent with the community about the budgeting process and where we are with it is is one giant step toward making

813
04:15:43.760 --> 04:16:00.000
them understand what why why we're requesting this of them. So So I just caution, you know, that we need to educate them and keep them informed about what's going on and why why we're moving in this direction. We certainly

814
04:16:00.000 --> 04:16:14.720
don't want to adopt something to put it on the ballot that does not come with >> that goes down >> at least a strong position of the council. >> Exactly. Oh, and a strong position for either way. >> I mean, so that they're making an informed decision. >> Okay.

815
04:16:14.720 --> 04:16:30.479
>> City attorney, anything you need to comment on there? Um first um procedurally to adopt a referendum question the city council would have to adopt an ordinance. The ordinance as uh

816
04:16:30.479 --> 04:16:48.239
Councilman Willis indicated you know would set forth the referendum question has to be maximum 15 words for a title maximum 75 words for the description of the of the referendum. This type of referendum for paid parking

817
04:16:48.239 --> 04:17:03.680
is not mandated by law. So this is not a mandated referendum. This would be what I would consider a non-binding referendum. So the non-binding referendum would have to describe what it is you're asking the

818
04:17:03.680 --> 04:17:20.239
voters to say yes or no to because the referendums are a yes or a no, right? So to the extent that you don't have any meat on the bones on paid parking, you may not be informing the the the voters

819
04:17:20.239 --> 04:17:35.199
about details that you would ask you would want them to vote upon to give you guidance. Um you could generally put a refer non-binding referendum out there but it without any meat uh it would be very

820
04:17:35.199 --> 04:17:51.840
general um because at the end of the day when you get the voting results on a non-binding referendum really it is a bowl of tea leaves for you all because the final decision on moving forward with paid parking simply requires a

821
04:17:51.840 --> 04:18:07.680
legislative act of the council which this council has the authority to adopt. without a referendum. So you you you would be using again this ref type of referendum as a non-binding bowl of tea leaves to help guide you on the decision

822
04:18:07.680 --> 04:18:23.040
on paid parking and how much you want to give the voters um to educate them on on your non-binding question is going to be limited to 15word title and a 75word description

823
04:18:23.040 --> 04:18:37.760
>> and no guarantee that people will read it. >> Right. I mean to to be educated. >> Don't misconstrue it. It's nonbinding, right? So, um >> um I have a question for you

824
04:18:37.760 --> 04:18:54.399
uh city attorney. We had I'd asked about in perpetuity for for um making the uh residents free free status as far as their permit. And you said we couldn't just make it

825
04:18:54.399 --> 04:19:09.520
unending. Could we put in a clause that gave a time period that no uh future law can supersede of like 25 years in the in in a resolution if we ended up doing

826
04:19:09.520 --> 04:19:25.279
paid parking that says if you're homesteaded in the city, you'll get free or a resident of the city, you know, homesteaded or resident, you get free parking at the beach for 25 years. And

827
04:19:25.279 --> 04:19:42.640
at that 25 year period at you know 20 you know whatever the date is um it will go before council for an extension or and define the terms of that. Could we put a time frame on that if we ended up

828
04:19:42.640 --> 04:19:59.520
doing that ended up doing parking? >> Yeah. Well again you're you're subject to whatever the city future city council decides right. So in terms of you setting a term >> for it, that term can be, you know,

829
04:19:59.520 --> 04:20:16.080
amended by future city councils, the only way to really I don't want to say tie the hands of the city council, but to direct the city council to do something a certain way would be to put it in the city charter, right? So that I mean paid parking in

830
04:20:16.080 --> 04:20:33.680
the city charter, I mean I've never seen anything like that. um you know that's more of a legislative act that councils uh can approve, they can unwind it, they can modify it, you know, future councils. So, I I don't can't really,

831
04:20:33.680 --> 04:20:48.640
you know, >> it's amazing to me that we we can't put a time frame on giving our residents free beach access, but our economic overlay development

832
04:20:48.640 --> 04:21:06.479
district doc supersedes our old code. And it's because of the state and SB 180, our hands are like this with development. It's just amazing to me that's how our legislation >> council I mean the council could adopt some sort of term you know put a term on

833
04:21:06.479 --> 04:21:21.920
it right or duration um in the ordinance when you get around to actually adopting the paid parking ordinance but my point is >> someone could change it in the future >> the council can change it in the future >> but I I think what we would put in right

834
04:21:21.920 --> 04:21:38.159
if we put something and said till 2040 we're going to do something right a future council would have to undo that right it puts them in a position that they would have to do like you just undone a 15-year intention. We wouldn't want it where they couldn't do that because the opposite could be true. We

835
04:21:38.159 --> 04:21:53.600
could put we could bind the residents for 15 years of something awful. And so you would want to have the ability to come in and it's all subjective to the interest and the will of the people and who's elected at that time. So, I think that that we hear from our attorney, the

836
04:21:53.600 --> 04:22:10.399
charter can be uh very difficult, if not impossible for a council to change if it's put in by the people. It can only be undone by the people, right? And so, the same power that made it happen would make it very difficult on a future council. And I do think that gives that

837
04:22:10.399 --> 04:22:26.720
some merit. We're just talking right now, Council Member King, or >> Yeah. Well, I'm looking at the time and we probably should make I would offer a motion if you want to continue beyond 10:30. >> Yes. >> Are you expecting the motion?

838
04:22:26.720 --> 04:22:42.239
>> I'll make a motion that we extend the meeting for >> um 30 minutes. >> I'll second that motion. >> Okay. Got a motion by Mayor Tim uh Jackson, a second by Council Member King

839
04:22:42.239 --> 04:22:58.800
to extend for 30 minutes, which would take us to 11:54. >> Yeah. Loads, >> y'all. Y'all, what are we going to do? >> Oh, yeah. Let's just round it up to >> 1154. 10:54. Thank you. Um,

840
04:22:58.800 --> 04:23:15.920
any further discussion on the matter? Seeing none, city clerk, >> mayor prom Jackson, >> four, >> council member King, >> four, >> mayor Morrison, >> four, >> council member Shiaki, >> four, >> and council member Willis, >> four. >> Motion to extend to 1054 is approved.

841
04:23:15.920 --> 04:23:31.680
50. We are now continuing the discussion. I think it would be wise first to let's get back to where we are on this item. Not that what we're talking about is not

842
04:23:31.680 --> 04:23:50.560
addressing it directly. I think it absolutely is. and um we had our workshop. The the city staff is looking for direction and instead of I I think

843
04:23:50.560 --> 04:24:10.239
what I what I would like to say in regards to this is and and it came up very direct by council member Shoryak and I think all of us spoke about what the residents Dr. Dr. Roberts is here and talked about

844
04:24:10.239 --> 04:24:26.720
the scope and why are we doing this? What is the intent? And I think that's absolutely important and the the question of what problem are we trying to solve um was stated about reserves, right?

845
04:24:26.720 --> 04:24:45.600
>> And so I've had a chance, we've all met with our city manager and while it might be hard at this time of night, I I don't think it will because we went through it so many times. The problem is reserves, but it's it is a problem,

846
04:24:45.600 --> 04:25:02.800
but it's not, for a lack of better words, the problem. What got us into that circumstance? And I think we can all debate it, but the reasoning doesn't matter as much as

847
04:25:02.800 --> 04:25:20.399
the rationale of you can say it two ways. Revenue was lower than expenses or you could say expenses was higher than revenue, right? We we all agreed that's deficit. Both of them equal deficit.

