It is officially 6 pm June 16, 2025. And with that, I'm going to call the Destin City Council meeting to order. Up first is going to be the invocation by our one and only Pastor David Butler from the Faith Assembly Christian Church. Thank you for being here.
Would you bow your heads with me, please? Heavenly Father, we thank you first of all that you are the Lord over our city. We thank you for the beauty, your wonderful creation. We thank you for those in attendance tonight. I'm
reminded of the scripture that says how wonderful it is when we all dwell together in unity. I just ask that may everything be done in order. We pray Lord God that your peace would prevail.
We ask that tonight that you would be in charge and in control. Everything we say and do be pleasing to you. We pray for the peace of Jerusalem and we pray for the peace of destiny. Father, we just give you the praise and the glory and
honor for all good things come from above. And now the blessing in Numbers chapter 6 is this. May the Lord bless you and keep you. May his face shine upon you and be turned towards you. May he give you his peace. Amen. Amen. Thank
you for that. Councilwoman Aver, please with the pledge. Please join me with your hand over your heart. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and
justice for all. All right. Thank you for that. You may be seated. Thank you all for being here. Up first will be the agenda approval. And if we could, I would like to ask that we move up uh the public hearing E and make that first as an A1 and then go
into the public hearings. I'll make that motion to move that, mayor. Awesome. Do I hear a second? I'll second. Are you talking after the consent agenda? Uh yeah, of course. Yes. I'm just saying moving it up in the public hearing portion. Which one is it?
Uh E would become first and then we would go in the alphabetical order from there. So are you saying 5e would become 5A? Correct. Okay. Thank you. We have a full house. So trying to be
respectful of everyone's time. Second. If I may ask one question, please. Miss Cop, when you schedule these public hearings at a particular time and you move one up, does that does that not cause difficulties for those who are
trying to estimate when to be here and they may in fact miss? Uh, no, because we p published it for 6 p.m. So, everyone should be here. Okay. All right. Thank you for that clarification. Any other discussion? Seeing none, I'll call the vote on the
agenda approval. Yep, I hear you. All right. Eyes have it unanimously. So moved. 70. With that, we will move into the proclamation recognition and the public works safety committee 2024 2025 work plan.
Yes, sir. Thank you for being here, Mr. Green. Green Jim Wood. It's going to be a long one, guys. Get ready. It's going to be a long I'm going first. I get to get out of here, so enjoy it tonight. So So, uh, mayor and council, good evening. Thanks for having
me before you tonight to talk about our successes or not from our 2024 work plan and our new 2025 work plan. So in your packet you have our new 2025 plan signed and uh approved by my committee. I did add one thing that which is the motions we did last you can see what was
completed what was not. No big things other than the ebike motion, which I'll talk about later. And we had originally encumbered $64,500 for the pedestrian crosswalk on Airport Road for the linear trail. According to the note I got from Crystal this
afternoon, $54,000 has been spent, but is actually city money and not mine. So, I have to find out exactly where I'm at and I'll get back to you on. But, uh, we've got a couple of, uh, rapid flashing beacons in the works right now. council will be spending probably 20 to 30,000 on those
over the next couple months. Uh so in our work plan this my seven broad goals remain as they've always been. Uh for those in the audience that don't know we provide a citizens venue for rem for uh bringing community issues for
forward. We review plans as needed whether they're city mobility or other plans for safety issues. Uh speed humps come to my committee. LSV ebikes and associate issues come to my committee. Uh we have each one of my committee members has an area around town where we
drive around which we're doing right now and looking for things that are broke, not working, overgrown, and trying to get those things turned in so they can be cleaned up. Uh one of our focuses right now is what we call vision triangles, especially with the ebikes being faster. You need to be able to see
further when you're coming to a to an intersection or a ingress and egress point for a neighborhood. So, making sure things are cleared out hopefully. And we also get our standard 100 grand a year for safety type items if we spend it. If not, that money is usually rolled
back into our RNR for street resurfacing. Uh we did uh add one thing this year. So, I know that one of y'all's goals was to have the committees take a more active role in their own agendas. So, uh our cuto off for our committee is the
last Tuesday of the month. I then go in at 7:00 the next morning and tackle Mr. Bodie. We go through everything and see what's there and put our agendas together. Getting those out in a timely manner is still a work in progress, but that'll get done too. Um for 2025, just
a couple things I want to mention. Uh we have looked at ebikes over several meetings. Uh we actually did a motion and I have not closed the door. I've got to see uh Miss Cop again. and I told the city manager I want to talk to him and probably go by and see our city engineer and our new community development
director also which have not been involved in this yet. Three things we looked at. We have an old ordinance from 2018 for e- scooters back then escooters was the rage and they came about as fast as they went and they were gone. But we
did outlaw the rentals in town of those. Now, the way we define e- scooters, it was with seats, I think, and without the with seats begs the question, does that mean ebikes, too? So, but we'd like to make it more specific in there. And if
we do, if we update the ordinance, we can also put a speed limit in there if we want to. And we've talked about anywhere from 12 to 15. Most ebikes you purchase have speedometers on them. They're fairly easy to set, so it shouldn't be too hard. I have noticed on
Airport Road, we had big issues probably four months ago with really high-speed ebikes on the sidewalks. I've seen a mark decrease myself. I know I work with uh Dr. Young. We sent out flyers to the
top 10 to 15 businesses in town. Uh a stack of flyers for each one of them. I also took them to a chamber, put them on their website. I've taken them to a few other churches around town. So, I think the word is getting out. Um, and if you put it on a if you put a speed limit on
there that doesn't it's tough to enforce. So, you know, if you put a speed limit out there or some folks going to follow it, some folks will. If it's one more than does it now? Maybe that's good enough. We'll see how that goes. But I've seen a marked decrease in issues so far. Still some other issues
around town. To me, mainly vision triangle centered more so than just ebike centered. Uh we did have a class on road conditions. Usually public services goes out and checks roads every year for cracks and other things. We had a class for our folk to make us more useful in
that process. So now we're a whole lot smarter on how to do that. So we can help out now. We did have our uh open meetings and sunshine class from Miss Traml came and did that for us. We appreciate that. And right now we're doing our area reviews. I know I turned mine in a couple months ago. I focused
on some simple things like the telephone and cable boxes in the rightway. In my neighborhood, there's a bunch of them on the ground. They're broke. They're open to the weather. They can't possibly be meant to be that way. So, let's clean them up. Uh, and also the vision triangle issues. And I know we've cleaned up one already. I've got another
one that I'm working on now. Uh, and I will be back. Hopefully, we're going to get this timeliness down next year where I come see you at the end of the fiscal year for the results and the beginning of the fiscal year for the new plan. I'm kind of combining a little bit tonight.
I will be back to see you at the end of the year for FY2025 results. So, subject to that, I will ask for any questions. Just for anyone watching in the audience, what is a vision triangle one more time? A vision trial. So, if you come to a to a to an ingress or egress
or intersection, you're looking left to right for an ebike on the sidewalk and there's trees, poles, whatever in the way, you can't see. With the speed of those things, your reaction time is that much slower if you can't see far enough. Trying to keep those areas cleaned out
as much as possible so folks can see. Gotcha. I've had a couple of people uh Larry or maybe you know if if someone wants to report something like this I know it's kind of a coming out of neighborhoods is probably going to be the primary what I want to get exactly um so with that what would be the best way for us to field those if citizens
are seeing this you know on their commute going to the store they can certainly email my office or public works office and uh those links are on the website and we'll be sure to give them the appropriate attention. Gotcha. All right. I put some data out
on nextdoor.com last time I saw that question. Uh so I put a process out there for folks to be able to use includes uh city website uh numbers and contact for Mr. Bod over at public services for myself. So however we get it, we don't care as long as we get it. Awesome. I just want to make sure when I
when I field them, I want to make sure we we get them to the right places. All right. I got a couple on the board for you. Uh Councilwoman Traml. Thank you, Mr. Wood. Uh good job. Thank you. Um, and I know your committee is extremely active. I just have one question for you. Uh, do you have all of
your members? I'm missing one. Okay. So, how can we help you get that one? We can appoint one. Okay. Okay. I'm not going to say who. I don't do that here. So, I believe it's Mr. Bagby. I'll I'll Cool. All right. And and I I I
would ask the eBike motion that I mentioned, I'm going to be bringing that forward sometime soon. I need a legislative sponsor. I'll be that sponsor. I'll be glad. Either one of you. Perfect. Believe me, I've been bugging him enough about ebikes. Not a problem. Any other questions? Oh, yes. Uh okay,
she's good. Uh Councilman Braden, thank you. Thanks for being here, Jim. No problem. Um, just for your info, um, a couple days ago I did witness a ebike right there on Airport Road into a vehicle. He was eastbound. The vehicle
was what going westbound. Is that the one that was on the road right there in right in front of your your neighborhood? Yep. I know where you're at. Okay. Um, yeah, the it was a juvenile on the ebike, but he did a little skint knee. Not bad, but he did do about $1,000 worth of damage to the
vehicle. Y um but deputy did show up. There's a report on that. Cool. Good. Perfect. Thank you, Councilman Schmidt. Mr. Wood, thank you as always. Um I appreciate your time and the committee's time. So, you have a status of all of
these important things y'all been doing and they all say complete next to them which is exciting. Yeah. Up to Yeah. mean so I guess the uh you mentioned the ebike motion that we brought to you guys which is one item but what I am not seeing unless I'm missing it is there's
goals for this the committee and those goals I believe are typically the same mean throughout the years but yes are we missing the actionable items that y'all are working on to specifically do this coming year in this on this plan is that
I'm missing I suspect you might be asking about the the the sheet that I saw after I had completed most of my work plan. There was a a new sheet that I saw that I did not incorporate this year. I will do that next year. So, when I look at my broad goals and objectives, if you
look at my planner, there are some some bulletized items underneath. Those are the things I look at under each one of those things for measuring what we do or don't do. Uh that's the way I've done this for a while. And and if you want me to do the individual sheets, I'm happy to do that.
like the ebike specifically isn't even mentioned in your in your work plan. Uh that's one of our goal that's one of those broad goals and objectives is the ebikes along with LSVs. That's all rolled. Maybe I missed the ebikes, but I just wanted to make sure that it wasn't missing because I know that is a big
item. Yeah. So, thanks. Not a problem. Anything else? Right. Yep. Uh Councilman Bagby. So, who is doing area 7 until I can find somebody from Crystal Beach to fill that? See, in fact, that's the one that I'm missing right now, I think. Yeah, it
is. Uh, let me see. Let me look here. Hang on a second. Area 7. Where's my area at? Oh, yeah. There's nobody there's nobody assigned to that one right now. So,
okay, that that would be a wrong answer. I understand. Don't be passing the buck now. I I'd like to get my seventh person who will fix that problem for you. So, all right. Councilwoman Abear. Thanks, Mayor. Um, thanks, Jim, for the
report. Um, I have a quick question on the LSVs. I know you've sent out the information to all the different resources about the ebikes, our LSVS. Um, did you by any chance when we did put that as part of something we wanted
to encourage? Is there any word of like what you did for the um ebikes? Did you put anything out to those that are in charge of allowing those to be part of their rentals or part of their units? Uh that you can't have children just in a
regular um seat belt. They need to be in a car seat. Um because I've seen a few and called Jason and had like, "Hey, I got somebody here on Airport Road. There's nine of them on a cart and five of them are under the age of four." Well, I mean that the the flyers we just sent out were ebike specific, not right
so much. We could we go back and do some more on LSVs. I would I would strongly encourage you to do that because and they don't they don't know when you when they pulled over at the light and I let them know, did you know your kids really need to be in a car seat? They were like what? They're in a seat belt. I'm like
this is like a car but worse. So yeah. So, if you could make that part of maybe some of the information that you put out, I think that would help help us stop the amount of people that have too many young kids on theirs. Okay. Thanks. Done. Thank you. Thank you. All right. With that, the board's cleared. Final words? All good. Thank you. Thank you,
sir. Appreciate it. Appreciate it. Mayor, I move that the city council approve the public works safety committee 2024 annual report and 2025 work plan. Second. All right. I got a motion. Second. Any further discussions? Seeing none, Ray, please call the vote.
My mouse fell asleep, sir. Yeah, so is my leg. All right. You want a vocal? Oh, there you go. All right. With that, my last comments to that is I guess if you want something done, give it to an army man. So, appreciate your service on both sides.
All right. With that, we'll move on. Uh public comments. I'm going to make one housekeeping rule here. Uh if you're here for anything on the public hearing uh portion of things, aka the docs or cross town connector, um I'm going to ask that you please hold your public comments for that specific time. There
will be a public comment window for each of those discussions labeled under public hearing. So, I'm going to open the public comments at this time and if you have uh anything to do or any kind of discussion that you would like to have with us, uh please hold if it's on any of the topics from the public
hearing. With that, I'm going to open it up and I'm going to start on my left, y'all's right. Does anyone here wish to speak on the public comment? Not anything related to docks. The docs come on. Yes.
and then just hit the gray button. It'll turn red. You don't need to hold it. Uh name and address and the floor is yours. Okay. Joanne Balon. I live in Marino Acres um on Planet Drive. Um I think we've seen a couple of
tragedies here in town um over the past week. um Panama City especially um two children 10 years old that have drowned. I'm going to leave that to let that investigation and everything go. But the other issue that I'm here
for and I'm pretty passionate about is we had an incident at the airport with the helicopters. And I know that Dest and the city of Dest does not control the FAA, the airspace, or the county,
but every time we have an election cycle that comes up, you guys ask for our votes. I'm here asking for your help. We live in a neighborhood and we have
concerns and it's not just the noise. It's now a safety issue for us. Also, I have these helicopters that are flying over my backyard 7 to 8 minutes apart. They start at 8:30 in the morning and
they continue till after dark. I want to know if the city of Dest or anybody here is willing to help the residents of this town that have safety concerns. I can choose where I drive. I
can choose to ride an LSB or not. I can choose to get into a boat. What I can't choose is a helicopter flying low over the top of my house. Is there anybody here that is willing to
help us? Because I understand we now have the FAA and the NTSB that's conducting an investigation. And I understand you can't get in the middle of that investigation. But I really think now is the time and it's actually
past time to stop talking about this and let's try to do something. I'm asking for either a committee, an airport committee, and I know some people are not for committees, but either an airport authority
committee to be established. And I got up here previously and asked about this. And I did get some good feedback. Either a committee or can we get the NTSB, the FAA, the tour company, the
citizens, the county, and a representative from the city to get everybody together for a town hall, a meeting, and let's start opening this discussion to see what we can come up with for solutions. I don't think it's
asking too much, but like I said, we do our civic duty and get out there and vote for you guys. It's not just me. There's a lot of people and this has been going on for many, many years. And we really do need to do something about it. And it starts with talking. Three
minutes. Wrap it up, please. Thank you. Thank you so much. Yes. All right. All right. If everyone's speaking, please name and address before you begin. First of all, uh, yeah, hit the gray button. It'll turn red. Yep. There
you go. So, I have a request. Um, it's three minutes each, right? Yes. So, mine goes a little bit longer and his is a little shorter. Can I just conjoin the nine minutes? Let's Let's figure out where this goes. Go ahead. Freedom of speech. Okay. So, I don't feel comfortable giving my
address. There's a family here that has stalked and harassed us. We had a restraining order on. I'll gladly give it to you um privately if that's okay. One second. Miss Cop, you're a resident of the city? Um yes. Okay. All right. Okay. Good evening. My name is Britney
Lee. Um I'm here tonight because the city of Destin is enforcing rules that has no legal authority to act. Let me be clear. Samson and Cody C compan companies are vending ice cream only below the mean high water line on state controlled land. Under Florida law, this
area is outside the city's jurisdiction. The mean high water line, which is stateowned land held in public trust under article X section 11 of the Florida Constitution, states the title to lands under navigable waters, including beaches below the mean high water line, is held by the state in
trust for all the people. This means the city has no jurisdiction over operations below this line. And Dustin knows this. You are in public for just a second. Can y'all start the timer? Yeah, Ray. The timer's not running. Oh, good. There you go. There's your There's Ray. God. There
you go. Magic. And Dustin knows this. Your own public information director Tamara Young stated to Dustin Log, "The water is not in our jurisdiction. No different than what we face." And not commenting on what takes place just out of our jurisdiction on land. Your own shoreline has an erosion control line
established by the state marking where a city's jurisdiction ends. That line has been repeatedly reinforced with federal and taxpayer funded beach restoration projects multiple times over the past 19 years. The state and federal government have been poured millions into managing
these beaches, not the city of Destin. So when your code officers come down to the shoreline, start writing tickets, threatening lawful state businesses and inventing ordinances that don't apply, you're not just overstepping, you're violating the law. The city of Destin has no legal authority to regulate or
enforce ordinances on those submerged lands and continuing to do so is just overreach. It's unlawful. We are fully licensed by the state of Florida. The citations and harassments we've endured are baseless. And let's talk about President GFream's ice cream has been vending on these beaches for over 20
years. The city has had no issue. There was no citations, no legal threats, no so-called code violations. But the moment my family starts doing the same thing legally and the moment the Rainbow Frost ice cream lawsuit lands on your desk, suddenly the city springs into action. But this goes far beyond
citations. We had to file a restraining order against multiple family members with the Rain Frost ice cream, the same individual behind the lawsuit because they were stalking us, showing up outside our home wearing ski masks in the middle of the night and threatening to stab and kill us because we if we didn't get off their beach. William Ellison even attempted to run me and my
unborn child over in the middle of the street in broad daylight. That's not only criminal behavior, it's terrifying. And yet, the city continues to act like we're the problem. But this goes beyond harassment. After threatening to call CPS and take my child away, your code officer forced us into unsafe waters, and I was stung by a stingray. I'm sure
you saw it on YouTube. Millions of views with a barb going through my ankle as a direct result. I suffered daily nerve damage because the negligence of your code officer has forced upon us. After the stingray incident, code officer Riley Wilson, afraid of getting sued, told us in a meeting would be a rescheduled with the mayor, the city
manager, the city attorney, and the council. I filed formal complaints, made multiple requests for that meeting. I was completely ignored. No one followed up. You didn't want a resolution. You wanted us gone. And let's address the elephant in the room. Dewey Destin Councilman who has a competing snowball
business named after him on his restaurant property voted to spend over $30,000 of your taxpayer dollars to pursue enforcement in an area that's not even under your legal control. This is textbook conflict of interest and it's a if this council continues to fund or act on it, it may become a matter of public
ethics or complaints or worse. We came here to do the right thing. We got licensed. We followed the law and we asked more than once to sit down with the city in good faith. Instead, you met with silence, harassment, enforcement far beyond what your jurisdictions allow. We've done nothing wrong. We are being treated as if we have simply
because it's politically convenient. This isn't about public safety. It's about protecting a monopoly. Rainbow Frost Ice Cream filed a lawsuit. Councilman Dewey Destin has a competing snowball business on his property. Voted to spend $30,000 in taxpayer money, y'all, to push out legal vendors. This
is complicit and it's an effort to control the market under the banner of government. But here's what you need to remember. I'm a disabled combat army veteran. I served this country to to defend freedom and capitalism, not to come home and be punished by a city to control who gets to concede. You're not
enforcing the law. You're trying to c crush competition. In doing so, you're treading on a very freedom I fought to protect. What we're asking for is simple. Apply the law where it actually applies. Respect the limits of your authority and stop allowing personal agendas to dictate public policy. I
still believe this council can do the right thing and choose integrity over influence. God bless you. Thank you, sir. He has a video he would like to show you. You want to state your name? Yeah. Say your name. Cody Thomas 314 to Quest to
Drive. You could just listen. Some vendors have been spotted selling things like ice cream. This vendor is doing it in this um wet sand water area of the beach. That wet sand water area though it is a part of Navar Beach is technically safe
property. Baker says because it's not regulated by the county. That was posted last week to Navar News. This is your code officer two days after I had a stingray go into my ankle. This is what he had to say on the beach to me. You
personally, we're trying to figure out everything is semantics, you know. I'm just trying to Maybe you should lay off. Maybe you should lay off. I am. Okay. I appreciate that. That's why I said I'm doing just talk to this manager. I'm trying I'm trying to set up. But you understand for
my friends to take my child away. I would never. I have an affection now. I think I think what I'm trying to do is set up a meeting between I want everyone I want all the Thomases Thomas Island I want um Gream anybody who wants to vend
on the beach to meet with the city attorney and we can try to figure out exactly once once the city attorney gets everything drafted up cuz I had tons of paperwork. I surveyed the beach. I hired somebody. You guys don't own the water. Oh, we know exactly. And that's why are
you pushing us off to the water then? No, we're we're trying to enforce from the mean low water. But that's not being deep. We're this whole knee deep mean water whatever is not knee deep. So why are you saying why do I have to get stung by a stingray barb go in my freaking ankle? Why? You're just
literally saying the knee water line is not knee deep. So make it make sense because Troy is the one that came up with the knee deep. I went in there last year. So I have him on camera saying I said can I see where it says knee deep? He said it's not. I make it up. It's what I say. It's knee deep cuz I say it
no longer works. So why exactly? So why is his rule still in effect? That's where the whole need thing's been around for 30 years. Sir, are you yielding our time to you? Yeah, this is the rest of my time now. All right.