848
04:25:20.399 --> 04:25:36.479
In the audit report that we received in response to management for no folks who are here with us today, it was stated that the reasoning was because the tax rate was not set high enough which in other words states and my interpretation

849
04:25:36.479 --> 04:25:52.960
is that the deficit occurred because we did not have enough revenue. That's one way to look at it. in discussions with this council through the years and understanding it. I think

850
04:25:52.960 --> 04:26:09.439
that the the budget that we passed was intended to be balanced and the expenses were higher than the actual

851
04:26:09.439 --> 04:26:27.359
revenue we passed. The the the presented revenue appeared to be okay, but the actual right was was not there. when we when we back into it. So the way I interpret it is our expenses were too high and as our mayor pro Tim said

852
04:26:27.359 --> 04:26:42.880
that to me is the issue and so if we go okay reserves are low why are reserves low expenses are high. I want to say this before going any further on high expenses. I think parking revenue is a

853
04:26:42.880 --> 04:27:00.720
very reasonable way to make money. I really do is and I think that many of the residents and I'm a resident. I go to the beach. I don't want meters. I don't want that. I love the culture and the freedom of our beach. I love being able to walk down. When a friend comes

854
04:27:00.720 --> 04:27:18.080
over, I say, "I'll go park my car down at the beach. You can park in my driveway." I like contractors coming to the our neighborhoods and being able to park the same thing. That's our our freedom today. There's no codes that would prohibit that. Yes, we are the

855
04:27:18.080 --> 04:27:35.600
last, but at the same time, I'm like, well, it is uh as stated in the city world, lowhanging fruit. I do think that the majority of them from the data we've learned about and just the obvious reality that the majority of residents

856
04:27:35.600 --> 04:27:52.640
do not park at the beach. That those are rare. We walk, we have means, we know people. It's not going to impact residents. And I think the full intentions of this council has been to figure out a way if not explicitly to pretty much eliminate all costs on

857
04:27:52.640 --> 04:28:09.760
residents if not make it no-brainer minimum. So a lot of the noise that we hear, right, is just really like you'll read an issue and you're like that's we're going to address that. You'll hear another issue. We're going to address that. The one thing uh is the math. And

858
04:28:09.760 --> 04:28:26.560
as we got tonight, as Council Member Willis said last last meeting, we really requested some things. Sensitivity analysis. I just want the record to state I think we got that tonight. The other thing that we had requested was the proposal that was submitted. I don't

859
04:28:26.560 --> 04:28:42.800
know if we've got that yet. Um, but I think there was a proposal submitted to our city staff. I'm still fumbling through what we received tonight. Do we have that? Okay. So, I think that's crucial, but in

860
04:28:42.800 --> 04:28:58.880
the end, we we'll see if it's needed. We talked about a boilerplate contract. This is me going back to the meeting and listening to it uh and trying to I was literally writing it out just sort of like what are the because a lot of the questions will come down to what the

861
04:28:58.880 --> 04:29:14.720
contract states. We talked about privacy. We talked about revenue. Um I think having an idea of some sort of we got the proposal is one thing but what are the terms and conditions? What is your basic contract is the third thing.

862
04:29:14.720 --> 04:29:33.040
The fourth thing was asking for a community that is receiving anywhere in the United States similar services that they're proposing to us. Not proximity. We don't need a community that's near us. who's got one device

863
04:29:33.040 --> 04:29:49.920
as close to us as possible. Uh and then with last item, the fifth item was data mapping. I think that was that was requested, which do we have something that would help with that? >> It it's irrelevant at this point. I think if we don't have it now, we can

864
04:29:49.920 --> 04:30:04.880
pursue getting it. I'm not necessarily expecting it. I'd feel better about making a decision which ultimately I'm saying the workshop at a minimum I would want to have those items before any

865
04:30:04.880 --> 04:30:22.159
workshop and as as far as having a workshop before uh any type of budget meeting. I agree with our mayor prom. I think that we have time to get these items because I do think we need to take a a look at expenses. And so those were the five big

866
04:30:22.159 --> 04:30:37.600
items. Some of the major questions from residents as we all heard uh which was I would call the the sixth thing that accumulated a series and once we get the minutes on that and and I think approve it we'll we'll be able to better

867
04:30:37.600 --> 04:30:56.239
understand it. But my understanding is, you know, issues about residents um the the representation of rep residents. Dr. Robert talked about, you know, we're saying I think we all agree that homestead does

868
04:30:56.239 --> 04:31:12.000
not represent residents. If it was referendum, homesteaders don't vote, not only homesteaders, but all residents. You could be renting here for one year. If you're registered to vote, you are not required to own a home here. And so, I think we all agree with that. It does

869
04:31:12.000 --> 04:31:28.960
represent a community of more than just uh homeowners. Renters love this community and and it's not an indication of anything less. Um we talked about affordability, questions around uh

870
04:31:28.960 --> 04:31:47.040
you know, being able to to to pay for it, access to a smartphone. I raised questions on privacy. We talked through that and some of the concerns there. Had a great talk with our city manager who helped understand a little bit about that. The um exemptions for contractors

871
04:31:47.040 --> 04:32:04.800
as I stated was brought up. Volunteer events we addressed like the uh co planning. I think we got a good response for our city manager on that. Um and then you know what are the the the comments from uh Mr. Rearen who talked

872
04:32:04.800 --> 04:32:19.520
about uh you know the the real cost of going to the beach the uh intangible costs and he talked about the joy of going to the beach and and that really fits into a lot of the comments

873
04:32:19.520 --> 04:32:36.159
I'm seeing to you the culture um and a lot of the things that Mr. Campbell, Pat Campbell wrote about and and spoke to us about the scope was hit hard, the hidden cost, resident guest. We all sat in that meeting. We all heard. We can all go

874
04:32:36.159 --> 04:32:52.080
back and listen to that meeting. I'm not going to go through every single one of them, but I did want to address kind of some of the open-ended questions before we would want to make a decision in addition to even if we had every one of

875
04:32:52.080 --> 04:33:08.959
these answered as the mayor prom said and I I think we've got to look at expenses. And so to to wrap up, I'm not going to keep rambling on. I actually wrote out what I wanted to say on the

876
04:33:08.959 --> 04:33:26.320
record and so I'm going to read it and I'll be done. I believe we should pause the discussion on paid parking. Not because I impose it. In fact, I believe there is reasonable argument that visitors who use our beaches should

877
04:33:26.320 --> 04:33:41.920
contribute toward the cost of maintaining them. If after doing our homework, paid parking is necessary, then I am willing to have that conversation. But today, I

878
04:33:41.920 --> 04:33:56.561
believe we are focused on the wrong problem. Our reserve shortfall is not the problem. It is the symptom. The real problem is that over many years, our

879
04:33:56.561 --> 04:34:12.799
local government took on expenses, facilities, capital improvements, debt, and obligations that residents at that time who are elected here today on this council addressed and residents who

880
04:34:12.799 --> 04:34:29.600
are with us today addressed as well without fully accounting for the long-term operating costs Today, this council has inherited this council has inherited many of those obligations and

881
04:34:29.600 --> 04:34:47.279
is being asked to solve problems that we did not create. Some in the community have suggested that our deficit exists because taxes were not increased. I, as mayor, reject that premise. The

882
04:34:47.279 --> 04:35:03.840
deficit did not occur because we failed to we failed to not collect enough money. The deficit occurred because government spent more. Our local government spent more than it could sustainably afford. If we immediately

883
04:35:03.840 --> 04:35:20.080
pursue new revenue before addressing expenses, we are effectively agreeing that the answer was always to charge more than rather spend less. In other words, we are agreeing with the statement in the audit report on the

884
04:35:20.080 --> 04:35:37.279
reason that we've failed is that only strengthens the argument that uh was stated which I think I reject and I believe uh many in the community if not this council as a whole rejects. So can

885
04:35:37.279 --> 04:35:55.039
the questions we need to ask is can services be delivered more efficiently? Should some operations be restructured? Can partnerships with the private sector reduce costs? Can we pursue revenue sharing opportunities with the port or

886
04:35:55.039 --> 04:36:12.561
tourism related funding sources before creating new local fees? Dr. Roberts had mentioned vaguely, but I think I know what she meant. pursuing other revenue sources that have been discussed in the past and I I perceived it as these

887
04:36:12.561 --> 04:36:28.799
discussions we've had. These conversations will be difficult but leadership requires difficult decisions and I believe each one of us have it. So I am proposing that we pause on the search for parking revenue. Let's

888
04:36:28.799 --> 04:36:45.920
focus on reducing expenses, restoring our reserves, and building a sustainable model for the future. Let's rethink how our local community operates. Let's focus on core services and examine whether certain functions are better

889
04:36:45.920 --> 04:37:00.561
delivered through partnerships, private operators, or alternative models that reduce long-term cost to the taxpayers. And if big if after making those tough decisions, we still need additional

890
04:37:00.561 --> 04:37:17.199
revenue then we can have that discussion honestly and transparently. The question is not whether paid parking is a good idea. The question is whether we have done everything possible to control expenses before asking anyone to pay

891
04:37:17.199 --> 04:37:33.199
more. I believe we owe the public that effort first. So, I hope that we can address the cause before we address the symptom. Let's put our financial house in order. Then, and only then should we consider asking for additional revenue.

892
04:37:33.199 --> 04:37:49.600
None of these statements are directed to anyone in this room. In fact, it's the latter. It's people that we've already made to it's not people. It's collectively a group of people that we've made decisions about. And I want

893
04:37:49.600 --> 04:38:06.561
to say that we have certain departments that that could be absolutely underfunded and we've got certain departments that could be overfunded. So I am not speaking of an acrosstheboard problem

894
04:38:06.561 --> 04:38:22.879
here. I think there are legitimate needs within our city within departments. But when we look at the budget, that will speak for itself. And until then, as our mayor Pertim said, I don't think we can go to the public. We've seen the

895
04:38:22.879 --> 04:38:40.799
resistance. I could take them all one at a time and argue with all of them and go, "Let me tell you why you're wrong on that." But but taking a step back and after having an honest conversation with with myself, our community, our city manager,

896
04:38:40.799 --> 04:38:58.480
and listening to those residents and reading hundreds of comments, there's a few that really stood out to me and they started attacking us. And those very few were the same ones that made decisions that put us in this

897
04:38:58.480 --> 04:39:15.039
place. And I'm going, you know what? Why don't we go right after? >> We're not going to swallow that pill. >> Right. >> That that is and it's no one here. It is. You are not going to sit on the

898
04:39:15.039 --> 04:39:32.799
outside and say, "How dare you, you know, raise, let's go and address the problem. We have it. I'm not going to point the finger. I think we need to address it. And I'm not sure what the problem is. We

899
04:39:32.799 --> 04:39:48.560
might walk away and go, "No, there's nothing else." I'm just saying it seems to me we should absolutely go and take a hard look at that. I haven't said anything that I think our mayor Bertim didn't say, but uh that's where my heart

900
04:39:48.560 --> 04:40:07.760
is and I hope this council seriously considers. Those are my final words. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. >> Well said. >> Thank you. So, I I I don't I think as far as the item goes, no action is

901
04:40:07.760 --> 04:40:23.440
needed. I agree with a workshop. I think we've raised another layer of when that workshop occurs. Um I'm not sure we can meet this referendum. I do agree with council member Shoryak on putting it out, but I

902
04:40:23.440 --> 04:40:40.878
hear council member King on the risk of putting it out before we we're ready if it's something we truly want and need. And I do lean that way. I really do think paid parking is is a good thing because I do think the majority are uh

903
04:40:40.878 --> 04:40:58.560
tourists. Um, I just I think we're talking about waiting potentially it would be a year be another year and we could do it right and be successful then rush it and lose it. That'd be I guess the cost if we don't meet that deadline. We're talking

904
04:40:58.560 --> 04:41:16.320
about November 2027 which 2026 is a midterm voter turnout's a lot higher >> 27 voter turnouts a lot lower. So there are those implications too. >> Or we move forward with it this year for with with residents having a clause for

905
04:41:16.320 --> 04:41:32.638
a longterm period of them getting a free, you know, permit. >> Yep. >> And then putting it on the ballot to continue or not the next November would be another way we could handle it because we have that legislative power to do that if we make it through the

906
04:41:32.638 --> 04:41:48.638
budget meeting and see that that's something that's necessary. But I think I need the big the whole picture, the big picture. Um, just like I asked when we looked at the C5 and was a citizen in those meetings saying, "How much is this

907
04:41:48.638 --> 04:42:04.080
going to cost us to maintain this going forward?" We've got to look at all of those things and have better better real numbers. Uh, because um, you know, estimates don't really quite cut it. And

908
04:42:04.080 --> 04:42:19.760
so for me having that conversation around uh you know once we've had the budget conversation it's going to be more meaningful as to what we can look at. And it also is going to give Sebastian more time and staff more time to give us

909
04:42:19.760 --> 04:42:36.400
projections numbers with the case study that we're saying okay if we charge this much and we have traffic mostly on Friday, Saturdays and Sundays and all of these months it stays packed they can get a

910
04:42:36.400 --> 04:42:51.760
more realistic estimate of what might be in expected out of the the gen revenue generation. for it. So, I think that's um I agree with you, Mr. May, >> and I'm willing to put in the time in

911
04:42:51.760 --> 04:43:07.920
the meetings. It would be intense, but we could do it if we want to get it on this referendum. As Council Member Willis has said, the deadline and our city attorney talked about the non-binding. I mean, if we want to push for this, I'm willing to do it, but I

912
04:43:07.920 --> 04:43:22.240
don't think we would move forward until we we can see it. And our city staff is working hard to get those numbers. We obviously know the setbacks. I don't want to put more pressure on them, but um I'm just saying I I'm open and I will

913
04:43:22.240 --> 04:43:40.480
lead the charge on parking revenue um on what I believe uh as far as for the community, but I'm not just punting to 2027. I know we've put in hard work, but I think it would be prudent that we have these

914
04:43:40.480 --> 04:43:56.638
questions answered and we have a strong understanding of the budget and then we can we can run full speed. But with it being June, we're a little over a month out. So, >> Mr. Mayor, >> yes. >> We have 15 minutes left.

915
04:43:56.638 --> 04:44:12.000
>> I'm finished. >> Okay. >> You have nine minutes left. >> I think I rounded it up to 11, didn't we? >> Zoom out. We've got uh we're at 9.4. We've got a discussion on or an action on 9.5 city manager performance metrics

916
04:44:12.000 --> 04:44:26.560
and then we've got one public hearing item. I think it would be prudent to at least due to the advertising to at least try to get to that public hearing item if we can. Um do we want to take no

917
04:44:26.560 --> 04:44:42.878
action and seek our city attorneys if our intent is to take no action? City attorney. Uh do we need to make any motion or can we just proceed uh to the next item? >> Um you can proceed to the next item if

918
04:44:42.878 --> 04:44:58.240
you're taking no action. >> We can keep it simple and go right on. >> Yeah. >> Any opposed? Well, I don't want to I'm not forcing a position on it, but >> was this for item 9.6? >> 9.4.