Samson Thomas 5571 Magro circumstance. You guys are good. I watch I watch Sam. Yeah. I mean, he's We do our best. The water pushes you out and in. It's not like we're trying. We We spent thousands of dollars to Paul. We never follow the rules. But when it's like becoming very
vague and water is not even right, the needy is we've just been doing it, but now it's getting out of hand. like we know. I watched Cody and Sam the other day. They were both good. And then I watched um it was David and um and they were good. So I got no issue with it. As far as I'm concerned,
everybody's doing what they're supposed to do. That's what we we want to do. But we also know that it's not right that you guys the whole thing is made up cuz they Brian Davis literally said I it's what I say. It's not written. It's what I say. And Troy, both of them had both on camera. I said, "Can I see the law
where it says you own upcoming?" He said there is no law. It's what we say. All right. You have anything to say? Oh, yeah. Actually, so I have more time. So when we first came out, we we started walking on the beach for 3 weeks. No one said nothing. They said hi. We were in
the wet sand. Everything was fine for three weeks. Everything was fine. Coat said hi. Everything sheriff said hi. Everything was fine. Rain Rainbow Frost started making false complaints. You guys came out there and smacked tickets down us. So we built carts, spent thousands of dollars to go knee deep because you guys said go knee deep. You don't want us to swim with the sharks. But yet we came out this year. You
pushed us out with the sharks. Got stung by stingrays beyond waist deep which was negligent. And um it's maliciousness. And um now that all this is happening and you're pushing us up waist deep and you guys don't own the water. If you don't own the water and why are we getting ticketed every day, nothing's
changed. We were in the water just like last year. We got confused because you guys said it's the wet stand and then changed it to its need and then other code would come out and say oh no it's the wet stand. You guys five different different decisions from different codes. So, we were getting confused. But now we we rebuilt carts. Spent thousands of dollars to build carts to go up five
all the way up into the water code. You heard him. He said, "We're okay. Everything's okay." But bam, bam, bam, bam, $5,000 in tickets. 77 $12,000 in tickets. H how in the world be getting $12,000 in tickets when we're in the water and you guys don't own it. So, if you guys don't own the water, that'd be like me going to Walton County if I worked with for you guys for the code
going to Walton County writing tickets all day. You guys don't own the water. You don't own You guys don't You heard what he said and we we know the rules. We know we we know it's below the high line. We know you guys know this. So why are we have 10 $15,000 in tickets at our door all of a sudden? Because you guys are getting sued. When we were fined for
a year and a half, we were out there every day up to our knees every day. Got cuts in my arms working out there to hold that cart up there every day. But now we got 15 something thousand dollar tickets. Does not make sense. We don't understand why. And we're totally confused because we nothing's changed. We've been the car is doing it. What is
your problem? It's cuz he owns Humping Ice Cream and cuz she's suing you. That's the only thing we can think of and we know why. And that's you guys are treading and you're treading really hard. I sacrificed my life for this country and I don't appreciate it. All right. Thank you, Mayor. Um, ma'am.
Nope. Nope. Nope. Nope. No. No. Excuse me. No. No. No. We're not. We're not engaging. You're allowed to quiet us now. We're not engaging. Just tonight. This is a free country. We're not engaging. Next meeting, too. We're not engaging. Okay. Fantastic. Let's just do that every meeting then. Well, Kevin,
they um they do have there are code enforcement hearings tomorrow where both sides will have some due process and that's a public meeting if you want to attend. I'm sure the public would love to hear from its council after nine minutes of that. So, why can't the council talk? I'm sure
at the end. Yeah, there's a judicial hearing. Anyone else? Carrie Harbarger, 307 Mountain Drive. So apparently and who may not understand and I understand you can't make comments about this and there is a lawsuit but
what they don't know is just exactly what I told you. I've contacted the DP. We have a director her name is Elizabeth our and she actually has assistance and our city manager has spoke to that office but I spoke to them first. The D
was very clear and I have supplied you the documents that I received in 2004. The DP was very clear that they wanted the city of Destin, they hold title. That's what those documents, those D documents, they
hold title on that property, but they expect you to execute your ordinances to their property. The only oversight the D is going to do is with docks and buildings. They expect you to apply your ordinance to their property that you make money on. Now, with that being
said, it is no different than what you make me do. You have either an easement in my or an easement or right away, whatever it is, in my front yard, goes halfway into my yard. I'm responsible to maintain the city's property. I use it for my benefit. The D said there's no
difference. They do have title, but they expect you. That's why you saw when those attached beach management rules came with that D form. That's what you submitted to the DP, how you were going to handle their property that you
benefit off of. They're wrong. They do hold title to it, but they told you and that what they don't know is you're expected to hold your rules and your ordinances on their property. Any questions? And nobody harassed those people. So,
they're here illegally. They're getting the fines because they've been told repeatedly and they did not invent the wheel. You can ask Kelly Gates and Dave Baslac. I tried to hawk snow cones on the beach 20 years ago and that was a big no. And it was out of respect cuz
truth is my boundaries don't don't not permit me to. But out of respect, it was all agreed. We're not wanting to harass people at their beaches. Nobody wants just like the cinjun. I love his seat. I love his food. But he's hawking caden sausages on the beach this past weekend.
You start that. I'm doing jello shots. I'm doing You really want to start that if we're going to open it up? But what they don't know is that we hold we hold the jurisdiction over that property even though the state holds title. They expect it from you. Actually, they
demand it from you. Anyone else here? Public comments not on public hearing. Yes, sir. Yeah, just hit that gray button. Yep. Yeah. My name is Mike Malbury. I lived in Destin for a number of years
plantation. Okay. Um I read an article the other day that um we as citizens have right to 15 slips at the Destin Harbor. Sorry, I'm going have to stop you there. We're going to have to wait for the public hearing to have those public comments discussed. Okay.
Yeah. Anyone else? Seeing none, I'm going to close the public comments at this time and we'll go to the consent agenda. Do I have a motion? I'll make a motion to approve as is. Do I hear a second? I have a second from Councilwoman uh sorry.
I'm about to call you something else again. All right. With that, any discussion on the consent agenda? Seeing none, I'll call the vote. Eyes have it. 70. Moving on. City Manager, Mr. Larry Jones. Thank you, Mr. Mayor and Council. Uh, item 4 A is Mr.
Mike Carowway is here to have a conversation with council about our medical insurance renewal, including some u information about the difference card and how that'll impact our uh upcoming rates. Hey, Mike, thanks for being here. Hit that mic and the floor
is yours. Got it. Thank you. Uh, good evening, mayor, city council members. Thank you for allowing me to be here tonight and being early on the agenda. I appreciate that. Um but um I um I'm here as you mentioned about the group medical renewal. U we
want to spend most of the time and I know I'm limited to 15 minutes. I'm going to have to do this as quick as possible to cover a lot of information. Um to to kick it off, let me just tell you where we started. I know last year we talked about level funding and looking at the League of Cities plans and moving to a partially self-funded
plan. That's still the game plan. However, um after the renewal we received from Blue Cross Blue Shield this year, which started at just just over 20%. Uh we negotiated it down to 15, we went out to market. We looked at all the available carriers. Etna, United
Healthcare, League of Cities, CHA America, all the available markets. Everyone declined to quote on us due to our ongoing medical conditions and except for United Healthcare. So, uh, we shared that information. United
Healthcare came in very, uh, competitive. They were, um, about 7% below, um, Blue Cross Blue Shield's PO renewal and about 14% below on the high deductible HSA plan. Um, so to even drive that down more, I met with Mr.
Jones, met with Jamie and executive team, Mr. bagby uh to come up with a better solution to negate this increase as much as we could even even staring at the medical conditions that we had and have um so we came up with a solution uh
to roll out the difference card and I have a young lady on the phone with us I believe her name's Ashley she's with the difference card I'm going to go through this presentation there's Ashley thank you for being here this evening you guys may have some questions that I'm not able to answer I feel I feel uh good that I can probably cover most but you
guys have thrown me a curveball to in the past. I want to be able to make sure I answer those tonight accurately. So, um, with that said, um, the difference card is works in conjunction with your health plan. Okay? It's called a MERP. It's a medical expense reimbursement
plan. And what this allows you to do, it allows you to go with a higher out-ofpocket expense plan that you're paying to Blue Cross United Healthcare. And then this program comes in and complements that and fill back fills the increased deductibles and co- insuranceances. Right now you all have
an extremely competitive benefit plan with Florida Blue. Um as you know the deductibles are very low on the PO plan. The co-pays are very low. Um we have the most participation in that plan. And then we also have a high deductible health plan that's been around since
about 2008. And we have about 25% of the population of employees on that plan. As well as we make high deduct or HSA contributions to those employees to kind of bridge the gap and the premium uh uh difference to keep it equivalent for all
employees. The problem with that strategy is is that number one, you're fully insured and you're never it's just not sustainable being fully insured and having those low deductibles. are always going to be staring at, you know, 8 10 15% rate increases, which we've had to
deal with and compounding that on top of already high premiums. It's just not a long-term play. So, what do we do? Um, if we can't get quotes from other markets, we have to come up with a solution. Be forward thinking, think out of the box. That's what the difference card does. It's been around since 2018.
It's part of the tax code. Um, and it's and it's a proven platform to help employers just like yourself, be it government, public sector, or private sector groups to help mitigate these high uh premiums and large increases uh
that we seem to get from all the Blue Crosses, United Signis, and Adnas. So with that said, um what if we go into this program, which I strongly encourage you all to do, um it's going to a
improve the benefits for the employees, right, where the majority of them are on the PO plan. Those those that are on the high deductible health plan with the HSA, which I'm not I don't want them to migrate if that's a good fit for them because there's a lot of advantages to having an HSA. Um it's going to keep
them whole on their plan. Okay. So, we're not going to take anything away from the employees, but what we are going to do is we're going to drop the premium significantly for the city of Dest. Also, we're going to drop the premiums for the employees that have employee spouse, employee children,
and family coverage. So, that's a very difficult task to do, right? So, how do you do it? you come up with a program like the difference card to help backfill that because 80% of your claims are driven by 20% of your population.
The paro principles in full effect as it pertains to medical insurance without a shadow of a doubt. So when you have these rich plan designs and these high premiums, 80% of your employees aren't even hitting their deductible on annual basis. Yet we're paying the carrier those premiums that we never get back.
There's no opportunity for us to win. there's no surplus opportunity. So, with that said, if we can move to the next slide, please. Um, we're going to talk really quick. I know I'm limited on time, so I'm going to talk about the solution. I'm going to talk about I'm going to show you the financial exhibits that we put together
for you, the funding reporting, and the member experience. Really high level. Next slide, please. Um, how does the difference card work? So, I've already spoke on this um uh in the initial comments, but essentially what's going to happen is you're going to uh purchase
a revised plan. It's going to be one plan that's going to be offered through um United Healthcare. We think that it's the time to move to United Healthcare, which we've been with before. Their network is is very good in Northwest Florida and nationally. It's the largest
PO network in the country. So, we're going to advise you to move to that. We're going to offer one plan instead of two plans. Okay? So, it's going to be a high deductible health plan. Those that want to stay on the PO plan with no HSA, they can do that. And we'll show you how it works in just a moment. And then
those that want to stay on the HSA plan and take advantage of that account, we're going to keep the plan compliant to allow them to re to receive contributions and make contributions to the health savings account. Uh so that's first and foremost. um the premium
savings on this which you'll you'll see in just a moment um an annual savings on this guaranteed annual savings too by the way this is not a projected savings this is a guaranteed annual savings and then we're going to talk about how the difference card works when an individual
goes and receives care whether it's at the doctor's office the lab the hospital whatever it may be um so we'll talk about that that's how the difference card works if you'll go to the next slide This is what they'll receive. Every employee here will receive a debit card,
a difference card. So, when they go in to receive care at White Wilson here on Airport Boulevard, which is where I go, um, Airport Road, I'm sorry, they'll go in there and if the co-pay today, if they're on the traditional PO plan and they go see a doctor at White Wilson Medical Center, they're they pay a $25
co-pay. That's the way the plan works today. with this plan. If they're on that same program, same program, they're going to go to that facility, they're going to give them this debit card, and they're going to swipe the debit card that we're the city of Destin's funding, and they're going to have zero out-of-
pocket expense on that PO plan. Right now, they have a $25 co-pay. If they go see a specialist, they have a $50 co-pay, which is extremely low. I promise you it is. they go see a specialist, they're going to pull out their difference card, they're going to swipe it, and they're going to have a
zero out of- pocket expense. So, on this plan, single employees, they're going to have $3,500 that we're going to fund into this difference card that they're going to be able to use first before they have a first dollar expense. That's a great thing. And then on the HSA plan,
the high deductible plan, they'll receive a card after they've met their deductible because to be a qualified plan under the HSA rules, they have to meet a a certain dollar amount, their deductible, to be eligible to receive health savings contributions. So, um,
again, it works seamlessly. It is going to be an extra step for the employees because they're going to have to, you know, have an extra card in their pocket besides the United Healthcare card. But other than that, it'll be a seamless process for them. They go to the pharmacy, same thing. S uh hospitalization, same thing. So, it
works very very well. Um five minutes. Okay. Sorry. Okay. Next slide, please. We talked about that. I'll just I'll I'll shoot over that. I want to get into the financial exhibit. So, the next slide, please. Okay. So, here's where your current
costs are. 1.4 million 31911. We're getting we negotiated the renewal down to just at a 14% increase. Uh so the renewal costs were going to 1,631 338 by moving to United Healthcare. Okay. By
moving to United Healthcare in the one single plan are revised fixed cost the carrier cost and the difference card administrative fees are 1,8519. Significant savings. Then you have your revised max cost. That revised max cost
is what you have to fund the claims card for to pay for expenses, co-pays, so on and so forth. So your cost there revised worst case scenario is a million235296. So considerably less than your current cost. And as far as your renewal costs
are concerned, it's going to save you close to $400,000 over what Blue Cross Blue Shield was proposing. Improving the benefits for the employees as far as what their out-of- pocket expenses are. lowering the premiums not just for the city of Dustin but for the employees what they have coming out of
their pocket. So the next slide I know this is tough to see but this is just kind of an out outlay of the uh plan design that we're moving to. Um it's difficult to see but just understand that what happens on the PO plan again we're going to give those
employees that are single $3500. those employees that are family, we're going to give them $7,000 to help meet those deductibles and out-of- pocket expenses. And then once they go through that, they'll have the same out-of- pocket expense that they have today. Some employees are never going to burn through that money, right? Because they
just don't have those expenses. And the ones that do and the ones that are, you know, high utilizers, because we're all going to have that that, you know, turn in the barrel, if you will, they'll have no more out-of- pocket expense than they have today. It'll be the same experience that they have on the current plan.
And then the next slide, um, this is the high deductible health plan. Again, it has to be, it's administered differently. So, they have to first, uh, out-of- pocket expense on the deductible, just like they do today. Anything above what their deductible is that they have currently is going to be
funded by the difference card on the back end. So, they will have no more out-of- pocket expense than they have currently with much lower premiums than we have under the Blue Cross Blue Shield plan. Um, let's see. move on and then to the next slide. This
is just a projection. If we were to stay on this path that we're on right now on on in five years, the projected savings, if we're just getting trend increases, which trend depending on who you ask, medical inflation is about 8%. If you stay on that path, uh projected savings
by using the um u the difference cards around $2.3 million on what the city is spending today. So, it's it's big. It's big numbers. It's taking control of your health plan. It is a great first step to moving to level funding and partially
self-funding. Great first step. At the end of the year, the money that we put into the claims bucket to pay for these claims, if our claims exceed that amount, we pay no more money. We have insurance A+ carrier that's reinsuring that. However, if we do have a balance
in that account at the end of the year, once it tres up, 100% of those funds come back to the city. Okay. It does not stay with the carrier, which is where we are now. Okay. Mike, final thoughts on the project. I got a couple discussions. Yeah. Go ahead. Is is everybody good with that explanation of where we are?
Okay. Fantastic. Awesome. Councilwoman Abear. Thanks, Mayor. Um, my question is is you're saying that there's no deductible for the the employee. Like if they're in this plan with this card, they don't have to hit like a $2,000 out-of- pocket deductible to advance with this card and get free medical
basically based on what comes out of their paycheck. First first $3,500 of eligible medical expenses only are covered by the difference card. Got it. Where right now they have to pay co-pays and pharmacy co-pays and deductibles. If they exhaust the 3500 as a single
person only, once that's exhausted, then yes, they would have a deductible and they would have responsibilities up to their current out-of- pocket max they have today. Okay. So, you're saying the single. So, what if we got a a member with a wife and a newborn baby? We double everything. So, so it becomes 30
it comes 7,000 card plus another 3500 for the child. No, it's 7,000 total for the family because your deductible it's a member in the family. So it's a members 3500 if they have family whether it's wife and kid wife and six kids that's another 3500 period correct
because if you look at your plan design you have a five $5,000 and a 10,000 for full family. Yes ma'am. Perfect. That's that's excellent. Okay. I'm glad we're going to move to this. Yes. Council Bagby Mike. Yes sir. Jamie uh Larry. Thank
y'all very much. Great job. Great work. And you know, we've talked numerous times, so I'm just going to go ahead and move to direct staff and the Centria to move forward with the implementation of the difference card program as a health reimbursement arrangement in conjunction
with the most competitively priced high deductible base plan. I'll second that. All right, I have a motion and a second. I have a couple more discussions. Larry, if I might just add that we recognize that this will be a different mechanism for our staff, but between Mr. Careway,
United Healthcare, and the difference card folks, they've all agreed that we will make this as seamless as possible. Make sure everybody understands how this thing works moving forward. Okay. Uh, Councilman Schmidt. Mike, thanks for being here. Yes, sir.
Um, I don't really like insurance. It's always so tough and confusing. I guess I'm I'm just curious since 2018 this program has been in effect. Why now? Why not last year whenever the cost increased? Why not the year before when the cost increase? Why not the year before that? Why why now? What's the
benefit for for y'all? For who? For what? No, it's a great question and I appreciate that question. Um, you know, it's been around MERP's been around since the 70s. It's been a part of the tax code, but has it been folded into medical plans like it is today or since 2018? No. I mean that's seven years ago.
Uh we've been placing business business with them for probably the last 18 months. So it's a relatively new product for our agency here. Um is the reason why we didn't talk about it last year or years prior. So it's something that um a we wanted to get some legs underneath
it, make sure that we had some good references that we could take it to locally. Just so you all know and I know Mr. Bagley mentioned it, we just moved uh DAG to this architectural firm and uh their employees. We just went through the enrollment. The employees are absolutely thrilled with it. So, and then our other agencies that we have
across the 28 states and we do business with um has had huge success with it. So, that's why we're rolling it out at the time that we are now. Yes, sir. Councilman Dustin, thank you, Mayor. I've went through switching insurance companies a couple of times while on the
school board. The biggest problem we had was the difference in the providers and that caused us the most problem. as you know they may well have very close but they're not always the same. So right an employee will come across the fact that their doctor's not in it anymore right
which can be substantially more expensive. Um what do we do when somebody can't go to their doctor anymore I think well I I feel comfortable that United Healthc Care's Choice Plus network matches up very well with Blue Options network. However, we
can never guarantee that a hospital or a medical group is going to agree to the terms or on the other side the the carriers are going to agree to what the what the facilities want. Um most recently u uh UF system and shans fell out of favor with United Healthcare. It
kept them you know it took them 90 days after the termination date to get it worked out. Same thing with Ascension Sacred Heart and Blue Cross Blue Shield. So those things do occur, but I think that you're going to find the overlap in the network between the two uh very common. Uh and actually if you ask
United Healthcare, their networks larger and blue crosses in Northwest Florida. So we will certain the the key to this Mr. Destin, the key to it, everyone on the panel is we have to communicate this properly. We are going to not only do our group meetings for this program, but
we're going to do individual sit down with every employee and go through this program so everyone's 100% comfortable with the plan that they choose, how it works, their network, pharmacy, the whole every everything that's bundled into that. We're going to make sure that those employees walk away with a good
feeling about the new program. And we also had a medical card the last policies we had with the school board and it it worked pretty well. Most people, as you say, didn't use it. I still had $2,000 credit on mine when I left. Yeah. Now, the the problem though
is, and I understand the concept of how you save money with that card because most people will never spend all their money, right? But folks who have catastrophic illnesses, right? They're the outlier, you know, somebody that runs up a million dollars in medical expenses and
a whole bunch of deductibles they're supposed to meet and you run through your $3,500. What what do you what do you do then? So again, the health insurance plan still in place. That's going to be the first card they give the provider. They're going to file a claim just like they do today. Whatever that
expense is for that visit is going to come out of the difference card as we mentioned for the first 3500. Everything above that number to the plan maximum would be the responsibility of the employee which in this case is exactly what their out of pocket is today. So what we're doing with the difference
card, which you know 75% of the employees on the traditional PO, we're covering that first dollar expense form, which they don't have right now. So it's going to really be a a better program for all employees. And then those employees that do have chronic
conditions, high cost pharmacy expenses, whatever it may be, they're still going to be made whole on where they sit today. Well, it appears that we're going to much higher deductible under this plan. We are. Yes, sir. And so that means you have a much more exposure to higher cost. I understand how the card
works, but there's a savings in here for the insurance company and for us or this couldn't happen, right? So those higher deductibles can get quite catastrophic. They can with these very bad diseases. So we're trading we're we're off
offloading that to try to save some money. But uh I'm not so sure that folks who have these really serious illnesses and are going to now have a much higher deductible, much higher out of pocket, it can work out so well for them. The folks who don't have that, yeah, it's
going to save them money. It's going to save us money going to save the insurance company money because and it's just unfortunate that we have to go and play that game to get people's health covered. And we're we're going to make the best guess we can, but
you don't save money with insurance companies unless they're saving money. Well, just as just as a quick example, and that's and you're absolutely right. When you go to high deductibles and you don't have something to backfill it, then you're really putting people at that exposure. And I agree with you, but when you take your plan, and our
individual deductible on this plan is $6,500. The di the uh difference card is paying the first $3500. That leaves a balance to the employee of three grand and then the re then the insurance company picks up a 100% of it after that. So the
employees out-of- pocket expense today is a $500 deductible 20% with a $3,000 out-of- pocket max. That's exactly what their exposure is today and that's what it will be moving to this program. Okay. Work out council final thoughts. Yeah,
that that was the point I was going to make on the maximum out of pocket is is still the same. So, that's correct. Whether it's the old plan and and my I shared your concern. Uh the only thing I would remind us is uh I shared the
concern when we flipped from United to Blue Cross because it's always when you switch, but we're just going back to United. So, some of these folks, of course, the doctors may have retired. I've got one getting ready to retire, but it, you know, it there is coverage.
You're not, it's never going to be perfect. Absolutely. And so, you mentioned Okaloosa schools that is, you know, fortunately that's a client of mine and they've been with United Healthcare since 2016, moving from Florida Blue and they've been very happy with them. Uh, yes. Final thoughts here. We're able
to cover people with those diseases that a lot of places don't cover. So, right, I think we need to look at it that way. You know, we have people on staff that have serious diseases and we're helping them. We're covering them and they wouldn't have any insurance if they were somewhere else. So, I don't want to
slight the fact that, you know, okay, they might have a a different cost, but I still feel like we're doing what we can as a city to give them benefits they can't get anywhere else. And that's sometimes the best part about being part of our city staff is our benefits. Maybe the hourly wage is not like huge, but
it's really good. But the benefits at the end of the day, if you add it all up, especially if you have kids, it's it's phenomenal. It's big. Yeah. You guys do you guys do a phenomenal job for your plan and the contributions you make to it. Absolutely. Yeah. More than most. Someone who just cut off his fingertip. I appreciate the insurance. Right. Yeah.
Make sure we get you an accident policy two days ago. So, that was fun. All right. With that, uh, I got nothing on the board. I'm going to call the vote. We have a motion in a second. Yeah. All right. Thank you, sir. Thanks for being here. Appreciate you. I have it. So,
move 70. Mr. Larry Jones. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Item 4B is just an update that the uh cameras at Captain Royal Melbourne Park are up and running. And I think Angie's going to pull them
up for us real quick. uh or we can show you individually. But um got great quality uh video on those locations. There you go. Andy, what's the resolution on that? Do you know?
I think it's 1080. 1080. Okay. HD. Okay. And those are recording and they will hold recordings for 30 days. And what is the use for this? I'm sorry. What is the use for the people that are here? We have issues with commercial use on
some of our docks and this is to provide evidence of those occurrences uh to take the appropriate action when we do uh find that folks are using them and not in accordance with our code. Thank you. Right. With that, do you need any
further guidance? No, sir. Just to update and let you know we did get that accomplished for you. Thank you, sir. Item 4 C is a um is the CI component of the cross town connector project. We did a request for qualifications that we put
out on the street. Uh we received six respondents. One of those was found to be nonresponsive. Uh so the remaining five were scored by your staff uh through the bid committee. Uh the top three the firms rankings are
in your packet. Uh typically the council would request us to bring back the top three rate firms. So those are indicated as Ankor, CI, Half Associates, and Vulker. Uh if it would be your pleasure, a motion would
be appropriate to bring those back for presentations at the next uh meeting. Thank you, sir. With that, Councilman Bagby. Mayor, I move that the council invite Ankor CI half Associates and Vulkar to attend the council meeting and make presentations to the council as
part of the RFQ25-06- CD selection process. I'll second that. All right, I have a motion. Second. Any further discussion? Seeing none, I'll call the vote. And for everyone wondering what this is, this is going to be the people doing and
creating the cross town connector. All right, eyes have it so moved. 70 Mr. Larry Jones. Next item is again for cross town connector. This is the award the uh construction component of phase one. Uh this will be the storm water uh
component that we were able to get separated out for procurement purposes. Uh we got two bids. Um H&T provided a bid at 2.3 million and change. GF Coast Utility Contractors was 2.7 million and
some change. Um staff recommends that we award this contract to H&T. Uh and just by way of information, the engineers estimate was 2.4 million and their bid is 2.383.
U so we would recommend we move forward with awarding this contract to H&T. Council baby. Mayor, I move the council award RFB25-07-CM to H&T contractors and request that the staff bring back a construction contract
for council consideration. I'll second that. I have a motion and a second. Uh Mr. Mr. Jones, after this goes through, if this goes through, what does the timeline look like for shovel ready shovels in the ground? We'll have to get a contract, but the contract is in the
works. uh we've actually provided it to H&T anticipating that uh your action tonight would move that forward. So we've got a jump start on that. We hope to have you to contract back at the next meeting and we'll have that information for you then. Fantastic. Thank you. With that, I'll call the vote with the motion and
second. Seeing no other discussion. Eyes have it so moved. 70. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Item 4E is for your consideration the interlocal agreement with the county. Um I attended the board of county commissioners meeting in Okaloosa County last week
where they graciously agreed to fund the uh 3.6 million of the total $4 million 20% match to the SS4A grant that we are applying for for the underpass at the Stallman intersection. Um, one change
they did make was they changed the language to say near the Stallman intersection. So, if there's some issue with getting right away, we have a little attitude there to move it if we need to. Uh, but um, this is a a great project. As you know, we're applying for that uh grant. The consultant is working
on that. The deadline is June the 26, so this is timely. Uh, this will be a major component of that grant application should you choose to approve it, and we would recommend you do. Mayor, I'd like to make the motion to approve the interlocal agreement. Yes, sir. Recommended motion. Councilman Destin's got a motion. Do I hear a second? I'll
second it. All right. Any discussion? And I would I would just like to thank the county and for stepping forward to help us with this project. Yeah, absolutely. We really appreciate this is going to be a tremendous partnership. Not only is this going to be a pedestrian safety improvement, but per uh the Florida Department of
Transportation, this intersection is one of the most congested, which creates a lot of the backup whether it's on the bridge or in West Dest. And a lot of that is to do with the pedestrian signal crossing. So saving up several minutes per per hour allows traffic to move
through and allows the pedestrians to be safer not on the road. So with that, I will call without any other discussion. All right, eyes have it. So move 70. That's all we have other than a couple of announcements. Uh one being uh
Thursday is a holiday, June 13th, June 9th, June 10th, if I can get that right, and the city uh city officers will be closed. Um and you'll be receiving an email from Mr. array in short order reminding you that your form ones are
due by the end of June. Thank you. All right, with that we are going to be moving to the public hearings and what I would consider the main event for tonight and we're going to start with what you see is labeled as 5e which is going to be dev 001609
2025. Miss cop. Thank you mayor. This is a public quasi judicial hearing regarding the submitt of a minor development order for an existing commercial marine construction project at 288 and 302 Harbor Boulevard. The application includes the
reclassification and reassignment of allowable occupancy of the existing boat slips and there is no proposed construction as part of this application. Before we move on to um staff introducing the item and hearing from the applicant, I'm going to go down
the council and confirm whether any of you have had any exarty communications. So, starting with council member Schmidt, have you had any exarty communications outside of this public hearing? Uh yes, ma'am. I have had
conversations with citizens of Dest um residents, business owners. Um I've spoken with the property owners in the past about the docks. Um but nothing that I have spoken to will
affect my decision based upon what's presented tonight. Okay. Thank you. And um if the applicant has questions about any of these communications, they may ask you later so that they can have an opportunity to respond to some of the conversations you may have had. Council member Guile, have you had any exarty
communications relating to this application? Yes, I have. Can you describe them? uh citizen business owner discussing some of the uh literature that was somewhat submitted here partially submitted here but nothing that's going
to affect my decision. Okay. Thank you mayor. Yes. Uh we have been on the docks with the applicant uh with you their lawyers and one of their um applicants. And with that we discuss the situation. Other than that, I've spoken to other
business owners that are on the harbor and none of that is going to affect my decision here tonight. Okay. Thank you, Council Member Abear. Um, yes, I've had conversations with citizens, um, business owners, some of the charter fishermen, um, and listened to, uh, the
meeting that was held when the first council meeting came up about the docks and what was going to be taken care of. But I'm open-minded to hear what has to be said tonight. Um, but I have had multiple conversations over the last
couple of weeks. Thank you, Council Member Bagby. No conversations. I did review the YouTube version of the uh council meeting uh where this was previously considered. Thank you, Council Member Dustin. Yes, I've had several citizens that have discussed the
issue with me, but I intend to make my decision based on the evidence that was presented tonight. Thank you, Council Member Traml. Uh, I have also viewed the video and, uh, I also called, uh, Mr. John Stevens, who's the chairman of the Harbor CRA, and told him this involved
the Harbor CRA, so he needed to be here. That was it. Thank you, Council Member Braden. Um, yes, ma'am. I've spoken to one of the applicants. Um, and we were talked about transit slips. Um,
but that was prior to me having any knowledge of this coming about. Um, I have no problem hearing this tonight and making a fair decision. Okay. Thank you. And you all, um, have indicated that you will make your decision based on the
evidence tonight and not on any prior communications you may have had. Um, so the first thing I'm going to do is enter the city's exhibits into the record. This will include the staff report and all attachments there too in
tonight's city council agenda. Will include city of Destin building permits number 1903145 for 302 Harbor Boulevard and number 1903146 for 288 Harbor Boulevard. It will include the city of Destin building permit conditions dated 124209.