919
04:44:58.240 --> 04:45:13.440
>> It's actually we're at 9.4 4 right now, but 9.5 I want to just look over to our city manager and take his guidance on handling that. No, we want to do 9.6. >> Can I can I make a suggestion? City manager.

920
04:45:13.440 --> 04:45:30.878
>> Um, we had discussed this with him. This was in regards to your uh reviews and Okay. >> Um, the city manager and I discussed him meeting with us one on-one quarterly. Is that correct? every six months.

921
04:45:30.878 --> 04:45:46.240
>> There were a couple options presented. >> Yeah, I liked the one where he discussed that we could meet with him in November because his review is due in dis in February and that way goal setting can be

922
04:45:46.240 --> 04:46:03.360
>> um addressed six months ahead because you need to give someone the ability to meet those goals. They need to know what they are to be able to meet them. So, I kind of like that option. Sure. >> Um, and now I'll let you >> Well, thank you. In the interest of time, I mean, this item can be tabled

923
04:46:03.360 --> 04:46:19.920
until next month if if you'd like to. I mean, essentially what you're going to do is schedule a workshop to set the goals and objectives that you have for me. And Mayor Prom referenced one of several options that, you know, you can consider when it comes to evaluating the

924
04:46:19.920 --> 04:46:36.958
um accomplishment of those goals and objectives. But for tonight, if you want to table this to July's meeting, uh I would recommend that you definitely schedule a workshop by August then. So talk about this in July to schedule a workshop in August and then we can discuss the options from there.

925
04:46:36.958 --> 04:46:54.400
>> Okay, just to be clear, we are moving on from 9.4. >> Okay, as stated in 9.5, um and our city manager, what do we want to do here? I make a motion that we table the uh the subject until our next meeting in July.

926
04:46:54.400 --> 04:47:12.080
>> Which item? 9.5. >> Item 9.5, city manager performance metrics. >> Thank you. Got a motion by council member King, a second by council member Shoryak. Any discussion on the motion? Seeing none, city clerk, >> mayor Tim Jackson,

927
04:47:12.080 --> 04:47:28.400
>> four. >> Council member King, >> four. Mayor Morrison >> four. >> Council member Shiaak >> four. >> And council member Willis >> four. >> Record show 9.5. It's adopted to be tabled.

928
04:47:28.400 --> 04:47:45.120
Moving on to our public hearing item 9.6. This is the first reading and public hearing of ordinance number 03206 repeal of the community appearance board. Before going to our city attorney, I want to let know that this is a public hearing item and we do have

929
04:47:45.120 --> 04:48:02.240
a card on it. So after our city attorney reads, we'll ask any technical questions. We'll go to the public, come back to the council. City attorney. >> Okay. First reading of ordinance number 03-2026, an ordinance of the city council of the city, Cape Canaveral, Bvoulevard County, Florida, abolishing the community

930
04:48:02.240 --> 04:48:16.958
appearance board, reassigning the community appearance uh review process to be performed cons concurrent with the site plan or building permit process as applicable, adopting conforming amendments, providing for the repeal of prior and consistent ordinances and

931
04:48:16.958 --> 04:48:33.760
resolutions, incorporation into the code, severability, and an effective date. So, >> that's uh you know it's his first reading and uh we don't have anybody from the community development department on this one, but um I'd be happy to give you a quick summary.

932
04:48:33.760 --> 04:48:51.920
Um it was requested that um the city council consider um abolishing the community appearance board similar to what the council did with the board of adjustment and then consolidate those responsibilities um for for um streamlining with the site

933
04:48:51.920 --> 04:49:09.680
plan review process. And if a site plan is not uh you know concurrently um necessary with a community appearance review then it would be done concurrent with the building permit process. So this ordinance would streamline the

934
04:49:09.680 --> 04:49:27.440
process and um incorporated into site plan or the building permit uh process depending on um you know the the the issue. So, this ordinance does not revise the community of parents standards that are uh that have been on

935
04:49:27.440 --> 04:49:43.440
the books for for a number of years. Um I can tell you from what staff relayed to me um that the city is having um issu serious issues with um board membership

936
04:49:43.440 --> 04:50:00.400
and I think the cab is down technically to just one member. Um, so that's impacting the ability to uh conduct that business. So the the thought was um you know by presenting this ordinance for um for the

937
04:50:00.400 --> 04:50:18.798
city council's quick review um you know that would solve the the recruitment process and um staff relayed to me that um and this would also you know limit or reduce the the the workload and the time

938
04:50:18.798 --> 04:50:36.240
and expense to actually present agenda items, conduct meetings after hours etc. So it has a you know a small I think financial um uh benefit as as well. Um so I' I'd be happy to answer any

939
04:50:36.240 --> 04:50:53.920
technical questions this um if the council approves this on first reading then um it's scheduled to go to the planning and zoning board for review and recommendation um at its meet meeting coming up here in early July. The thought process was, you

940
04:50:53.920 --> 04:51:09.200
know, since it involves the potential abolishment of a board, uh the feedback from the council, I was thought that we get some feedback first before presenting such an ordinance to the planning and zoning board. So that's why the ordinance is being presented to you

941
04:51:09.200 --> 04:51:25.040
on first reading before P&Z recommendation. Mayor, >> yes. Thank you, city attorney. Any questions for our city attorney or city staff? >> No question, Mr. Mayor, but the time is running nigh again. >> Let's extend it.

942
04:51:25.040 --> 04:51:41.320
>> I'll make a I'll make a motion to extend for 15 minutes. >> I'll second that. >> Got a motion to extend for 15 minutes. Any further or by Mayor Tim Jackson and a second by Council Member King. Any further discussion?

943
04:51:42.000 --> 04:51:59.520
>> Seeing none, that will take us to what is that? I'm scared to speak. 110. >> Bless you. >> But the records show the council's got my back and stated basic elementary math of 11:08

944
04:51:59.520 --> 04:52:15.760
at this hour. Thank you. Any further discussion? Seeing none, city clerk, >> mayor prom Jackson for council member King >> four. Mayor Morrison >> four. >> Council member Shiaak >> four. >> And council member Willis

945
04:52:15.760 --> 04:52:33.000
>> four. So, we were at any questions after our city attorney read and explained the summary of the ordinance for him or city staff. Seeing none, got a card. Dr. Roberts, please come forward. When you're ready, take your time.

946
04:52:33.120 --> 04:52:49.840
And if anyone else would like to speak on this item, this is a public hearing item. First reading of ordinance number 032026. More than welcome to come forward after Dr. Roberts is finished. Floor is yours. Um, one of the concerns that I'm just

947
04:52:49.840 --> 04:53:04.798
expressing the the value of the community appearance board in the past has been in terms of its early years was really to look at the harmony of colors, design, etc. with the neighbors in that particular area of whatever proposal was

948
04:53:04.798 --> 04:53:20.718
being given to the board to look at. And it's not clear to me in what's being proposed as the alternative to the community appearance board as to whether how that will be addressed, who will be taking care of that. And in my observation, we went through a period of

949
04:53:20.718 --> 04:53:37.520
time with the city kind of almost deactivated the advisory boards and that includes community parents, beautifification, etc. Some boards that really had some very meaningful citizen participation and value added. And I think what's worrying me now is if we we're going to

950
04:53:37.520 --> 04:53:53.920
eliminate the community appearance board, you know, and give that assignment to another capability for the city, but I'm not real clear that they're going to take on these broader appearance of the city roles that were envisioned originally with the board. And you may remember that we in the