Correspondence from the city community development department to Claude Perry dated December 18th, 2019 regarding the net positive environmental benefit for 288 and 302 Harbor Boulevard. The October 31st, 2019 permit application and associated correspondence between
Douglas Matthews and Lewis Sanguz. The two documents marked figure four proposed site plan for Perry docking facility for 288 and 302 Harbor respectively both dated January 2018. Is there any objection from the applicant?
These documents were provided to you. Dana Matthews representing the applicant. We have no objection. Thank you, Mr. Matthews. uh council. In 2019, the city council approved a marine construction project and a condition of the approval of that project was that
the subject boat slips would be designated and used as public slips. Note that due to the current usage of the slips in violation of this condition of approval requiring 21 public slips, this property is currently the subject of a code compliance action. However,
please do not let the code compliance status affect your decision tonight and keep your decision based only on the evidence presented to you this evening. The applicant is currently seeking to obtain a development order and ultimately modify their existing permit and staff will further introduce this
item. We will play the video that several of you have referred to from the 2019 hearing when this was initially approved. Um, and then we will hear from the applicant as well as the public. Uh, Mr. Butler. Yes. Thank you. So, as Kim stated
tonight, this is the the applicant is proposing to redesate the slips. Um, currently the commercial dock was approved by city council on January 7th, 2019, allowing for 18 commercial slips, 21 transient slips, and one water taxi slip. Tonight, the applicant is
proposing to adjust these designations to accommodate 29 commercial slips, six transient slips, one water taxi slip, and six fueling slips. Uh the details of these proposed changes are outlined in your staff report. So in 2019 there was
a code section in our land development code section 11.0501N which states that no dock shall be constructed or modified such that slip density exceeds one slip per eight linear feet of waterfront footage. Uh the two properties where this dock is
located has approximately 260 ft of waterfront which equates to about 32 and a half slips. At the time of city council approval on January 7th, 2019, 11.0509B5 of the land development code allowed for an exemption exemption to the maximum slip density based on linear feet of
waterfront for properties that are located in the south harbor mixeduse zoning district under the tier one or tier 2 development standards and what that project fell under that standard. Um there they met four of the five criteria to be exempt from the slip density. The fifth criteria they
partially met and I'll read the fifth criteria. It states, "A minimum of 10% of the total number of slips in the project are set aside for fair carrying boats and another minimum 10% of the total slips are set aside for transient boats that are open to the public to promote non-automotive travel." And then
skips ahead. A minimum of 50% of the transient slips must be reserved for non-renal users. The remainder of the the remainder of the total 10% may be reserved for short-term rental users. The applicant failed to meet the fifth criteria with respect to the fair carrying vestible minimum 10%. However,
they stated that they were providing a public benefit over and beyond since they are providing a 20 since they're providing 21 transient slips um for the public to use at a first come basis. The council accepted this offer and approved the application on that basis. Um, it is
worth noting that that co ordinance is no longer in our land development code as it was removed in February of 2020. So, as previously stated, the applicant is here this evening to redesate the slip allowance or the slip usage of the
existing commercial dock to include 29 commercial slips, six transient slips, one water taxi, and six fueling slips. Uh these changes would reduce the number of transient slips on the property by 15, increase the commercial slips by 11 and add the six fueling slips. Um also
the net positive environmental benefit was significantly reduced because of the public the the public benefit that was being provided by these transient slips as approved. Um and as Kim stated, staff does have the video of the council
meeting for everybody to view. And if anybody has any questions of staff, we are here to answer them. And just one housekeeping item, if we could swear in anyone that's going to provide testimony. If you're going to provide testimony in this matter, please stand, unless you're an attorney representing
the applicant. Okay. Do you all swear or affirm to tell the truth? Thank you. And Mr. Butler, since I didn't swear you in before, did everything you just testified to, is that your true and honest opinions and statements? Yes. Thank you.
Can you play the video please? Thanks. This will be the January uh hearing it was simultaneously with 5F the dock application at 302 Harbor Boulevard because these docks are located adjacent to each other and in fact I think they're connected by a proposed boardwalk. Um so it's easier to think of
them as one dock although when you vote we have to do it separately because they're different upland parcels. So, the uh applicant here is Perry Enterprises. I see a couple Claude and a couple representatives of Perry Enterprises over there. If whoever is
going to testify could please stand up to be sworn in. We'll we'll um we'll rewind or I don't think they say rewind anymore, but we'll get it back to the beginning. Yeah. My Andy, just give me a thumbs up back
there when you're ready. 5E, which is a dock application at 288D Harbor Boulevard. Uh, I'm going to kind of address this simultaneously with 5F, the dock application at 302 Harbor Boulevard, because these docks are located adjacent to each other. And in fact, I think they're connected by a
proposed boardwalk. Um, so it's easier to think of them as one dock, although when you vote, we have to do it separately because they're different upland parcels. So, the uh applicant here is Perry Enterprises. I see a couple I see Claude
and a couple representatives of If whoever is going to testify could please stand up to be sworn in. Go ahead, Rick. Uh, Mr. Perry or Mr. Traml, do you want one of you want to come up here and kind of introduce the project? Thank you. Council Matt Traml, Taylor
Engineering, we're here uh representing Mr. Perry. he had contracted with us to uh obtain the permits and authorizations for his his two properties. I think it's a pretty straightforward project. U Mr. Aban has done a great job uh laying out exactly what we're looking for. Um we're
falling under an exemption that's allowed under the current land development code. However, each one of the properties falls slightly short of that exemption. Um we're providing well beyond the public slips that are required. We are providing one water taxi dock as opposed to two water taxi
docks for, you know, one one on each property. It's kind of silly to put two water taxi slips within 50 ft of one another. Uh and then lastly, we are not providing um the commercial slips that are required. So you you may think of it as Mr. Perry's giving an additional
public benefit um if anything to his uh commercial downfall, I will say. So uh that's As uh as Kyle as Kyle's laid it out, we're we're two um fair carrying slips short on one of the properties and we're
one fair carrying slip short on the other property. Mr. Perry will be happy to add more commercial slips if the council so chooses. Um or we can approve the the project as proposed. We do have D and core of engineers authorization. It did go to the harbor board. I think the last meeting in December. It was
approved unanimously. the harbor board did seem to think that it was a larger public benefit uh to approve the project as proposed and that's why we're here today. And was there any uh changes in uh the documentation you sent us? It's in our
briefing materials. Everything is no changes uh from the D or the harbor board. Everything has been the same and consistent. Um what you have in front of you and the harbor board approved this project unanimous. Yes, sir. Okay. Uh Mr. October. Dear, I'll make the motion
if you like. I move to approve the application for marine construction at 288D Harbor Boulevard and just do the 288 288 Harbor Boulevard by exercising the city's police powers in a manner which
maximizes the public benefit. Second. I got a a motion, a second. Um, Mr. Braden, how's it going to affect these parcels if one parcel is sold and the other one's not? They are actually two um it was
historically the the two parcels that always been been um seen as separate uh separate entities, separate parcels. It's the same owner, but it is two separate parcels, two separate permits, two separate submerged land leases. Um and I think that's exactly why Mr. Bowman has recommended they be two
separate motions. That That's right, Rodney. So you are approving one dock at a time. So the specific proposed slips in each dock are what you're approving. Uh in the agenda item I laid it out kind of as one dock because practically
speaking it is kind of viewed as one dock. So So are we joining the two pieces of property to be able to build the dock the length that is being built? No, that's that's not I don't believe what they're proposing. They they are not um codependent on one another. Uh each each property could have its own
separate dock and does um they are connected through an upland boardwalk and an upland dock. Uh but neither one is dependent on the other. It just looks like one piece is would encroach on the other piece if they were eventually separated
and sold. No, there there's no encroachment. Um D allows for the docks to be constructed up to the property line and as Mr. Perry is his own neighboring adjacent parcel owner. He's given himself that setback waiver. He's given himself that authorization. So they are abuing the property line, but
there's no encroachment over the property or riparian line offshore. Okay. Thank you, Miss Ramwell. Thank you. So essentially what we're looking at here is the only reason we're having to approve this specially is the fact that
Mr. Perry actually doesn't want to have several of these as fair carrying vessels. He actually would like to prefer make them public. Is that correct? That's correct. And in my discussions with Mr. Perry, he wanted to provide um there's a huge lack of public
slips and and waterfront on on Destin Harbor. I think we have all of two slips. I I don't know the exact number, but we're we're proposing nearly uh almost 20 uh public waterfront slips that will be available on his two properties. That's going to benefit the
harbor waterfront, the harbor boardwalk, and all of the harbor uh harbor area in general. So, um that was his plan all along to provide the greatest public benefit um to that area of the harbor waterfront. Absolutely. I agree. and I all day long I'll take people that want
to do public slips as opposed to you know fair carrying or additional commercial. So that's terrific. Thank just for the record uh 21 of the proposed 40 slips will be available for public transient moing. Uh that represents an increase from the nine of
21 currently. Okay, we got a motion, we got a second. Is there any further discussion? The only thing I would like to bring up is there's some ambiguity about what defines a fair carrying vessel and I would like for us to address that in in
our ordinance. Uh it put that on the agenda to clarify that as as being either a charter for hire vessel or you know dolphin cruise boat something along the lines and not a live livery vessel.
Um so we could do that. Yeah, that is something that we can do and I would recommend that we do. Uh the the primary issue is that actually our LDC does not define fair carrying boat as the term is used in this exception, but our comp plan defines fair carrying vessel. So I
borrowed that definition and applied it here, but we can define that better in the LDC. All right, seeing is there any any further discussion? Seeing none, let's go ahead and vote on this so we start on the second one. By the way, I forgot we have to have
public comment. Okay, it's a hearing. I call catch. Would anyone like to speak on this dock? Can I just ask question? No, you can come up here, ma'am, and offer your public comment during the public
comment period. Public hearing. Public inquiry. Now, it doesn't say you have to make a statement. So, you are allowed to have public inquiry. Yeah, we don't know who you are. RC Bell three golf race court. Uh I just have one question. Uh I think it's a great
idea. So if it's transient and there's that many 21 uh is there someone like a I would ask but I'm not allowed to talk to the people. Is there um some way to manage that? Like what if there's like 22 boats
and only 21 slips on a Saturday that want to use that to go to the restaurant or is usually land owner does that. I know at Marina Cafe they they manage their transient boats because they have permanent dock boats there as well and you always call the marina there. I they
have they can put big boats in their slips and people are always asking me where they can dock a 50 60footer and I always tell them call Marina Cafe. Well, I'm sure Mr. Perry's going to have a a project or a manager on site that will handle because he's going to get the same thing. He's going to get inquiries,
you know, where can we dock our boat and how long can we stay and how much it going to cost me and that kind of stuff. Well, and I only ask because for a short time in the 90s, I worked one summer at AJ's when they did have transate slips and sometimes those that was a problem. People wanted them.
Thank you, Marcy. Any further comment? Seeing none, let's go ahead and take this to a vote. Hey everyone, big heads up. Paleo Valley is running a sale on your taxpayer dollars have not been used
for YouTube live. Unanimous eyes have it. Let's uh move on, Mr. Attorney. Yep. If uh Mr. Traml could please step up and just confirm that we're talking about the adjacent dock here and everything applies to this dock, that'd be great. That's correct. Uh
Uh, same condition applies. We're I I don't know if it was this property or the other with either one or two commercial vessels shy of meeting the exemption requirements. Mr. Over here, I'll make the second motion again if you want. And I'll second it move to approve the
application for marine construction at 302 Harbor Boulevard by exercising the city's police powers in a manner which maximizes the public's benefit. Second. comment. We got a motion. We got a second comment. And we will have public comment.
Seeing none, is there any comment here amongst the council? Seeing none. Just like to thank you all on behalf of myself, Mr. Perry. Appreciate it. Eyes have it. Unanimous. So moved. Uh, all right. consent agenda. Mr.
Matthews, do you have any objection to the city entering this into the record, this video? No. Okay. Thank you. And then um Mr. Butler, just two questions before we um end the staff introduction, but can you read um can you tell me how the city code defines public transient
slips? Yes. So, the city defines a transient slip as a boat slip reserved for the general public on a first come, first- serve basis in order to promote non- automotive travel. Non-renal transient slips cannot have a rental fee attached
to them and no boat may be parked in the slip for more than 6 hours. Short-term rental transient slips may have a rental fee. However, no boat may be parked in the slip for more than 7 days. Thank you. And can you also let us know how the code handles post permit changes
when a permit has already been issued and you want to modify that? Yes. So, uh, land development code section 2.11.00 postp permit changes after a construction permit has been issued, it shall be unlawful to change, modify, alter, or otherwise deviate from the
terms and conditions of the development order without first obtaining a deviation to the order. Similarly, except for minor field modifications as may be allowed by the building codes and associated mechanical, electrical, plumbing, gas, and fire safety codes, it shall be unlawful to change, modify, alter, or otherwise deviate from the
terms and conditions of the construction permit without first obtaining a city approved modification to the permit. Note, construction standard field changes must be made available to the city inspector for inspection purposes consistent with the building, mechanical, electrical, plumbing, gas, and fire safety codes adopted by the
city. Thank you. and council. I'm going to turn it over to the applicant now. Um, so Mr. Matthews, thank you again, Mr. Mayor, Council, Miss Cop, Mr. Jones, staff. Um, my name is Dana Matthews. I'm a local lawyer.
Um, with me today is Steve Tatum. Um, we represent the applicants. Um Claude Perry is here, his daughter Kim Mgler, uh Kent Houston. Um they're all trustees of the two of the trust that owns the two LLC's that own this property, which
is the applicant before you today. Um the as a general housekeeping matter, um we also want to introduce evidence um in consultation with Miss Cop. Um you've already gotten this in your packages. I
understand Miss Cop sent you our memo this past Friday. Um, as well as the appendix that we had attached with it. Um, to save time, I've had Miss Mgler, who is an authorized representative of the applicant, sign an affidavit
acknowledging that the facts alleged in the memo are true and correct or best knowledge and belief and all the documents. So, we don't have to go through these one at a time. um just like I stipulated with Miss Cop about the exhibits that she had. So for the record, Mr. Meer, I'd ask you to accept
that into evidence. Miss Cop, are you okay with this? No objection to Miss Mgler um asserting the factual statements. However, she wouldn't be qualified to make the legal conclusions made by the attorney. Thank you. So, um, what I want to do is
unfortunately for both the city and for us, even though we've been working on this for a number of months, you didn't get a staff report, nor did we, until this past Friday, late morning, and you didn't get our memo until Friday afternoon. And so, um, the I I feel uh
it necessary to at least go through our memo and our analysis of where we're at today. Um, I do have a couple of comments on Mr. Butler's staff report um that I'll get to in the course of my presentation.
The it goes back and and first of all, why are we here? We're here for an amendment for a development order, which is a little bit of an oxymoron because we don't have a process in the city to amend a dock permit, and it's not
amending the construction of the permit like Mr. Butler read to you that there is a process. If you get a construction permit from Miss Noel's department and you seek to modify those construction requirements later on, there is a
process to come back through to get an amendment either to the horizontal infrastructure, which is a development order, or to the building process itself. That same code provision he read you, if you listen to it, doesn't have anything to do with docs because we don't have that type of a process in the
city of Dest. The applicant has agreed to go through this process because of the issues that have come up in the public and the social media and the the code violation that I'll just briefly mentioned because that's set for the
ball. um to try to make sure everybody was on the same page on the information that's been available to them since 2019. You got a chance to hear the U video just a moment ago from January of 2019,
but none of y'all were here. Um I don't believe you were here on the council. Rodney Rodney was Mr. Braden, excuse me, was here. Um but again, it's a different process. So what we have is that the
existing docks that were first of all the Perry's own this property for a long time and for those of you that know the harbor and the boat house and that area down there is that there were docks down there going back a 100 years ago 80 at
least into the 40s 30s and the 40s. And the reason why we know this is because some of them continued to exist before this application process started with the city, before it started with the army corps and with the DP. And in fact, back in I think it was 16, 15, 16 and
17, Mr. Dustin will be very familiar with this because I think he went through the similar process is that on behalf of my clients I work with the Florida Board of Internal Improvement Trust Fund to establish what's called a butler act and to have property that is
typically anything under the water any the dirt under the water the sand under the water is sovereign state property typically. However, there's a process by which you can prove to the state that you actually own the submerged land. And
we were able to do that with Mr. Perry's property. And if you look for portions of it, so if you're familiar with the docks out there, the eastern dock I call it, which is 302, that there's about 80 ft of that dock that got extended as part of this permit
that belongs to the the the property under the water belongs to uh the Perry's. And there's also about twothirds of the area underneath the ship store, which you know comes out over the water. The Perry's also own that property as well. It's a little bit
different than a typical scenario when you're just dealing with state sovereign land and with what permits that you're getting from the D. So, I tell you that history. The in 2019
um the Paris sought to expand those docs and they wanted to have additional lengths. They wanted to have additional slips and the sections that Mr. Butler was referring to 11.05 5 of the land development code at the time was the
governing ordinance that the city had. And he would he's correct that the ratherman was that for every eight linear feet of upland shoreline you were entitled to one boat slip as a matter of
right. He's um incorrect in one sense that he said he said approximately 260 ft. It's actually 282 feet of linear feet that the Perry's own and that's supported by the survey that we had updated and delivered to you in your
packages which gave them the opport the right to have 35 slips um as a matter of right nothing to do with transient public or anything just a commercial slips the before the city um as a prerequisite
to filing for an application forward with the city on approval of new marina construction for docks, you have to go to the Army Corps of Engineers first and go through a permitting process. Takes about 18 months. Uh Matt Traml, um Mr.