951
04:53:53.920 --> 04:54:10.560
visioning effort um back in the 2010 time period, we did look at um the facades of this of the city businesses um in terms of coming up with some kind of a maybe a cultural um

952
04:54:10.560 --> 04:54:25.520
implication for the city through whatever facade was decided. And it to me the community appearance board was dealing with that that type of thing. And so when we eliminate it, I'm not sure that we're assuming that another capability is going to take that type of

953
04:54:25.520 --> 04:54:40.160
review on as part of the responsibilities they would have. So that's my first concern because it's not clear in at least what I'm reading, but I may not have read it to the point that I should have because I'm just looking at the agenda. I'm not looking at the

954
04:54:40.160 --> 04:54:58.240
back here. Um, and secondly, to me, it's suggesting a healthy review by the um, city council, city staff of our advisory boards altogether because I'm just really worried that we're losing the sense of their original purpose. Maybe they're not to be here, maybe they are,

955
04:54:58.240 --> 04:55:12.878
but I'm just sensing as a long-term resident that we're losing the intent of the advisory boards that were originally created. And I just think a thoughtful review of the boards would be extremely timely. Um it it's just like you were

956
04:55:12.878 --> 04:55:30.080
mentioning uh Mr. Mayor that the lack of resident interest in serving is sometimes resulting from this. So I just think that it's a I know we've got a lot to do right now as a as a city and certainly you as council and staff. I think there's a healthy review of our

957
04:55:30.080 --> 04:55:46.080
advisory boards reactivation or initiating some um to where they really have an intended clear purpose and value added. So, I'm glad to see the council taking on some of these decision roles. So, I just wanted to compliment you all for doing that like with PNC coming

958
04:55:46.080 --> 04:56:02.958
forward with your site plans so the residents are not u blindsided by some of these developments. So, anyway, thank you very much for the opportunity to comment. And I apologize for not reading the ordinance. It may actually clear clarify some of those questions I had.

959
04:56:02.958 --> 04:56:22.958
>> Thank you very much. Anyone else would like to speak on this public hearing item? Ordinance 03 20226. Seeing none, we'll go ahead and close public participation. Bring it back to the council. Council, I just want to

960
04:56:22.958 --> 04:56:41.040
initially respond to the public comments we heard from Dr. Roberts and directly to Dr. Roberts who's with us here today. Um, all I got to say is amen. I think you know that I'm going to be very open and transparent here. Uh when I ran, one

961
04:56:41.040 --> 04:56:57.760
of the the points that I stated to residents and I said this to our city manager was that public input had diminished and that the question was well what is

962
04:56:57.760 --> 04:57:16.000
evidence of that? And I pointed out that may not be perfect but one example my theory was that the board participation the number of boards back when you served in prior had actually

963
04:57:16.000 --> 04:57:32.638
diminished and so here I am today behind the dis honored to be here and we are literally abolishing boards so I don't feel good about this. But as I'm working through it and I'm and we

964
04:57:32.638 --> 04:57:49.280
haven't made the decision, the proposal is there. We made the decision of one, which that one was never one that I took issue. But correct me if I'm wrong, the board was the beautifification board. And I think the role and intent to your

965
04:57:49.280 --> 04:58:05.520
first point of that board, I think we all want that board. What happened was that the that board was abolished. It was repurposed to the community appearance board. The economic overlay district was created and they were given

966
04:58:05.520 --> 04:58:22.718
significant responsibility on major projects i.e. 150 room minimum hotels that stressed a lot of the residents out and caused and who approved this and it it it was a weak answer for the council to go

967
04:58:22.718 --> 04:58:38.160
oh the board the board approved. That wasn't us the abort. And we and I think we've been really focused on trying to get the liability and accountability back to us. Is abolishing it the process? I'm going to dig into this one. We're

968
04:58:38.160 --> 04:58:52.798
going to have another reading. I think abolishing the process at a minimum is that it would go through that board. But I am with you. I do not want to lose residents giving advice on those things

969
04:58:52.798 --> 04:59:08.638
that you talked about within our city cuz there are so many residents that are passionate about the be the just the beautifification of the city. giving the council feedback, true advice on the aesthetics of buildings, but prior to

970
04:59:08.638 --> 04:59:25.680
that is just the aesthetics of our public property, our spaces, beach crossovers, and those things. And so before this uh the second reading, it would be good if we had a chance to get together and to address your your

971
04:59:25.680 --> 04:59:41.680
two points on if this is going to abolish all functions of their roles. Who is advising the council on that niche of beautifification? What was the old

972
04:59:41.680 --> 04:59:56.480
responsibilities of the beautifification board? And my understanding was we had a beautifification text, we had a fire or beautifification millillage, we had a fire millillage, we had a police mill, we had a library millillage, we had like five millages. Those were all

973
04:59:56.480 --> 05:00:14.080
consolidated into general government and a lot of the boards. It's Joanne Muny. I'm just naming old names of folks who were so passionate and got involved in so many others who really cared sort of had a distaste and a new direction was

974
05:00:14.080 --> 05:00:30.000
set to respect the decision of that council. But I always thought that was special what I would call old Cape Canaveral that was turning a leaf. My hope is that this council we can work together and restore that function.

975
05:00:30.000 --> 05:00:45.280
But the priorities what I'm reading today are very high for me on the procedures of this board. That's all I want to say. Um if the best path on this first reading, I think we should move my opinion is unless council has further

976
05:00:45.280 --> 05:01:02.160
discussion, we move forward this. But before second reading, if it makes sense to amend it to maybe with our city attorney's advice, can we should we keep it alive and repurpose other functions? Would that save us time and be more efficient? Rename it, whatever. That'd

977
05:01:02.160 --> 05:01:19.040
be fine. Or do we just start over? Either way, that's all I got to say. I am in support of this, but I hear um Dr. Roberts loud and clear and I share the same concern and spoke with our city manager about it. So, if we need to move forward, I know it's late. I'm happy to

978
05:01:19.040 --> 05:01:35.080
do that. >> Are you ready to entertain a motion, Mr. Mayor? If there's no further discussion, seeing none, please. >> Okay. Uh well, I'll move to uh consider the approval of ordinance number 03-2026

979
05:01:35.200 --> 05:01:52.400
um on its first reading. >> I'll second. >> Got a motion by council member King, a second by council member Willis. Any further discussion? Seeing none, city clerk, >> mayor prom Jackson >> four. Council member King

980
05:01:52.400 --> 05:02:06.400
>> four. >> Mayor Morrison >> four. >> Council member Shiaak >> four. >> And council member Willis >> four. Let the record show item 9.6 first reading public hearing ordinance number 03206 passes 50 which takes us to the

981
05:02:06.400 --> 05:02:22.560
end of our public hearing items. We have an item for discussion that was uh consensus was taken to add on. We'll call that 10.1. Respecting the format of our agenda to

982
05:02:22.560 --> 05:02:38.718
discuss the 250ear anniversary. This is a write in agenda item. It would not appear. It was added on. Council member King. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. um had a conversation with our city manager uh last week during our one-on-one in which

983
05:02:38.718 --> 05:02:53.440
we discussed the fact that um there is very very little being done to observe and recognize the 250th anniversary of our country and um I understand that staff is very very

984
05:02:53.440 --> 05:03:08.798
worked and so I thought well let's let's have the council take this on. It doesn't have to be anything big, but it can be something memorable to, you know, again, observe the 250th birthday. So,

985
05:03:08.798 --> 05:03:25.360
um I happen to uh I put together a group of a list of things that we might be able to do and um I just happened to mention it to Laura Gandandy who was outside when I was leaving the city hall and she said, "Oh, I've got all all

986
05:03:25.360 --> 05:03:40.638
kinds of ideas." So on her own on her own initiative, she put together a list which you have in front of you of different things that we could be doing now at this late hour. I don't think we want to go through this list and dis

987
05:03:40.638 --> 05:03:58.400
discuss this. But if we could if Huh? What? >> I just I just saw one I want to discuss. >> You do? >> No. >> Excuse me. >> Okay. So we're looking at the time here on the clock. I think we've got three minutes left on this particular motion.

988
05:03:58.400 --> 05:04:14.878
So, Mr. Mayor, what would you like to do about this situation right now? >> Follow your lead. >> Okay. Um, Council Member King, can I jump in real quick? >> Please do. Um, one of our vendors about two and a half weeks ago contacted me

989
05:04:14.878 --> 05:04:31.120
and he was surprised that we didn't have something on our website for the uh, America 250 and he called me and he said, um, you know, Mayor Pro Tim Jackson, I'm I'm wanting to check on you guys cuz you always have everything

990
05:04:31.120 --> 05:04:45.040
going. I said, we really have full plates right now and that kind of thing. he has offered up a uh to bring their grill trailer over and pay for hamburgers and hot dogs if we give a

991
05:04:45.040 --> 05:05:02.320
headcount. So, um if we decide that we can do something and if it's a picnic situation, I've got that covered. I think that I could probably get a couple of the restaurants to donate lettuce and

992
05:05:02.320 --> 05:05:18.160
tomatoes and condiments, things like that. Um, Tom has a Sam's membership, so we got paper plates covered, right, Tom? Um, >> we're looking at the clock, too. I I don't want to I don't >> Five minutes.

993
05:05:18.160 --> 05:05:33.120
>> All right. Okay. All right. So, it sounds like sounds like you've you've got some balls in the air that can help us with this. Okay. May I suggest that you take a look at the memo that Laura Thank you, Laura,

994
05:05:33.120 --> 05:05:50.718
very much. uh put together and also she designed a flyer that we could use >> as part of our um time is of the essence tonight and also for this. We've got two weeks to pull this together. And I I'm

995
05:05:50.718 --> 05:06:08.480
wondering if we should have a workshop to discuss it as soon as possible so that we can get our affairs in order. We can decide what we want to do and then move forward. and I will need to check and make sure, you know, based on what date we do this

996
05:06:08.480 --> 05:06:25.040
with the vendor, but he was really wanting to help. So, do we need to have another meeting? >> I think we do. >> And we're running out of time. Yes. I think during normal work hours for our city staff, if if our city manager would be fine. >> Well, my question that motion of a time

997
05:06:25.040 --> 05:06:42.718
>> Well, and my question is this. Does a city manager does city staff who I know is stressed have time to assist with this? >> We will make time to um because I mean I'll order things, coordinate things.

998
05:06:42.718 --> 05:06:58.240
I'll volunteer up my time to help >> because it's important to me. It's important to our city. >> Sure. >> I know. I'm sure I'm sure Tom will go to Sam's >> Councilman. Sure. He's like the greatest shopper

999
05:06:58.240 --> 05:07:15.200
ever. That's why I keep saying that and I'm sure count. So I think that my point is I'm willing as one of five to jump in and help if it puts stress on staff. >> Well, we're here to help. I think the question is is do you need to workshop

1000
05:07:15.200 --> 05:07:30.878
to discuss what you're going to do? Uh and if you do, when is that workshop going to take place? And uh we can have staff be present for that workshop to fac help facilitate these conversations. Yeah. I don't have to go to work until Saturday, so I'm free. >> And you have public advertising

1001
05:07:30.878 --> 05:07:46.160
requirements to meet. >> Yes. >> Or a workshop. Yeah. >> So, let's start there. What would be the soonest that our city clerk, if we confirm tonight, could advertise? I think 48 hours would be >> right

1002
05:07:46.160 --> 05:08:02.320
>> minimum. And I'm not >> That's what I'm told. >> Out of turn here. They would have to speak. >> What? We're at Tuesday. >> I know. >> Well, I mean this Friday. >> This Yeah. At the >> absolute soonest.

1003
05:08:02.320 --> 05:08:17.840
>> If a if a decision was made to meet this Friday, city manager, would I would that be >> absolutely >> coordinating with our city clerk. >> Okay. >> Now, assuming I've got a I've got a leave, but I might even be able to dial

1004
05:08:17.840 --> 05:08:35.200
in if it's later. Okay. So, let's do um >> let's make it early Friday. >> Yeah, I get later in the afternoon. I could meet earlier. >> I will say we have coffee with the city manager at 10:00 a.m. That goes from 10 to 11. >> Okay.

1005
05:08:35.200 --> 05:08:51.280
So, what would be most convenient for you, city manager, post 11 or prior to 10? Um I don't know how I mean I'm available as and we can have staff doesn't come in until 8:30, >> right?

1006
05:08:51.280 --> 05:09:09.680
>> Um and um I'll need to duck out next door for the meeting at 10:00, >> right? >> If you want to do 11 if that's not >> 11:00 is fine. How about the Let's Let's pull the group here. 11 o'clock on Friday morning here at city hall.

1007
05:09:09.680 --> 05:09:26.320
>> I would have to dial in. I have plans. I need to extend the meeting 10 minutes. >> Oh, that's right. >> I think if we have a few, we're we're fine. I mean, if we all can't be here, but it's crucial, I think, that >> you're there and I'll be there 11:00 Friday here.

1008
05:09:26.320 --> 05:09:41.120
>> Here, >> here >> and not at the Cape Center. >> Well, coffee with city managers at the Cape Center at 10. >> Well, I was thinking, would it be easier to just >> do it at the Cape Center? >> You mean right when that wraps up? Oh, that would be fine. >> Your preference. Maybe the public will be there still to participate.

1009
05:09:41.120 --> 05:09:55.440
>> City manager will already be there. >> Either or. I think we stay flexible. Yeah. But for advertising, you need to know the location. So, yeah, it's not that easy, is it? >> Um, >> what about recording and all that minutes?

1010
05:09:55.440 --> 05:10:14.798
>> Yeah. So, uh, yeah, I mean, I'd be willing to pick up some lunch or I mean, just if it's a few of us. >> Sure. It's right during lunchtime. And >> yeah, chicken tenders at Publix. Everybody likes them. >> Absolutely. Um Okay. So 11 is that the

1011
05:10:14.798 --> 05:10:32.638
11 o'clock at the Cape Center. >> Okay. >> All right. >> Cape Center. >> Yeah. >> Friday. >> Does that work? City manager. >> Well, does that work for the clerk to have a workshop at the Cape Center? >> Okay. >> City attorney doesn't need to be there.

1012
05:10:32.638 --> 05:10:51.600
>> But he's invited if he likes chicken tenders. >> He's invited. anyone. I'm just thinking like it's it's very short notice. So, >> do we have to take a vote on that or is that just a >> We do. >> Yeah. I think to schedule a meeting, we we should >> uh roll call vote. So, if you want to

1013
05:10:51.600 --> 05:11:07.120
move the time, location, yeah, and uh >> day. >> Okay. I make a motion that we meet together this Friday. What is the date? Friday. >> For a workshop. >> For a workshop. um the 19th of June uh

1014
05:11:07.120 --> 05:11:24.878
at 11:00 at the Cape Center to discuss America's celebration. >> Excellent. >> Thank you. >> I'll second the motion. >> All right. >> Got a motion by Council Member King, a second by Mayor Prom Jackson.