Tram's uh Councilman Traml's son at the time, Taylor Engineering, they assisted they assisted through all this process also. Then based on that, you run concurrently, but you have to have the ACE permit before you get your FD
permit. Even though FT, they can only control the land underneath the water that they control, not the Butler Act, but because you're doing a project that covers both areas, they got to be involved and that they ended up having those permits. So when you submit to the
city, which is what they did back in I think it was December of 2000 or November of 2018. Um when the Parerry submitted to the city for approval, of course the core permits, core drawings, D permits, their drawings, everything was all part of the
package on what they were seeking to do. Remember they had the right to have 35 commercial spaces in there at that time. the um at also at that time they had
already received their submerged land leases from the state of Florida. This is important because the submerged land leases which are in your packages that we gave you in 302 Harbor for example I I want to just read to you the the
portion that that I think is relevant. The lei that's the parish are hereby authorized to operate a 25 slip commercial docking facility to be used exclusively exclusively for the mooring of recreational and commercial vessels
along with personal watercraft and pontoon rental facility commercial business consisting of an overwater restaurant and then they put in parentheses on privately owned submerged lands the butler act I was telling you about that's why you see the edge restaurant is over the water because it
was on o over property that Mr. Perry owned and an upland restaurant. So that's what that permit said. If you notice, there's no words in there. It says transient public available for free free use of the docks. It's a commercial docking
facility what's been approved. And that lease is that Smurs land lease was in place, delivered to the city as part of the application process before the city video that you saw in January of 2019.
The second submerged land lease that the Perry's had was at 288 Harbor. I'll read this to you. The LEI is hereby authorized to construct and operate a 16s slip commercial docking facility. One slip used for six personal watercraft and two nonwaterd dependent
structures, ship store and restaurant to be exclusively for mooring of recreational vessels, commercial vessels and personal watercraft in conjunction with an upland oyster bar and restaurant with fueling facilities and with a sewage pumpout facility if it meets the
regulatory requirements. They never applied for it. So that doesn't really apply. But again, you notice there's no mention transient public to commercial marina facility. The And what did and so what did those
I'm the two combined? So the 302 docks, I call those the east docks. It provided for on the drawings themselves six commercial slips, one new commercial slip. Don't ask me why it was differentiated that way. One water taxi
and 17 quote public transient mooring slips. This is important because this is going to be the this one of the things we're going to be talking about tonight. There is no definition in the city's land development code or in the D or in the Army Corps of Engineers that says
anything about quote public transient moing slips. I'm going to tell you what I think, but there that doesn't exist. the 288 dock, which is the we call it the fueling dock right by the Oyster Bar uh and the ship store. It said it
provided 16 slips, one slip for six rental jet skis, 11 commercial slips, and then four transient slips to be used for fueling. Again, I don't know why I wasn't here. I wasn't part of this process. Why there's a distinction in
the other dock for transient and then the other dock is public or transient public. I I can't answer that question for you, but I can tell you what the code definition was. Mr. Butler read it to you, but I want to read it again because I want to make sure at least you
you you follow this that RLDC back in 2019 then nor today has a definition of a public slip. They don't even have public slip requirements and they didn't back then except on one exception that we're going to get to in
a minute. But this is what's important. This is the definition back then and today. Boat slips reserved for the general public on a first come first serve basis in order to promote non-automotive non-automotive travel.
Non rental transient slips cannot have a rental fee attached to them and no boat may be parked in the slip for more than six hours. Shortterm rental transient slips may have a rental fee. However, no boat may be parked in the slip for more
than 7 days. Now, why is that important? You heard the video. You saw the plans that were approved. You saw the designation of the slips. But did you see any designation on what was a short-term rental or a non-ren for
transient? You don't see that on there because it's not it wasn't addressed in the plans nor was it addressed in any motion in front of the city council. And I'm not blaming anybody. I'm just telling you that that is because of the
inconsistency with the D designation of usage. And that's by the way this is what we're talking about. We're talking about usage. We're not talking about construction. We're talking about usage. Because of the um of the inconsistencies or the lack of definition, I believe
that is what has brought us where we are today, six years later. Let me further confuse you. So on an annual basis to have a submerged land lease with the state of Florida, which these are five-year
licenses, got them an 18 to 23. They've both been renewed. They're currently in effect. There's no issues with the state of Florida. But every year you have to pay fees. Any of you, Mr. Dustin knows this, I know that has submerged land
leases, you've got a flat fee, you got 6% of gross revenue, you got x amount of dollars per slip, and you got to pay it to the state. And you got to send them all your financial information and your sales tax receipts and your fuel tax receipts and everything else so they can
make sure that they're getting paid what they're supposed to be paid. Now, the thing that's on that form and I I that's in your attachment. I want you all to see it because this is what the applicant gets reminded annually on that
form. The DP has four classifications for slips for usage. Four temporary slips. This is how they define them. Slips that are not rented and are used as fuel docking, launching or removing boats,
restaurants use or store purchases. These slips should be nonrevenue generating slips. Now, let's think about the applicant and you have uh restaurants there that are being served by these slips. You have fuel slips.
Could that be a temporary slip? I think that's a a common perception. But again, this is what on an annual basis, this is how they're looking at the use of their slips. This is the definition by D on transient slips that are rented on a
shortterm basis. doesn't say free rented on a shortterm basis and again remember our permits from the city did not designate whether transient was rental or non- rental. Third public slips they
have a definition city doesn't but DETP does open to the public on a first come first serve basis rental terms shall be no longer than one year and with no automatic renewal rights or conditions. So the D
to the extent you have a public slip you can rent it for up to a year no restriction. Private slips is the fourth category they have non-rened to the public slips used for personal mooring association common area etc.
doesn't really apply to what we're talking about here. But with when you look at those definitions versus those of the city or the lack thereof, you can imagine that there's a little bit of inconsistency and maybe uncertainty in the public
domain. My clients for the first five years, first of all, this was in they got their submerged land lease in 18, got their core permits and their D and then they got the cities in January of 19. I think it took a year to uh actually construct
them for the first five years that they didn't when and when they when they got their permits from the city all these permits they didn't have tenants except for the existing slips that they had that were not the expansion and they knew that they had livery vessels what we call livery vessels in Destin which
is basically a pontoon boat that you can go hire and and run a boat and you can captain it yourself that the city has been rightfully I discouraging over the last several years, but at the time that's with the existing tenants they
had. So when they applied for their permits, they have a minimum right of 35, but they wanted to add six additional slips because of the fueling and the transit and they could not meet one of the 26 conditions and that was
this fair carrying vessel which um Mr. J, Mayor Jarvis pointed out at the end. I still don't think it's been fixed, but the best I can tell on the distinction between the livery and the fair carrying vessel. Again, fair carrying vessel not defined in the LDC, but going to the
comp plan and you look at them together, you got one, you got captain boats like dolphin fishing boats or sightseeing boats where they have professional captains and you literally as a consumer, you buy a ticket and you get on the boat. A livery vessel is one in
which you would actually rent yourself a pontoon boat, a way runner or something like that. At the time, the code had a provision to increase from your 35 slips that they had in this point to go more
if they provided 10% of the total slips available at that time that you were asking for to be available for um um transient. And so out of that out of that 41, they determined four slips
would be trans were required to be transient. two of which could be rental and two of which could be non-renal. Also, out of the 40 slips, four of them had to be quote fair carrying. They only
had one out of four, so they were short fair carrying. But again, the applicant is not offered to do transient slips, which is what happened. The question is, what does that mean? Is it free? Is it not free? that those were never
discussed, nor were they noted on the application as such. But ultimately during that five-year period of of the usage, these slips were never full. They didn't have weren't fully rented. And therefore, the public my clients allowed the public to use them. And by the way,
the slips were that were not rented to other to tenants, Upland tenants that had businesses have always been open to the public and for their use. have never been charged even though they had the right to charge in my opinion under the under the rules but they didn't charge a
public you didn't have to pay a fee to get up there and tie up to the dot I think you can do that if you want to I think you can do it under today's code but we're going to get to the proposal here in a minute I just wanted you to understand that history the at some
point within the last I think it's year or so and Miss Cop or Mr. Ber might be able to expand on this. It was on page five of my memo. I took a snapshot of this map that the city produced and at the very first meeting I had with staff
several months ago, six months ago maybe about this whole issue. This map is very confusing and I it was acknowledged by city staff that it has caused more confusion in the public because of the way it has lack of specificity. If you
look on the map, you'll notice it has a legend and it calls it Harbor Transient Slip locations, but doesn't say what transient means. Doesn't say if it's rental, if it's non- rental. Then it has an index for pictures. If green, it's a
water tax. If it's I guess brown or orange or something, they say customer only. Yellow is public. If you notice this map, this is a current one. um only designates those
areas for dockage on the harbor that are shown on this map. The only quote public slips other than my clients that is designated is the city owned Royal Melbourne prop that is city-owned property. But again, when it says public, it doesn't tell the public that
is looking at these maps what that means. We know D said that you can run them for up to a year, but it doesn't say what the city intends it to be. Of course, my clients don't intend it, and the public probably thinks it's free. I I can understand why they might think
that. And that causes consternation, and obviously, it's resulted in confrontation and disinformation that has bubbled up in the last six, seven months. That's why we're here actually. So, what we've done is
we've taken the the the existing usage of the docks and we've put it on a on a a drawing that you've got you guys have all seen that, right? The proposed plan. Do I need to pull that out? Y'all know what it is. Okay. And what we've done is
we've identified the current functional use and the contractual obligations my clients have with their tenants as well as what they consider transit. Now let me back up a minute. today in 2020. Remember I told you that exception that if you wanted to have
extra docket, extra slips like they did, an extra four slips, you had to have two non-renal and two that you couldn't charge and two um transit that you could charge. That those provisions were no longer there. In fact, the city, not y'all, but different city council
decided that it was public policy not to require transient slips. So today, as we for the last 4 and 1/2 years, there is no transient slip or public slip requirement in the city of Destin. That's been a policy decision by prior
councils. If these docks were torn down tomorrow by her, let's say a hurricane hits uninsured, everybody knows that owns docks. You can't insure docks. uh the hurricane uh um blows them all down and they go to rebuild. Under the
current city code, they can build 35 commercial slips. They're not required to have any public or or transient slips. And so that's kind of where we find ourselves today in looking at the need for the tenants who want to have
transient traffic to come to the docks to use the Upland restaurants to the rest of the public who may want access to not just our clients property and their tenants but to the rest of the boardwalk and to um respecting private property rights and the flexibility that
is required when you're looking and analyzing your dock usage on an annual basis that the Perry's came up with a plan. That's what we call the proposed new plan. That is what this development order amendment consideration is for you
tonight. So, let me tell you, you know, make sure you understand what the the plan is. It is not in changing the size of the docks. It's not increasing the slips any more than what was previously approved and and and built. And there so
there's still um but what it does is redesates them. So the one closest to the boat house is a um you could use for it's a small little area for a personal watercraft or for a transient slip. And we identified the transient the public
the right to be able to go anybody in the public and my client agreeing not for the first next three years not to charge anybody for that use but for have a three-hour duration because we want to make sure that people are not parking there all day long. And I'm going to get
to some of the concerns in a minute. So essentially they have created this. If you look on the where the ship store is on the west side, you're going to see six areas are designated as fuel areas. You got to understand that there's about
138 ft in depth. And so I'm not saying there's going to be six boats there at any given point in time. It could be one boat, could be two, but it could accommodate six boats at, you know, 18 to 20 ft to get fuel. There are two fuel pumps there on that dock. one closest to
the water and one further up by the um by the by the ship store. The proposal is that those and for all practical purposes and as part of our plan and proposal is that those slips, those fuel slips would be again
available for anybody in the public to use to be able to pull up. And when I say slips, this is not slips that you come in and park, you know, uh, perpendicular to to the it's where you pull up to the side of the existing boardwalk dock and you tie up on a cleat
and you get gas or you go into the ship store and purchase the things that are available for purchase there. Um, that is run by the boat house by the way. Or you could pick up to go orders um, from any of the restaurants there. Pick up and go. So it is designed to be like
what the D calls a temporary slip for non long not for long duration not for charge but for the public or anybody to be able to use to be able for those three purposes that I talked about. the six slips on the other side of the
boardwalk, those are designated in our proposal as transient and we're calling it using the city's definition is non rental transient. So again, for anybody in the public to be able to come and
park and again it's 138 ft. So whether it be two boats, four boats, six boats, whatever it may be, that um that public would not be charged for use there, but they would be limited to a duration of 3 hours. And that's up to my clients to manage that that process. And that
therefore that and and the and the the users, the public users of those slips would not be limited to having to go just to the restaurants on my client's property and their tenants. They go up and down the boardwalk to other places. So again providing access to the to the
uh the boardwalk. The remaining slips that we have would be fair carrying vessel commercial slips and they would be rented and they are as they are now. Um but they would not be um they're not
liy vessels. We we've as part of a proposal, we've consented to no livery vessels, which means we're not going to allow the public to come up there and get on a pontoon boat and and take it out themselves. My clients have heeded the city's policies as they've been
modified and changed the last couple years. And they require their tenants who have what if they have a pontoon boat, they are six sixpack charters or less. and they have to have a license captain on the vessel. So, not very my
clients are just as because they got all the liability that's going on in those docks and all those uses down there and concerned about the boat safety as we all are when we sometimes get out on busy weekends and we see the public actually operating their own vessels
with probably less experience than we would hope. Um but the bottom line is they're requiring all captain vessels for their least tenant space. So that is the proposal. We um we would the last part of it is I said there was a sunset
provision after 3 years on the six transient slips that we have at the end of three years the parish would have the option to continue in exactly the same way it is as we're proposing or that the
um patrons to those slips would be required to use the go into the restaurants in the upland property area um of of the Perry property. and probably have a wristband or something like that. Some kind of a non like y'all like a city charge 10 bucks or 15 bucks
to be in a public parking lot. Well, they would do something similar with a credit back so that they would give incentive for the public to use those u tenant properties. So, that is the proposed plan. Why?
Besides what I've already told you, why what what do we why do we need this plan? Well, first of all, there has to be control of the docks. Marcy Bell asked a question to Mayor Jarvis on January 2019. Who's going to manage? If there's, you know, 22 slips and there's
22 boats and 21 slips, who's going to manage it? Well, the Upland property owner is going to manage it, Mr. Jarvis said. Just like the city manages its own docks, like Mr. Dustin manages his docks, any other Upland property owner needs to be able to manage the docks. And there needs to be clarity of
information to the public and to the city and the applicant as to what those actual uses are. And unfortunately, they were not identified back in 2019. We have um there's a the one that the
city has a legitimate interest in the parking requirement of an upland property that has docks that rent slips. You guys know that you have parking requirements and the Perry's have the
same thing not just for their tenants on the on the hill but also for their boat slip tenants on the type of vessels and depending the type of vessel it is there's different parking requirements. For the last 10 years, even before this doc uh started back, I think goes back
to 2012, um the Perry's have submitted every two years roughly a parking analysis to the city because their tenant mix changed whether it be the Upland property didn't change a whole lot, but the but slip
usage did. So, we we'd have to go through ground truth by survey and with a consultant. Rick Hall did it has done it for every single time and the most recent one you have was I think June of of of this I think June 24th of 25 this
most recent update and it's an actual like I said on the ground truth um of how many how many parking spaces are out there what are the uses upland submerged land uh what are the parking requirements what is the multimotal
application um to those parking spaces what is these shared use because some of them were used during the day, some of them were used at night. All that has been analyzed. It's the same methodology that the city's accepted, you know, um since 2000, like I said, I think 12. And
um we have excess parking um I think it's 34 excess parking spaces as it sits there today. And it's actually more because, you know, the building on the highway burnt down and the parking analysis assumes that those parking spaces are still there. We actually
wanted them to do that because we never want to get be short. So, we have more parking that's required. Staff has gotten copies of it. They've accepted it. Um that it is that we meet those kind of those requirements. One of the problems with the way I I
just call it the disinformation that's out there today. My clients have never gated their property from Highway 98. They don't have parking gestapos down their counting. If you come down the hill, are you using one of the tenant
businesses there? Are you getting on a boat in that one of the ten one of the tenant um um um um boats or are you just finding a parking place and going east and west down the boardwalk? Unfortunately, we see that a lot in Destin and that happens and and then
that's a problem that we've had and been trying to address through public parking. But the bottom line is that there are people who take advantage of that situation or find it the most convenient which causes parking issues. a person will come and um and have their
a friend that they may go rent a pontoon for some other pontoon company down the um the harbor somewhere or some fishing charter and have them come pick them up at the Perry dock and then the person who's getting on that boat is parked down in the Perry parking lot
unauthorized which causes parking congestion for somebody on usages that those docks are not intended for those docks are not there's no public easement over those docks. Those docks haven't been dedicated to the for public use.
The city doesn't weren't dedicated for the use of the city like you do with subdivision plats and you give roads that the developer gives to the city through dedication. None of that exists. It's a usage issue. Again, I'm not blaming anybody. This is the kind of
thing why we need to have a managed plan is because there's that kind of confusion. There's also people because we have um people that as as you know we have lots and lots of boers. So people come in and they see a dock and they say, "Hey, just meet us over there at
the boat house dock and we'll pick you up." Okay. Well, then they get in their car and they go park in the Perry parking lot and then they go up on the dock and then their buddies pick them up at the end of the dock and they go to Crab Island or do whatever they want to do for all day long. Meanwhile, we've
got parking in the parking lot. That is that is an issue. Again, another reason to control who is on the dock when they're there um and for what purpose. The there's liability issues as you can
imagine with um owning docks. And if the public has the right to just come on your dock at any time they want to. Unfortunately, the city is not indemnifying my client for any uhbody that gets hurt out there. They're not indemnifying my client for any property
damage. We're not asking the city to do that. But that is a but it is an issue. And so the issue means that my client has to put procure additional liability insurance at higher premiums for PI and for
property damage because of other people that are using the docks other than those that are being invited by the parish. Again, you have a managed plan. It's easier with your insurance underwriters to be able to explain how that plan works on the ground. The um
there's a financial viability issue. I already mentioned the fact that first and this is again something I want to clarify for the public because I think they see this again on a map. It's public. They think that public funds were used to construct this dock. That is not the case. The city did not
contribute any money to the Perry nor was there any grant money or state of Florida money or any other federal grant money that built these docks built out of pocket by by the parish. The the public does not maintain these docks. As I said, they don't maintain insurance.
They don't pay to for uh utilities, electricity, submerged land lease fees. They don't pay for if there's any damage to the docks. This is all by by the owners of the property. and and to and
now because of the usage of the docks being full. Um Miss Mgler and by the way Miss Mgler um pretty much is the doc master and kind of on the ground during the season like every single day all day
long um managing the property um and the tenants and the business and the guests etc. Unfortunately, she has been threatened. Um, she's been not physically harmed, but threatened harmed because members of the public think that these docks are free. And when she asked
complightly not, you can't park your boat there, then they there becomes some issues and we she can't do anything about law enforcement, which we elicit um because of the the sitin that was going to take place, we brought some um offduty law enforcement in and
unfortunately they can't enforce it because they don't know the rules and the uncertainty from the plans and approvals. Again, another reason for clarity, and I apologize for being long-winded, but I want to make sure that that y'all understand the plight that we're in and trying to fix the
problem. Um, so what is the I mean, there are public I outlined a section in here that the that the Perry's are providing a public benefit. again don't have to have more than two slips non-renal even under the
old code which doesn't exist anymore and they're have offering six transit slips without charge um which and they're providing access to the public for fueling and what have you and and ship store and being able access to to the other areas of the harbor and also part
of the plan because it it appears again I wasn't here it appears that there was some quidd proquo on this net positive benefit it. We'll make sure everybody understands what that was. So, back number of years ago, the city um had
this adopted an ordinance that under new DOC construction, you had to pay 25% of the cost of construction for a net positive benefit fee. The city is supposed to, I don't know if they do, you can check with your staff, supposed to be segregated funds, supposed to be
be to quote mitigate the impacts that your new constructed um docking facilities might have on the harbor. I assume the money is being used for the harbor flushing station. I don't know that. Um and so unfortunately the city is um because of different maybe staff
changes and what have you, I don't think those fees were collected consistently across the board since the time the city um um actually put that ordinance into effect. It's my understanding from staff that I think it was a year or so ago, y'all, this whether it be this group or
the last group of council recognized that and have now cured that issue. The bottom line is it would have been about $119,000 would have been Mr. Perry's net positive benefit fee um contribution. At the time, the city charged him just shy of
$10,000. They gave quote credit for, you know, um transient slips. Um, and we've offered to pay $60,000 to the city um to this to the same fund that you all have for net positive benefit to the extent of being less than 15 transient slips.
In our opinion right now, even though six of them are designated transient, the other um six of their fueling might as well be transient because it meets the same functional definition, you know, and under the D. Um, I'm not going to get into the legal
analysis because me and Miss Cop can debate that all day long. Um, I just want to say briefly that there are legal issues that that we that the city and the applicant um may have um in terms of whether or not the state D rules and
their submerged land leases preempt the city's ability to designate usage. I don't want to get into all that, but I'm just saying that there is an issue out there. There's an issue about exactions where if you try to say no, we approved 15 transit slips back then and that's what you got to do today and whether
that's an exaction meaning that you were taking somebody's private property rights away without paying them for. Again, I've just mentioned that there's legal issues that we could spend a couple years litigating, but there's no reason to do that because in my opinion, what we've asked for in this application
is exactly what they're entitled to and giving more public benefits than is required by the code. Um, the last thing I want to mention to you is that when the when the approval was made by the council um, back in January of 19, if
you notice, there was nothing in the motion, nor was there anything in the code then, nor was there anything in the code now that says that boat slip usage has to be permanent in nature. There's nothing that says that. And so the
question is, do we comply today with your current codes? Yes. Are we offering more transient? Yes, because you don't have transient requirements. So the solution is to is in our opinion, humble opinion is we're trying to find a
balance. The Perry's have been here a long time, big uh contributing members of this community. They're proud of what they built. They support their tenants on the harbor which also support tax base for this city. It provides recreational opportunities for our
tourism which is an economic number one engine um in this in this in this city and also provides a balance for the citizens who are non tourist ability to use these docking facilities um in the manner in which I've expressed them to
you. So um that's basically I know I'm long-winded. I apologize. Um, but I felt compelled to make sure that I was able to communicate effectively my client's concerns and what the proposal actually was because the staff report doesn't
quite say that. Um, there is a um, and I'm not saying that there's misrepresentation or non-disclosure. It's just not flushed out in the same manner that that I've laid it out to you. Um, also one of the um, exhibits that came in with this um, staff was a
proposed development order that kind of left some things blank. And I would suggest to you that whatever decision you make that you allow me to work with Miss Comp and staff as to make sure that development order had the proper formatting. Um because there was one
thing that I thought was important I left out but it's in your materials is I'm suggesting that we have very specific signage on the docks for these areas so the public knows. So like on the fueling areas it would be temporary area for fueling ship store pickup
orders. So everybody knows on that side of the dock for those areas that's what it's for. The transient side no charge public welcome 3 hours durational. And then on the tenant side where we have long-term tenants saying tenant use
only. That way we have signage that everybody can see and we would ask also that the map of the city be updated appropriately. So again we're all on the same page. So that's the only other thing I would ask you to allow us to do.
Um, and I'd also ask you to um, well, I I want to save time for rebuttal um, after the public comment, but I'm willing to answer any questions y'all have right now. Miss Scott, do we need the public comment before we engage? I would
recommend you do, but if I if you don't mind, Mr. Matthews, can Mr. Butler respond to you about the linear footage and whether it's correct in the staff report? Sure. Um, Mr. Mr. Butler, do you recall what I'm talking about when Mr. Matthews indicated that the staff report was
incorrect with the with regard to the Yeah, I would I would say that staff believes that the staff report is correct with 260 linear feet of waterfront. Um, in your packet, there's a survey of 288 Harbor Boulevard and on the first page of that survey, it clearly says east 110 ft. So that 288
Harbor Boulevard is 110 ft wide. And then 302 Harbor Boulevard, there's also a survey in your packet. Um there is no dimension for that property there anywhere on the survey. However, staff does have a survey of the property from the 10 roof development order which I pulled earlier today. And on the survey,
it very clearly says 150.02 ft. Also, if you pull the deed from the Okaloosa County property appraiser and you look at the meets and bounds description, it says 150 ft. So you get 150 plus 110 is 260 linear feet of waterfront. Okay. Thanks. And when you say the tin roof development order, just for those that
don't know what that is, what property is that for? That's the old Marlor house that is on 302 Harbor Boulevard, I believe. And then Mr. Matthews, did you have a response on that? Or if not, I was going to also ask you, and we'll give him the right to respond, but I was also going
to ask you if the land development code has a definition for fair carrying vessel because I believe the applicant stated that it did not. But if you check chapter three, yes, fair carrying vessel has been in the land development code for a couple of years. Um it's defined
as vessels used for the following activities that are available to the public for hire party fishing, sightseeing, which includes dolphin, sunset, dinner cruises, etc. Sa sailing, parasailing, and diving, snorkeling, fair carrying vessels shall not include pontoon or runabout boats or personal watercraft. Also on the linear front,
the linear frontage of the waterfront 260 linear feet was also in the original staff report from 2019 that the council approved and I'm assuming the applicant reviewed beforehand. No, this applicant didn't re didn't review the minutes of the January 2019
minutes that weren't created until after the meeting was over with, but I do notice in the staff report that that's where you got the 260 ft. But for purposes of this council um the the Emerald Coast Associates um and that
sold the Geopoint and Daryl Burgess who in primarily who's been a surveyor for 35 years almost 40 years in our area has surveyed this property many times. And in your package are specific purpose surveys for both of these parcels. And
one of them is 117 plus or minus lineal feet and the other one's 165.7 plus or minus. when you add together that's 282.7. So um any other questions I can answer at this
time. Mr. Butler, did you have any anything else or are you good? That's all for now. Thank you, Miss Cop. Before we open to the public, would this be the appropriate time to ask questions on the information that they're entering into the record?
You can ask now. Okay. Um, just one question reviewing this. Uh, at the end here, you have the gross income report forms for each year and they're all blank. No. Yeah, because we didn't actually submit the ones that we did. I did it to show you the definitions.
Okay. If you look, can I approach Mr. Mayor? Yeah. Oh, they're there. I just pul are looking at the D definitions for slip the various slips. Okay, gotcha. I was just curious because while you were talking, you said that
they were reminded annually uh per the state to report their income. So, I just didn't know uh the reasoning for keeping those. Yeah, it was just because it's on the reporting form. It I don't know why they put the duffins in there. I guess because to make sure that depending on how you're being charged under your
submerged land lease relates back to a particular defined category that the only reason I gave it to you is because I wanted you to know that these are the state FD definition. Okay. Thank you for that. All right. All right. With that we'll enter into the public comment
portion of this. Uh, with that, I want to remind everyone that this is a judicial hearing. And with that, this is not an audience for applausing, clapping, booing, any of that nature. Outside of that, you can come up here. Everyone has the right for three minutes. Uh, you do not need to take all
three minutes. If you'd like to just wave in support or in denial when you get up here, you can absolutely do so. Or you can exercise your threeminut uh, freedom of speech. So, with that, I will have the gentleman in the back, and we will go from there. As a reminder, I guess need everyone's
name, address, and the floor is yours. Roger. My name is Alan Osborne, and uh I don't come here much, but I own two pieces of property. Uh I'm dressed to the whole board. Oh, no. Address. Okay. I own two properties in Dest. One of
them is on uh uh I think it's 572 Gulf Shore Drive. Both my properties have water access. And if you know anything about me, you know I'm here cuz something smells bad in here. Okay? This don't smell right. Now, now I'm going to tell you, my father sat on the bench for
25 years. And something that a good story for this for information is he told me that half the lawyers that stood up in front of him were wrong every day. So half the court was wrong every time. So what you you can't just take testimony as fact. And I got a pretty
good track record for overturning stuff that people say. And I ain't got no law license. But I'm going to tell you what you heard mostly today was a whole can of red herring. Okay. What you heard was the same permits were in place that when you were back then and it went to some
die tribe about what they gave them. It doesn't matter. What happened was all those conditions existed and the permits. You just need to know back in the day or your predecessors need to know did they have the permits? And the answer is yes.
After that, they came to you and said, "You control the city. If the D and other organizations dictated what you had to do, then Mr. Perry wouldn't have made an application asking you if this is okay for the community." So, he cut a
deal with you. He saved money. And it's silly to say the inconsistency is a definition. Webster's been around about 200 years. Look up Transit. Look up mooring. Look up boat slip. These are all easy definitions that you can't
twist. And and nobody there in that hearing. And I sat right back there and was telling Goober, I mean Gary, that uh you know, hey, this is this is a good thing because the harbor's dying. Okay. The harbor's a mess. It is. And today I
backed my boat out and went over to Claude and climbed up in the tower. And who would park there? There's 50. no more in signs. He has the same liability he's always had. And every business down here, including Dwey, has that uh liability of dealing with idiots. And
this in this development order won't change that. Not a lick. What it will change is I don't even think there's 21 slips where you can pull up as a a resident of Destin. Now I got a slip. But what about people
that have a 22-footer, live back here, launch at Joe's Bayou, and want to go and eat. Go look at that and see. You know why it hadn't been used? Cuz Claude's been covering it up with signs for the whole time. And and you what you're going to do, and you better listen to me on this,
if you like to keep your money, 10 minutes, 10 second warning. Okay? You're going to set a precedence. And I'd ask for more time if you think it's sufficient. And what you what I'm scared you're going to do and I got a track record of proving this is you're going to open the
door for every single deal that's been cut by previous councils and then and then you're going to open the door for other inconsistencies that you won't back the development order that you did. This is not a precedence you can ever set or we've lost almost death in the
harbor's a mess. It is. It's It's not what I moved here in as a young soldier in the army. Not what I fell in love with. And I know I can't undo it, but I sure don't want to. The last thing we need is more commercial slips. The
locals need a way to enjoy Destin includes the harbor. And we're out of luck. You And I love what y'all done with Noriega Point, but all those places, the local park, they're gone for the good of the tourists, not the good of us. for the good of the tourists.
Claude cut this deal. In my opinion, Claude wants more money. And if and all these conditions existed back then. So if he knew what the public was and we all sat out there and went, "Yeah, we're going to get something." There was no mention of we're going to charge.
There's no mention. Every business owner is responsible for policing up the unruly people. Nobody polices up. If y'all have a business, if y'all have unruly people, it's not the city council's problem to figure it out. Liability and nobody's going to fence
that area. Look, I love the boat house. I love I love Land Sharks Pizza and all that stuff. But the fact is it creates chaos and nobody's going to fence it. That's all a red herring, too. He cut a deal. We hadn't been able to use it. Nobody wants to pull up there and meet
those nasty people. And if you haven't gone down there and seen the 20some signs that are down there, then you'll have no doubt of why it's not in use. Nobody used the Destin City slips cuz frankly, hell, they were full of silt. You couldn't pull up in there in
anything but a flats boat. So, look, some part of the character of Destined. The harbor needs a harbor master that has a pair. And y'all need I don't I do we even have one? I mean if we don't I
don't think so. But for for God's sakes don't throw the baby out with the bass water. And listen, Mr. Perry owned both properties. This will be my last point. Caveat mtor. No matter if he transferred it to relatives or somebody else buys it, they bought it like it laid. And
I'll give you my example. I I have a slip on Holiday Aisle. I signed the documents agreeing to follow the rules that were in place in what 72. It says I can rent one of them. Get there's people now that rent all 100% of
their property, but the rules that I agreed to or I bought the property that were agreed to says that I will only rent one and I can't come here to you and say, can you override my private agreement? Mr. Perry entered an agreement with you.
You voted on it with all the same conditions and you're opening Pandora's box for everybody to appeal everything that happens based on I want it for money. Please keep the public's slips. 21 slips I believe is more than all the
rest of them combined. So what you be doing is cutting the majority of places the public can go. Please save Destin. Thank you. Thank you, sir. All right. Next. Oh, you're good. There's gonna be plenty.
Oh, gotcha. Yeah. Good evening. Name and address, sir. Yes. Uh Jay Roberts, Becker and Polyoff. I represent Destin Yach Club, Dustin Harbor Place, Marba, San Piper Cove Condominium Association, Harbor
Landing, Destin Harbor West, Waterview Towers, East Pass Towers 1, and East Pass Towers 2. That's 173 harborgoing destinites. Before you continue your physical address, either
office or 833 East Mur. Thank you, sir. Uh that is 1,073 unit owners that surround the Dustin Harbor and they have asked me to come here to give thanks to give thanks to
the 2019 council here to give thanks to Mr. Perry 2019 for providing a public benefit to them because lots of talk is done in this area about access to beaches. Beaches are important, but let's be honest, what does Destin have
that 3A doesn't have? We got a harbor. We got a harbor here and having access to that harbor is important. So on behalf of 1,073 harborgoing Destinites, I say thanks for
foregoing short-term revenue for long-term public gain. On a personal note, to my wife's chagrin and uh my MX statement, I spent in excess of $20,000 on the harbor last year, including
substantial renumeration to 302 and 288, for my friends, for my family, for myself. Now, that's not necessarily remarkable in and of itself, but what's noteworthy is I don't live in Destin. I live on the sound in Marester. So, how
do I get here? How do I get here? I bring my boat. So do people in Navar. So do people in Master. So do people in Shalomar, Fort Walton Beach, and Niceville. If we don't have a place to come up to
spend that money, we go elsewhere. There's plenty of parking in Niceville. Fort Walton Beach is building a landing with exceptional parking for their tourist area to come there. Sand Destin has plenty of parking to take their boat. So again, I give thanks for the
long-term thinking of the council in 2019. I give thanks to the Perry's for what they did and making that deal. And I hope that everybody can see the long-term benefit of what we have in place. Thank you. One second. Uh just for my personal notes, your address one more time.
833 East Miracle Strip. Thank you, sir. Strip. Next. Yes, ma'am. Did I push it? Already on. Already on. Name address and the floor is yours. Emily Rogers, 770 Harbor Boulevard. Um,
first of all, I wanted to discuss the core value of the month. Integrity for you guys. It's on the agenda on the first page. integrity, honesty, consistency, accountability, and reliability. What is this developer asking you to do?