1015
05:11:24.878 --> 05:11:41.840
Any further discussion? City clerk, is that day, time, location, and subject of the meeting sufficient >> for you? >> Thank you. >> Okay, >> city attorney, final check with you. Any issues on the legalities of that

1016
05:11:41.840 --> 05:11:57.840
meeting? >> Okay, excellent. Seeing none, city clerk, please call the role. >> Mayor Prom Jackson, >> four. >> Council member King, >> four. >> Mayor Morrison, >> four. >> Council member Shiaak, >> four. and council member Willis

1017
05:11:57.840 --> 05:12:12.638
>> four. >> Okay, >> thank you everybody. >> Hey, thank you. >> I'll report it. >> We are now at reports. I got some preliminary notices from council member Willis and mayor prom Jackson if we

1018
05:12:12.638 --> 05:12:29.040
could uh extend for five minutes so that we can do reports unless both of them want to forfeit. So otherwise we could adjourn but reports are important. Our city manager needs to >> uh take a hotel room tonight. He's he's going to be doing a U-turn.

1019
05:12:29.040 --> 05:12:44.718
>> Make a motion to extend the meeting five minutes. >> I'll second the motion. >> Got a motion by Council Member Willis, second by Mayor Bertim Jackson to extend the meeting for 5 minutes, which would take us to 10:20 or 11:20. >> Oh no.

1020
05:12:44.718 --> 05:13:00.400
>> Any further discussion? Seeing none, city clerk, >> mayor prom Jackson, >> four, >> council member King, >> four, >> Mayor Morrison, >> four, >> council member Shiaak, >> four, >> and council member Willis,

1021
05:13:00.400 --> 05:13:18.560
>> four. >> Let the record show 50 to extend to 11:20. Reports, we'll start with on council member King. >> Um, I'm going to keep it very, very brief. I I attended the IMO uh this past

1022
05:13:18.560 --> 05:13:37.760
month in Bokeh and um found that it was very very informative and um eager to go to the next one either in Orlando. So anyway, that's that's basically it for me. Thank you,

1023
05:13:37.760 --> 05:13:53.360
>> Council Member Shory. >> I also attended the EMO training in Boca Raton. was very informative. Learned a lot about how to be a council member. So, and met a lot of people did a lot of networking and very interesting program.

1024
05:13:53.360 --> 05:14:09.840
Um, also did meet and greets with the our fire and rescue and the finance department working my way around the city. And also I wanted to throw in there um I guess I I don't know if this is an item for discussion or something but I I know we've addressed Filillmore

1025
05:14:09.840 --> 05:14:25.760
and the other half of that is I've always heard Filillmore Jackson. Can I wanted to bring it up can we create an ordinance to to um prohibit people from keeping their boarding their buildings boarded up permanently? I guess is the question. I wanted to see

1026
05:14:25.760 --> 05:14:40.798
what the council thought about that briefly. I don't want to make it an agenda item for tonight, but >> I'd be interested in discussing it if you want to add it onto the next agenda. >> Yeah, >> absolutely. >> And then the other thing we've kind of pushed the paid beach

1027
05:14:40.798 --> 05:14:58.958
parking out, but parking on our what I somebody coined the term the million-dollar parking lot. That's we have other names for it, but we won't say what they are. But um I'd like to look at using one of these apps to do something to generate some revenue there. And I I'll go ahead and

1028
05:14:58.958 --> 05:15:13.920
put that on next month's agenda as well. And another revenue I think we should do that no matter what. That's easy money. And that's it. >> Thank you, >> Council Member Willis. >> Uh yes, I'll just make it this one item.

1029
05:15:13.920 --> 05:15:30.878
uh at everyone's place you have a document that is a draft document by the National League of Cities Transportation and Infrastructure Services Committee and I serve on that committee and we had

1030
05:15:30.878 --> 05:15:48.160
the opportunity we were addressing the FAA and we had the opportunity to add in um concerns about Cape Canaveral and the Space Coast operations comparator and dealing with

1031
05:15:48.160 --> 05:16:02.878
launches and the document um the issues that warrant review. We're asking the FAA general accounting office to re-evaluate the FAA's approach

1032
05:16:02.878 --> 05:16:19.360
and it consists of a document that the city manager had mailed on our behalf to the FAA regarding the um the Starship launches and the impact on

1033
05:16:19.360 --> 05:16:35.280
the area. And this is just a good opportunity for us to keep our name out there that hey, we're having to deal with this. And I think it would be very good to keep us involved and be part of

1034
05:16:35.280 --> 05:16:50.958
the National League of Cities effort to have the FAA re-evaluate how they address impacts on communities. And if I would I'm just asking for consensus about from the council to

1035
05:16:50.958 --> 05:17:17.040
proceed with it. >> Um is your role in that committee to proceed with encouraging the FAA to I see here on page 11, >> right? Page 11. Yes. >> Um to proceed with the review.

1036
05:17:17.040 --> 05:17:37.680
>> Well, to proceed with uh this addition to their document and submission to the GAO and the FAA, uh I I think upon I mean having a chance to review it, review and understand it, I can speak for myself. If it's

1037
05:17:37.680 --> 05:17:54.000
something that's good for the community, I I think I would support it. When is the next meeting? Yes. >> Uh the next meeting I believe will be next week. >> Okay. And so you want you would need to know prior to that. >> Oh yes.

1038
05:17:54.000 --> 05:18:09.200
>> Okay. >> Preferably tonight if possible, but >> Oh, no. I understand. >> May I ask a question, >> please? >> Um Council Member Willis, how does this fit in with airports? Because rockets and airports are two different things.

1039
05:18:09.200 --> 05:18:26.718
>> Well, no. The FAA, the GAO, General Accounting Office is looking to have the FAA re-evaluate the impact of airports, noise, vibration, pollution, all of that. >> Uhhuh. >> And as it states in here, this example

1040
05:18:26.718 --> 05:18:42.240
is not presented as a traditional airport case study. Rather, it serves as a comparator for how rapidly evolving FAA regulated transportation activities may require adaptive life cyclebased review as operations

1041
05:18:42.240 --> 05:18:58.480
scale. >> Okay. >> So, it basically would be reiterating to the FAA the previous letter that the city manager sent. >> Okay. that we need to >> and andust. >> Well, and I'm trying to understand what

1042
05:18:58.480 --> 05:19:14.320
um you know, National League of Cities is doing here as far as what they're going for by lobbying for this because they lobby for everything. You know, these groups lobby for things and so I want to understand what's going on

1043
05:19:14.320 --> 05:19:30.360
before I say, "Oh, sure. I'm good with that." And so, um >> they're they're applying old metrics >> to new technology at airports

1044
05:19:30.560 --> 05:19:47.280
and they're wanting GAO is uh we're trying to get the GAO to look at having the FAA update what they do, how they evaluate things, and it just gives us an opportunity to

1045
05:19:47.280 --> 05:20:04.040
be part of the conversation. Is it a public meeting or is it recorded? >> No, it's not recorded. >> Okay, >> it's just a committee meeting. >> Yeah,

1046
05:20:04.240 --> 05:20:19.520
I think Council Member Willis is looking for uh support, which uh first of all, I want to say thank you. Appreciate that. I think this is a good example of us working together, so we all left hand knows what the right hand's doing. Um, I think some concerns were raised by Mayor

1047
05:20:19.520 --> 05:20:35.520
Pro Tim Jackson Jackson, my opinion would be in good faith that proceed and Mayor Pro Tim Jackson or any other council member at this time or any future raises concern they would address that to our city manager or directly if