To put away your integrity. This whole argument is based on the premise that Mr. Perry didn't understand what a public transient slip was. That he had no idea he was going by the FD permit. However, you heard it
yourself at the 2019 meeting. You heard his agent, Mr. Perry was present, state, "We are proposing 20 public waterfront slips to be available on the two properties to benefit the harbor waterfront, the harbor boardwalk, and
all of the harbor area in general. This is his plan all along, providing the greatest public benefit." Does that sound like he doesn't understand what a public transient slip is? Because it doesn't sound like it to me. Then we're going to couch in that NFPB
fee, that $119,500. Now, I could be wrong on this, but I'm pretty sure the $10,000 that he did pay was to the FT. So, he didn't pay anything to the city of Dustin. He actually asked Mr. Braden
if that city council would agree to wave those fees and they did based on the mitigation and the fact that he was providing public transient slips for the public benefit. What is the public benefit of rental
slips that he can rent out for a year? I don't see any. So why was this fee waved at all? Because he knew what he was doing. So, and I am going to ask for a little bit more time because I did want to go ahead
and bring up a couple of things that haven't been brought up regarding the parking situation because I went through and I looked over the uh parking analysis that was provided by Mr. Matthews. Based on this,
the the raw parking requirement for this property is 279 spaces. With the MA multimodal transportation district, it's it drops down to 223 spaces. This parking analysis then further dropped it down to 192 spaces. Then they
did it one more time because of the different hours of the day that people are required to work there. And that's where they went down to the 119 space requirement. Here's the thing about these analysis. They're opinions. And quite frankly, this opinion is wrong. If
you go back to 2017, their other parking analysis said 124. So weird, right? The number actually dropped. Kind of strange. Doesn't make sense. Again, a parking analysis is merely an
opinion. I can go out and hire a parking. 3 minutes is up. Does anyone want to sacrifice their time? I will. Thank you, ma'am. So, thank you. Anyhow, again, parking analysis opinion based.
You can get a different one that's going to give you a different opinion. This particular one is even more incorrect. You'll actually notice that, and I can't tell you which p which page it is, but for the hourly requirement,
they're saying that all of the fair carrying vessels, their need drops to zero at 6 p.m. What do all the fair carrying vessels do here? Sunset cruises, fireworks cruises, all of that, every single one of them
offers it seven days a week starting at 6 PM. So, what else happens at 6? Dinner rush. Now, mind you, common sense will actually tell you there is a huge parking issue down
there. Huge. Go down there any day, any night. There is not a single place to park. And these properties together have roughly 153 parking spaces. You explained to me how that's going to serve six
restaurants, one bar, 25 six passenger fair carrying vessels, two tour boats, and three fishing vessels. How are you going to do that? We already got a problem. And two of the restaurants aren't even
even developed yet. Like they said, it's sitting empty. The problem's there. So, what are we going to do? cram more things down. I don't think it's really smart. So anyway, finally, I don't need to go over
the 2019 stuff again. I don't need to explain to you what has happened, what should be happening. But what I will leave you with is that we're asking you guys to write this wrong. We're asking you to uphold the
integrity of this city. Thanks. Thank you. Right. Next. All right. John. Uh, good evening, Council Mayor. Uh, John Stevens, 4025 Indian Trail. Um, I sincerely hope the city and and its
residents retain these, uh, public access to all these promised transient slips. Transient slip access is vital part of this community's connection from the water and, uh, support both locals and visitors, uh, who contribute to our harbor's vibrancy and economy. Um, so I'm going to change hats. Um, so now I'm
going to wear my uh city desk and harbor CRA chairman hat. Um, should this matter proceed to go to litigation, arbitration, or negotiation. Um, in addition to keep in as many transient slips as possible, I strongly urge uh the council or the the council to
consider requesting easements to to the boardwalk of 288 and 302 Harbor Boulevard. These easements uh were among the few that city did not secure during the original original initiative of the Destin Harbor Boardwalk Project. Um securing them now uh will help um
complete phase one and help initiate phase three which is to extend the boardwalk all the way to ship to Chandler. Um and then on another note um I ask that the council review the shared parking plan also um as there's a lot of inconsistencies in it. Appreciate it.
Thank you sir. Anyone else? Yes, ma'am. Right. Just for consistency, if you can give me your name and address again. Joan Bushlon, Marino Acres on Planet Drive. Um,
there was a lot of words salad there. I heard everything, but out of that I got public benefit, but not free. So the transient boat slips. So a few years ago we had a major issue
with right of ways here in Dest. And um it took us a few years and we worked really really hard and came above city council and we eventually got that a special referendum put on the ballot
and it passed unanimously with on the vote for this the residents and citizens of Destin voted unanimously to save those right of ways and we did and the reason we did was because I have
always been an advocate for water access. I believe the public has the right to access points and we should cherish that. I came to the meeting on Monday for the public workshop and I
think John Stevens stood up here and said that what we need is more transient boat slips. Why on earth would we give up any of these transient boat slips to spend more taxpayers dollars to build more transient boat slips?
Wouldn't that be a net loss, not a net gain? So, I know in that workshop council gave some really good feedback and I was really encouraged by the feedback.
green spaces, water access, residents. We spent a lot of time down on the harbor and it was time to come back to the residents of Dest. What were our needs? Our needs are access to the water,
whether it be by boat, by foot, or if you want to go to the beach. There's a huge problem with this. So, I know my time's running out. So, does the city even know what public
benefits have been given over the years? Because I do believe this is a slippery slope. If you start and maybe we had that issue with the right ofways also. I don't think that there was a real good accountant of how many public rightways
that access the water that we actually that the city actually had. There had to be an accountant done of that. How much more public benefits is out there. I know one in particular that goes right through the middle of a condo out to a beach. A lot of people
don't talk about it. I used to live right across the street. 10 seconds. But public access, I say no to this new development order. We need to we need those transient slips and we need more. Thank you, ma'am. Right. Anyone else?
Travis Chun, 202 Lakes Lane. I just want to I mean I'm pretty sure they covered mostly everything the last couple people but I just wanted to say that uh a vote for this new developmental order would be a vote against the people's the people of
Destin citizens it. Yep. The blue hold up and get on the mic. Yep. This for the Pratt 5 Calhoun Avenue. Um, just a couple things. They they took all the wind out of my sale. They took everything. So, just a few things. Where
are the public slips now? Do we have any reminder? We got to address us. That'll be for rebuttal for the gentleman. So, I don't know if there's any there. I don't think there's one. There's someone said 20 signs. There's probably 50 signs. So, I'd like to know where that is. Also,
what what kind of revenue has been derived from what we should have as our slips? So, let's say there's 20 slips. Are they being rented? Where'd that money go? So, that's another benefit. Not to mention the tax credits. We talked about the 119,000.
The other thing is, you know, if city council doesn't matter and city council's agreement is moot, it doesn't have a expiration date and all the the like like she said, word salad that we talked about. If it doesn't really matter, why are they back here asking
for it to be changed? So, obviously, you have the the the upper hand here and I hope you use it. So, you know, maybe maybe there's a little compromise. I mean, I would say 20 transient slips. It might be a little bit much, but the
thing is if there's I've been over there many times. I boat. I've got two boats out here and I'll go over there and a year ago during the winter especially, they wanted my business. They'd let me park there. It was fine. I never overstayed my welcome. But here in this
last year and last this summer, I guess, like I've not had a runin with anybody. I went over, excuse me, I went over there one day and there was another gentleman running his business obviously and he said, "Hey, you can't park there." I just said, "Okay." Went on. But apparently it's gotten pretty
hostile according to what I'm hearing. So with that said, you guys have the power in your hands obviously or they wouldn't be courting you as hard as they are right now. Took me a minute, two minutes. Uh that was an hour and 15 minutes. So hopefully we can get to the
bottom of it. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Anyone else? Yes, sir. Name and address. Floor is yours. Patrick Burke on behalf of Destin Water Taxi, 615 Golf Shore Drive. Good evening, everybody. Um, not in proposal of this uh
the amendment you guys are doing. Um, however, I would like to relinquish the water taxi slip in front of the edge and have it on either side on the west end on east end on the dock as I do have customers that would like to go from Harbor Tavern or strictly to Boat House. The edge is fine. I always drop off
there, but however, with the heavy traffic that comes in through that channel way, uh, for example, I nearly missed uh, an accident from what I call credit card captains. So, if I could have please uh amendment or a restructure of the water taxi slips on
the east side of the dock. I only need one section. So, 8 foot I believe is the required construction between piling to piling on the edge is fine with me just so I can get out of the taxi way of the channel and be on my way. That's all I have to say and I'll give my time to anyone else that needs it. Thank you.
Thank you, sir. All right. Next. All right. Got a lot of people here. Anyone else? Yes, ma'am. Adrienne Alterman, 425 Stallman Avenue. Hi, Council Members and Mr. Mayor. Um, I just wasn't planning on speaking tonight, but it really struck me when I
was watching the video of the original um passing of this I don't want to call it a bill, but pro uh whatever was built. And um if you listen to it, the amount of times that the comments were made about the public good, I think it was at least five or six times, if not
upward of 10 to 12 times, between both the person that was pitching you the proposal and then also the city council members that were um in unanimous approval of it and how good they thought it was for the public. So, I'd ask you to go back to that time that the city council um approved it and look at the
intent of both parties because both parties were indicating that the transient portion of the proposal was going to be better for the public. And I think that's really where the issue stands today. I do ask that if you guys are considering a yes on
uh Mr. Perry's proposal that the three-year limit of whatever is approved from a transient's time be struck or changed because really that is just uh farce give from there. You know, let's give
get as many um public transpl and keep them there permanently uh for as long as we can. And then finally, I want to ask the council um uh Mr. Perry's lawyer came up here and spoke today for a long time about a lot of definitions about transient, a lot of
questions about what would happen if you rebuilt that dock today and if a hurricane came and and blew it away. Well, why aren't there requirements? And really, what is the council thinking about the future of the harbor and where do you guys want to see the public have use of that? And so really consider in
your future uh agenda items to what what should those requirements be and let's fix this problem for any future builds that come to the harbor. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else? Yes, sir. I'm Jean Eisman, 775 Gulf Shore Drive.
Just want to start out with saying I do love Kimberly and Claude, have a good relationship with them, but I run inspected vessels out of our marina and the guy stating that only six-pack vessels are being run out of there is completely false. Prime Time Charters
runs out of there. They have three livery vessels and several pick up at the end of the dock as liveries. That's all I got. Thank you, Jean. Anyone else? All right, giving everyone due process. Anyone else? Seeing none, we're going to
close the public comments. Miss Cop, does the applicant wish to respond to any of the public comments? Okay. Do they need to respond? All right. You're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Mayor Council, I'm I made
notes of the different people who spoke, so I'm going to have a couple comments on some of the things they said. Uh, Mr. Osborne says he lives at 572 Gulf Shore Drive. Um, Mr. Osborne has been a resident of Walt County up until 2223, living on Driftwood, which is the
extension off of M Bayou, where he listed his homestead. um he ran for sheriff's just this past um election cycle several months ago and listed his home address as being off of Mbio Road in Walton County. So um I don't know where he lives and whether he owns
property or not in Dest, but he's definitely hasn't been a Dest. And I'll let Mr. Bagby share with you the litigation that he's filed against the city of I mean Oak of Walton County for the last 20 years. Um second, Mr.
Robert, respect the hell out of him. Great um lawyer, association lawyer, Becker Polio. And uh he may represent 1,73 condo owners. I don't know how many of them have their own private boat slips on the harbor. I know Marbella does for sure. Um and because I've
worked with Jay on different projects. Several of these condo of developments have boat slips on the harbor. And I can assure you they're not transient and they're not public because they're for their residents and their residents only to use. Um Miss Rogers known no new knew
Tffy still good friend of mine. Um you know the thing that that that Miss Rogers she's couple statements. One Mr. Perry never paid $10,000 in uh net positive benefit fee. It's not true. there's a letter in your file that you got that
the city produced as part of their evidence as well as we did that that was paid. Um and second of all, um she calls this a contract. Mr. Perry did not enter into a contract with the city. The city is very well
aware. I know Mr. Bagby, Mr. Traml are, Mr. Destin for sure because I've been involved with meetings with him before in the past. There is a statutory and provision and it also is codified by the city of Destin and their land development called and it's called a
developers agreement where there is a quid proquo for lots of different things and it is public record have public meetings it is drafted it is worked on it is signed it's approved it's recorded in the public records we don't have a development agreement we have an
approval of a dock permit for construction ction. The uses that were offered by the applicant were permitted usage. It wasn't an indentured servant. I'm giving you free
use of 21 boat slips for the rest of of my life and the duration of the docks. I don't doubt that these citizens believe and I don't disagree that we need as much access to the water, whether it be the harbor uh waterways or whether it be the beaches.
That's what eminent domain is about. That's about raising taxpayers money and using triumph money like you guys have done very well with your grants and bought property on the beach that you own and you control and you regulate and you allow the public to use it. You
bought property at World Melbourne Park and built a the first public marina, I guess, to to the extent that it's a marina, but the first public docking facility answering cons uh people in the citizenry who live
here saying we want to have access to the harbor. The city can buy additional properties if they can find Upland property owners to sell it to them and they can build docks and they can create their own rules and regs. But what the
city can't do is to exact private property and public benefits unless it's to mitigate the the um the causes of it which is why we had net positive benefit which is why we have impact fees and we all know about that.
You can't just say, "Well, you offer this 21 transient slips down. You're going to stay with it and it's going to be free to the public." City doesn't have that right in my opinion. Um, that gentleman I I I missed his name, but he wants to us to relocate the taxi
slip. I I I don't think that's going to be an issue. I've talked over with my clients. I'm not quite sure I understood the issue because I have hearing aids and I don't hear very well. So, I couldn't quite understand what he was saying. But, if it's a issue of designating a different place than what we've had for taxi, then we could be
more than happy if he's the guy that drives a water taxi around us. Um, I did want to mention something because I forgot at the very end of the 2019 when Marcy Bell was asking Gary Jarvis
about managing the docks and how the people you remember Gary said, "Well, I'm sure people are going to be calling to find out how much it cost because it was clearly in his head and at least was mentioned whether Mr. Brad and everybody else up there and picked
up on it that these boat slips were not free of charge. So, it was always contemplating to me that way. Um, last gentleman said that there is a prime time charters and they don't um they do something not they're not limited to a
six-pack. Um, the proposal is that we'll be limited to six-pack and all the tenants have been told that including this gentleman, I don't remember his name, but the prime time charter guy. So that's part of the proposal that that we were giving to you. So with that being
said, I'll be answer be willing to answer any other questions the council has. All right, Miss Cup, at this point, can I go through the board? Yes. All right. I'm going to start with one question as an icebreaker. Are you paid by the minute? No. Fair enough. All right.
Yep. Staff, anything? Seeing none from staff. All right. Councilman Guile. Thank you. Thank everybody for coming in today. During the public comments, there were six locals that voted no or came up to
speak no. Two people reserved time for the people speaking no and two non-residents that spoke no. I just want that clear that I tracked that. And I do appreciate y'all speaking, but there were two non-residents that were were voicing opinions. Second, um, one thing
that you've kind of stressed is, uh, based off permit permit, but I watched the 2019 and it was very clear to me that council members stated that they were approving this primarily and solely because they were going to be public slips. Um, I feel
like if you would have stressed that they weren't going to be public slips that they would not have have approved this. Second, I'm I've looked at your shared parking. I've listened to some of the the citizens in Destin. I've also Googled just those two addresses,
charters out of those addresses. Uh you state that you're going to have 0% at 6 p.m. I've seen Cruise Tikis that's located at that address offering sunset tours starting at 6 p.m. lasting 3 hours up to 9:00 p.m. I've seen Prime Time Charters also doing the same thing
starting at 6:30 lasting for three hours. So I believe that's inaccurate and it's deceptive. So, I'm going to move to deny the application as uh presented. Is that a motion? That is a motion. I have a motion. Do I hear a second?
I have a second. We'll continue discussion. Anything else? No. Thank you very much. All right. I didn't know. Council, uh, Councilman Braden, you're up. Thank you. Um, when you stated a minute ago that the other attorney said there was like a
thousand or something other boats or slips or whatever or he represented those people and you assured us that those were not public. What did you mean by that when I when I said the condo marina boats? Yeah. You said the thousand of
them and you assured us that those were not public. Yeah, because those the ones that I have read and I've read the submerged land leases and I've also peritted permitted them for developers of condominium projects. They are very specially designed for the associations
and the usage of those unit owners and what would be they're not open to the public. If they're not public, then what would be a public slip? Pardon me? What what would be a public what would be for the public? That's a great question because there are no public slip definitions in the city of Dustin. The only public definition is by the D that
says you can rent for up to a year. Right. Well, I was on the council in 2019 and I don't need you or anyone else in this room or city staff or this council, anybody else to tell me or explain to me what a
public slip is or a transit slip. I've taken boats from here to Clear Water to Key West to Mexico and we stayed in transit slips all the way. public transit slip. So, I don't need anybody to explain to me what a public slip is. I don't need
anybody explain to me what that 55 mph speed limit sign says out there. Um, I know what it is. So when you stand up here and tell me or or you or anybody else stands up and tells me that if you allow me to build this or if you approve
this, I'm going to give you 20 public transit slips. And when they go to the harbor board and has said multiple times, yes, these are public. These are for the public. That is for the public. I don't mean that
it's for the public to pay for them. is for the public to come rent it for a month for 12 months. That's for public use. It's a public benefit and I know we were big into public benefits and we still are. You know, if you want to build it, we need some public benefit.