1048
05:20:35.520 --> 05:20:51.680
not respecting Sunshine Law. I think city manager and upon review uh proceed and and go forth and just I think that's just the best way to handle it at this hour. >> Yeah. I just and I'm not going to keep

1049
05:20:51.680 --> 05:21:08.798
everyone over this. I mean, whatever the council wants to do on this, I just don't we're we're not termed a, you know, we're not, yes, we're part of FAA regulations and they license the ships for Starship and all of the launch

1050
05:21:08.798 --> 05:21:24.240
vessels out there, but we really don't fall in with the airport. What to me is important is for uh spaceport regulations to be put into place. And so I'm not sure lumping with airports is the way to do it. And council member

1051
05:21:24.240 --> 05:21:40.798
Willis may be able to communicate that to the board that you're on. That's my only concern because airports have different standards and they're under different federal regulations than launches and even though they report to the FAA. So that's my only thing. But I

1052
05:21:40.798 --> 05:21:56.718
think it's good to communicate with DC and I appreciate you doing this, Council Member Willis. I just wonder h what's the best way for us to approach it and what will this help us with as a city

1053
05:21:56.718 --> 05:22:11.680
because we're not responsible for the base and we're not responsible for NASA and we're not responsible for you know the spaceport so as a city um and I know I'm seeing the issue changes and all of

1054
05:22:11.680 --> 05:22:27.360
that and emerging operations and that kind of thing. So, you know, I'm just I have questions, I guess, and I can ask um the city manager and then he can get with you, Councilman Willis.

1055
05:22:27.360 --> 05:22:44.760
>> Well, thank you. But, um it only helps us to remain in the conversation, whatever way we can. It helps us and our and our residents deal with what is coming. So, thank you.

1056
05:22:44.878 --> 05:23:00.000
>> Thank you. I I think uh everyone take a look at that. Know that council member Willis is is going to try and keep the city in the conversation on issues that could impact our community. And um as you said, Mayor Pro Tim

1057
05:23:00.000 --> 05:23:18.080
Jackson, I think working with our city manager on any concerns on that is the best approach. Otherwise, thank you all and uh Mayor, anything else council member Willis at this time? No sir. Mayor Pro Tim Jackson reports.

1058
05:23:18.080 --> 05:23:33.920
>> Mine is going to be very quick because we're running out of steam and it's almost midnight. So, um I have one quick one that I'm going to cover and this is something that has been is out there floating out

1059
05:23:33.920 --> 05:23:48.798
online and I want to give an update on it so people know what it what the situation is. Um there's multiple media reports about a 94 unit townhouse, luxury townhouse development in Cape

1060
05:23:48.798 --> 05:24:05.680
Canaveral with um launch viewing decks on top >> and um they make it sound like it's a done deal and it's already everything in the works. I did verify with staff the

1061
05:24:05.680 --> 05:24:21.120
name of the company. Uh the location is Ever Home Living and he is his founder as you see from the report it says that he grew up in Cocoa Beach. That's not exactly true. He's a developer from

1062
05:24:21.120 --> 05:24:37.360
Miami. He develops in the Caribbean. He's also lived in New York. He has he says he surfed Cocoa Beach as a child. So, he has roots to the area. Um, but he is doing this in another location in

1063
05:24:37.360 --> 05:24:53.680
Sarasota. Um, and looking at developing, which is what his company does. Um, but I wanted people to know where all of these articles make it sound like this is a done deal in Cape Canaveral, it is.

1064
05:24:53.680 --> 05:25:09.360
Um he we have had preliminary meetings with our community development department about building and all of this. No meetings have happened since and no permits have been turned in. This

1065
05:25:09.360 --> 05:25:26.400
is the property in between Zerellas and Puerto D del Rio which literally that was property after I investigated I found out it was property that was owned by the condominiums and they were

1066
05:25:26.400 --> 05:25:43.600
already approved to build on those lots. So those lots are already have approval for development back from when the condos were built. Okay. So as this goes forward, it's just

1067
05:25:43.600 --> 05:25:59.840
something for our citizens to be aware of is that this developer is interested in building out with 94 units. I want to I my concern as I talked about earlier tonight is storm water management and

1068
05:25:59.840 --> 05:26:16.480
ensuring that that plant and Thurm Boulevard doesn't go underwater like we did have with the 14 in in December when that was flooded over in that area. We need to make sure that the people in that area can get back and forth to their homes and that the storm water and

1069
05:26:16.480 --> 05:26:32.480
and it's probably good for the city to be able to actually get to the wastewater plant which was flooded down that street. So, as we look at this, we're going to have to ensure that we're looking at the storm water requirements for it, but it was approved back with

1070
05:26:32.480 --> 05:26:48.240
the original condo development when it was put in. So, that's just a little update so that people will know what the situation is versus everything in the media that makes you sound makes it sound like they're dropping the shovel tomorrow over there. >> Mr. Mayor.

1071
05:26:48.240 --> 05:27:01.760
>> Yes, Council Member Willis. >> That that property was never part of the condominium complex because I live there. Um that was part of a assisted living plan development.

1072
05:27:01.760 --> 05:27:19.200
um the potential development will infringe upon the existing storm water. Um so that in my opinion, if 94 units were to go in there, they're going to have to significantly alter their storm

1073
05:27:19.200 --> 05:27:34.958
water situation. So because what we have now services the property for the condominium complex. So, thank you, Council Member Willis, because that's what sta what I the information I gave

1074
05:27:34.958 --> 05:27:49.280
was what staff told me and I knew you'd know because you're involved with that condo. But I'm concerned about the flooding over there as well. So, thank you so much for that info that y'all that wasn't owned by y'all.

1075
05:27:49.280 --> 05:28:05.840
>> Um, Mayor Prom, was is that um is that the area that now has uh the fencing around it? No. >> No. What? That's behind it. >> Oh, okay. >> Between it and and Puerto del Rio, there's a little retention pond and a a

1076
05:28:05.840 --> 05:28:21.360
green space around. >> So, so the fact that there's this very obvious fencing, um, does that indicate that there's something going on with that property now? >> I would assume silk fence. >> I'm talking about adjacent to

1077
05:28:21.360 --> 05:28:37.440
>> It's a different prop. Oh, is that the Wave Village property? That's >> W. That's a different owner in parcel, >> right? Okay. So, we don't >> butts it, I believe. >> Right. But we don't know that something is happening. I guess we check with our building department, but Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Thank you.

1078
05:28:37.440 --> 05:28:52.000
>> But just wanted to give that update so people wouldn't see these articles and think that it's already we're out there with shovels already. So, that's all. >> No, and I think we'll we'll get better with that and we'll learn. I mean this city internally is going through so many

1079
05:28:52.000 --> 05:29:06.958
leader I mean just changes whether I I sympathize with our city staff who is trying to keep all the balloons in this air during this economy. My reports are simple. I just want to echo a community

1080
05:29:06.958 --> 05:29:23.520
concern and um my hope is that we can at the next meeting or shortly give an update. I know our public I've gotten a few comments on the accessing the public records and my communication is we're we're working on it. I think we had

1081
05:29:23.520 --> 05:29:40.240
heard some things and so I just want to communicate that my hope is um there's anything that this council can do to support those efforts to as we're working through those challenges. I I I believe we would all support it and

1082
05:29:40.240 --> 05:29:55.920
thank you for all the hard work that you're doing today. But um that's it. I I have nothing else. >> Mr. Mayor, thank you. I make a motion that we end the this uh meeting tonight. We conclude.

1083
05:29:55.920 --> 05:30:00.760
>> Motion to adjurnn. >> Motion to adjurnn.