So, okay. Well, I I'll give you this public benefit if you approve it. And that's what we approved on. I know with without a shadow of a doubt that was how I interpreted it when I voted to to approve it that they were for public not
for public to rent for 12 months at the time. Um, and it was transit slips. And I I like the lady said mentioned a while ago, the parking it did go from 279
to 223 to 120. And I've said for eight years or nine nine and a half years now, I don't know how any hell that is even possible. Like I said, that's their opinion. why the city why this council or past councils ever approved that or even considered that you know that well
the votes aren't being used from 6:00 on or whatever. I mean, that's just that's ludicrous. And you know, we we require you to have so many parking places and then the next day you can come in and say, "Well, I know we had to have so many parking
places for my restaurant, but now I want 12 pontoon boats. So, here's a somebody just pencil whipped a parking study for me and says, "I got enough now all of a sudden." And then three months later, well, I want some pon or want some wave runners. Well, let's pencil whip that again. Okay. Now you you got plenty
still. I I don't get it. But no, when it's it's public and I like I say, I know what I know what public is. I know what they meant by public or transit slips. That's what I base my decision off of in
2019. And I feel certain that's what the rest of the staff and the council base their opinion off of. Um, and I know at least four years ago, Mr. Perry come up here and he stood right where you're at and was arguing with the
council that this is that's private property. We had no right to tell him that he couldn't rent those slips because we were telling him then that was public. You can't do it. You got to take your signs down. Well, it's private property. You can't tell me what I can do on my own property.
I mean, so it's been going on for a long time. So I and again it's like it was said earlier I if it's so cut and dry I don't know why you're here tonight. I don't know why you even don't you supposed to go to the magistrate tomorrow night if it didn't pass tonight
and why you didn't take it there or if it's so cut and dry. I don't I don't know why why is it an issue. But anyway there's just a there's a lot and I don't I'm going to shut up for now.
All right, point taken. Uh, Councilwoman Abear. Thanks, Mayor. Um, not sure if you noticed, but I was in the front row during that meeting because I was running for council and had not made it on council yet. So, I attended every meeting because I wanted to know what was going on with the city and I heard
it. I heard it sitting in this room. This is for the public. And there was no intention of, oh, it's going to cost money. There was no discussion of cost. it was going to be for the public benefit. And then when Miss Prebble
reiterated that, let me clarify that with you. This is going to be for the public. I That's wonderful. That's exactly what we want to do. We want to do stuff for the public. So, it was clear and there was no muddiness about it whatsoever.
And for you to say, you know, if the city wants some more, you know, harbor access, whatever, you know, go find some more and go buy it. That's the residents money we have to spend to get that. We got lucky that we got TDC funding to help us buy one harbor. We got lucky
that we got TDC funding to help us buy two pieces of property at the front over by Crystal Beach. So telling us that we we should go find some more, that's really not fair to the citizens that work very hard in this city and pay a lot of money. They should enjoy those 21
slips. They should be free. And I don't think anybody could argue with that. that was here that night or has watched it become an absolute aggravation since then. So I agree. I I I'm not going to vote for your change. Fine. Um I want to
clarify though what you said, what Mr. Braden said, Mr. is public benefit. The applicant wasn't required to provide 21 public benefits under the rules of the city of Dustin. Four, two, two of which no charge, two of which could be
charged. That's what your code says. That's what your code says. But Mr. Matthews, he said 21 public slips, not what was required, what was given. It was given. There was
no laws, codes, any of that was discussed. His lawyer stood up here. Appreciate your comments. I wasn't here, but we we'll just beg to differ. That's fine. You You got just rewatch it maybe five or six more times. It It'll sink in. It
was free. It won't won't. All right. For the sake sake of uh not being redundant, I do believe um and it's it's quite apparent to me that the public slips uh were a condition of approval. I mean, that seems pretty cut and dry. So, um, you know, the fact that
it took an hour, you know, I I guess come from the standpoint of if you're explaining, you're losing and to take an hour to explain something that should be fairly straightforward. Um, and given the evidence that you provided today, um, it just I I don't see how this can
even be um, held up on your side. So, I appreciate you um, coming here tonight, but I I just really don't see how this wasn't a condition of approval. Um, with that, Councilman Dustin. Thank you, Mayor.
Well, Mr. Perry group raises a number of questions that I think are legitimate, you know, about the liability when the public uses your slips, uh, about the repairs when the public tears your slips up, how long the agreement to provide
public slips goes for, is it in perpetuity? Um, none of those things were addressed and it's abundantly clear from listening to the tapes and the testimony that the council was accepting public's lips
and they didn't expect there was any time frame on them. Um, I'm I'm like you say, I'm surprised it wasn't the subject of a development agreement that would have clarified everything and would have made this whole uh exercise we're going through not necessary. But that didn't happen.
And so, uh, I don't know how we can go forward and give up the public's use of these slips short of a a judge in a court telling us we have to. And so, you know, I'm regretfully could not support a motion to uh give up those public
slips and and the motion to deny, I think, is correct at this time. Council Schmidt. Yeah. Man, it's been a while. Thanks Mr. Matthews for being here. I think last time you were here we had a lot of
discussion too. So hopefully uh we'll have to do it again anytime soon. Um I appreciate though this is the process of what we all signed for signed up for. So you know I respect you and everybody for coming here. Um you said a minute ago
that this property does not have a parking zar. Is that what you said that they don't have anybody going around asking for parking? I just was curious. Is that what you said? Yeah. Okay. I just wanted to make sure I heard you because I just want to make sure for the
record. Um, why are these FD forms in your packet blank? So, I was trying to understand I was trying to do the research. I saw the definitions, but then I tried to go see, okay, well, here's the definitions. Well, how many
did they say were being used? But they're all blank. I understand that. I did not submit the forms that were filed previously other than to show you what the definition of clips are by the D.
That was the only purpose by giving you that. So, so, so we don't know how many they put under each of those sections then. No, no, none of them. That's
No, that is No, I I can't answer that for you. I can tell you that the DP does not designate any of the slips that they approve in those categories the way those definitions are. And if you noticed that they're all fee generating.
I I'll be quite candid with you in my conversations with FTP. They care about the money. Okay. I'm sorry, but that's No, you're good. Speaking of the money, speaking of the money, um I have a document, I guess, that was signed by
Mr. Claude Perry. It's in our packet for these applications, and it was writing to Mr. Zenuzi, who was the community development director at the time. And it says, um, I'm writing you concerning the dock extension projects located at 302
and 288 Harbor Boulevard. This project V the project offers 15 transient boat slips for use by the public. So I believe this was his way of saying or what what was the
purpose of this? Do you know? Uh, no. But I can tell you what I agree with what it says. It doesn't say free, does it? It doesn't say in perpetuity, does it? Boat slips for and we do have today transient boat 12 that are provided or 13 provided to the public right now. And
did he request to have the hundred and something thousands waved? No comments, please. I I know through the different things that I saw that that was definitely taken into consideration and that's another reason why we offered to
pay 60,000 more than the 10 that we've already paid because I think there was a quid proquo. I've never seen a document that actually says that but it definitely looked like that that was something that had been discussed. Absolutely. All right. Gotcha.
Well, I mean, based on, you know, I do have some questions about the shared parking plan as well. You know, there's some things there that don't look right. Um, but based on what we see tonight, you know, that 20 minute video, I wasn't here in 2019, but I watched it tonight. It's
very to me very clear multiple times by another outstanding community member. The Tramolf family has made it very clear representing your client that these were going to be 21
public transient slips to use by the public to come enjoy our festive marketplace on the harbor. And that was the intention given that night from what I could see. Um, I wish it's been like that since that day. Um, but there's no
way I could support this development order application based on what I'm being presented tonight. So, okay, Councilman Bagby. Thank you, Mayor. Uh just a couple of quick points that Miss Rogers point or
that I understood was you paid $10,000 or the I'm sorry, the applicant paid $10,000, but that $10,000 went to FD, not to the city. So, uh I will ask the staff or you or the applicant,
how much in uh payment did the city receive for the NEPB? Go ahead. U Kim Bell. No, I thought you're reaching for it. Okay. Nobody knows. I'm pulling up the
letter from from Lewis because I think the amounts were in there. Okay. Okay. Although Crystal's not here, right, to verify. Oh, thanks. So, according to the letters from uh from Lewis to Mr. Perry, it
looks like a total of 9,870 net positive environmental benefit fees and a total of 475655 in building permit fees were paid to the city. That is my read of the letter. So, 9870. So, I just want
Because you know I like I think Mr. Destin's absolutely right. We should we not just the city but the applicant should have done a better job memorializing this in some sort of an agreement. Uh and we wouldn't be here
tonight but we didn't. what I think and I'm not here, you know, I I've ran through the parking numbers and I just think that's I have a lot of issue with it, but I'm not going to spend time doing that because to me the bottom line after watching the tape a couple of
times is that it would have been 119,000 and you paid 10,000. And the reason the council allowed you to pay 10,000 as opposed to 119,000 was because you were given a public benefit of the slips
to the city or to the public which the city represents. And so that 109,000 difference and I I read, you know, y'all valued back then it was $1,000 per month per slip and all this. The courts are going to figure all that out. But for
our purposes, we we g you know there's there's three reostats here. There's the the money paid. Okay, you paid 10,000, you you could have paid 119,000 and all of them would have been private. They would have
been whatever you want them to be. You could have uh there was a mention of the harbor boardwalk easement. you know, you could have granted that uh like most everybody did, not everybody. Uh or
there was the number of public slips. And so you you don't get to in my mind, you know, if you want to come back and say, "Well, we'll pay 60,000 and we'll give you 15 slips and we'll give you an easement to the board." That that's a
negotiation that you and the staff can have. But for tonight's purpose, what's in front of us was you gave us 21 slips. We let you pay only $10,000. And unless you have a better proposal than what what you're currently
proposing in your revised development order or amended de development order, then I I have to vote no because I just don't think the value is there. The value is in those slips. The value that Mr. Perry, who I love and have always
respected, and you who I respect. I want to say I love you, but don't love them. That's fair. Yeah. Stop while you're here. Yeah. Uh is that we we had we the city and the
applicant had an agreement, had a an understanding, and we moved forward, and we didn't get but $10,000. and but we got 21 slips or we thought we were getting 21 slips and that that's where we are and you know we'll let a judge or whatever figure all that out
but I think it was clear from the record that was established the public and the city thought those were public slips and so that that's it. Uh Councilwoman Traml well I'd just like to say I think the three of us over here
have spent so many more hours with Mr. Matthews in negotiation than anybody else in this room. Um because we sat together and negotiated the contract for all those easements and we hammered it out and we made details and we did all that kind of stuff. And yes, there are
some missing from all of this. I agree with that. I don't know that you can do that every time, but I will say with what's presented tonight um and what you're proposing,
I'm going to deny the application as well because I think it's time to negotiate again. Thank you. I would ask a qu I'm sorry. Yep. No, I was going to say the board's free, so if there's any rebuttals or any final comments, please do so now. Yeah,
I would um ask um that because of comments of Mr. Bagley, Mr. Destin, and Mr. Raml in particular, I would like an opportunity to continue this for 30 days to let me talk with Please. Nope. To let
me get with staff and see if there is another proposal that would be more acceptable than the one that you have presented to you tonight. I I will commit that the proposal that we have and the uses during the next 30
days will be those uses the the fueling in the six transit etc. So not to put have no parking signs if you will up on the dock but to give me 30 days to meet with staff and to come up with um something
that may be more palatable to you. That's what I would ask. All right. Thank you for that. I'm asking before you make He's asking for 30 days to continue talking to staff and I about a revised proposal. Is that what you're saying? Correct. And then continuing the VO the the NOV tomorrow
for the same 30-day period so that we can be doing it all at once. Yeah. He's asking also for us to put tomorrow's code compliance hearing on hold for 30 days. Guys, stop. We got a sheriff back there who's been bored all night.
All right, Councilman Braden. Okay. But but things on the dock will remain as they are now. Correct. We won't be changing it to the whatever you proposed on. Oh, I'm going to say we'll continue to have trans the transient slips that are there will be be used by the public
without charge. Okay. All right. Thank you. That's that's what I wanted to clarify. I would All right. Just like that, the board's ling back up. Councilman Braden. Um thank you, mayor. No, I don't. No. Just because the council has already pretty much admitted they're not
accepting it, they're going to deny it. Now you want 30 days, take another shot at it to come back and try to work something with the staff. Well, it's not the staff, it's this council that's running the show, not the staff. Um, so they just I mean with all the
misinformation up here tonight, I mean it's incredible. Um, I mean the one that um Mr. Um Osborne said he lived on the island. He never said that. He said he has property. He has two pieces of property in Dustin. Um
so it's I mean just just goes on and on and on, you know, just just trying to mislead and um no there's no way in hell I'm fixing to give 30 days. I mean, you know, to give another shot at it. I mean, this is a judicial hearing, other
you know, to work with staff. It's this not worth this is not for staff to work on it. is it's the council. We got elected to represent the people and that's all I have. Mayor, thank you. Thank you, Councilman. Council Gile,
it's been six years and you all haven't learned the definition of public transient slip. I don't think you're going to learn it in 30 days. So, I'm not going to support it. Councelor Schmidt. Yeah. I just wanted to publicly say I I can't do that. Um I I believe our attorney has already tried to do a
little bit of that leading up to tonight. And that wasn't even received well because here we are with no additional changes from what was being proposed. So I cannot I will not accept that at all. Councilman Abear. Thanks Mayor. As I
said before, I was here when it was said there's no way I'm going to give you 30 more days to do anything else. What we've said here is what we represented from years ago. We represent our public and they deserve those 21 slips free and
clear starting tomorrow. Councilman Bag. Well, my my question is for our attorney. If we deny, that doesn't prevent them from coming back in 30 days with another application, does it? I believe if they get denied, they have
to not come back for at least a year. Okay. And what what and the denial just basically says to the code board or to the magistrate I so there is a order
that provides that there is a violation that right the next step in that process is to have a compliance hearing to determine if they came into compliance or if a lean will be imposed. So, if they had gotten approval tonight for
something, then that violation may have been determined to come into compliance. But without an approval from the council to change the requirements that were imposed as a condition of the 2019 permit, they're they would not in my opinion, and we'll deal with this
tomorrow at the magistrate, um they would not be in compliance. Okay. All right. Councilman Dest reaching. I was just going to make a point of order, mayor. If we have a motion in front of us, it's for denial. It is not for a continuence short of a substitute
motion, then uh we need to vote on our motion. Yes, sir. Yes, we do. All right. Councilman uh Ray, please call the vote. We're denied. All right, Rayen. to deny the Okay. So, if I vote yes, it's denied. You're denied.
Wait, can we explain that, please? Yeah, because the way it's written, we we did we made the motion in the negative, not the affirmative. It was Council Member Guile's motion to deny the application. So, if you vote yes, you will be voting for a denial. If you vote no, you will
not be voting for a denial. So, voting yes is voting yes is a denial. And what we agree all right have it 70. All right. All right. With that, um, that's what I was going to say. We're going to take a five minute break. We have a couple
people want Thank you everyone for being in those very uncomfortable chairs. All right. If everyone can please find their seats, I would like to get this meeting back to order. Sergeant-at-arms, we have a council
woman leaving. I would like you to escort her back to her seat. Just kidding. All right. All right. With that, I have a quorum and we are going to continue the June 16th city council meeting.
With that, public hearing 5A, Miss Cop. Okay. This is ordinance number 253PC, an ordinance of the city of Dest, Florida, amending the comprehensive plan, providing for authority, providing for findings of fact, providing for the adoption of a small-scale amendment to
the comprehensive plan future land use map to include a change in future land use designation of three parcels of real property located within a portion of the area of Beach Drive to Benning Drive as more particularly described and depicted in exhibit A, consisting of
approximately 8.53 acres from medium density residential village MDRV to recreation RECC, providing for incorporation into the comprehensive plan, providing for a business impact estimate, providing for conflicting provisions, providing for severability, and providing for an effective date. And
mayor, if you don't mind, I'd also like to read the next ordinance, which is the accompanying reasonzoning. Yes, ma'am. Okay. Because they're connected for the same properties. And so simultaneously, we'll also be reading ordinance number 254 LC, an ordinance of the city of
Dustin, Florida, amending the official zoning map as referenced in the land development code section 7201A2 zoning maps to include a change in the zoning designation of three parcels of real property located within a portion of the area of Beach Drive to Benning Drive as more particularly described and depicted
in exhibit A, consisting of approximately 8.53 acres from medium-density residential village, MDRV, to recreation REC providing for authority, providing for findings of fact, providing for jurisdiction, providing for zoning map amendments, providing for incorporation into the
land development code, providing for conflicting provisions, providing for severability, and providing for an effective date. This is first reading of both ordinances. One, as I just described, is a comp plan amendment. The other is reszoning of property in connection with our cross town
connector. Thank you, Miss Cop. at this time if there's anyone from the public where they all go who would like to speak on these two issues. Oh, thank you, Sheriff. The sheriff is going to identify as the public tonight. All right, with that, uh, if there anyone from the public who
wishes to speak on these, this is your time to do so. Seeing literally nobody, I will close the public comments and entertain a motion at this time. Councilman Bagby, I move that city council approve the proposed ordinance 25-03-PC. one at a time. That was just for Y. Okay, I'll second that. All right, I
have a motion and I have a second. Any discussions? Seeing none, Ray, please call the vote for 253 PC. Oh, and Abear is out of here. Uh, would someone like to push her? What do we do
here, Ray? Kill her. As far as the voting, I'll vote for from the vote from Shut up, Larry. Ray, do we need a verbal vote? Do we need a verbal vote to absent her? There we go. There we go. All right.
There we go. 60. So moved. Uh and then with that, I will entertain a motion uh for 254 LC at this time. Mayor, I move that the city council approve the proposed ordinance 25-04- LC. All right. With that, do I hear I have a motion to hear a second? You got a second, Councilman Braden. Thank or
Yep. Uh if I'm trying to go too quick here. All right. If there's anyone from the public at this time who wishes to speak on 254 LC, this is your time to do so. Seeing none, I'll close the public comments. We have I'm sorry. I'm doing
this all out of order. With that, do I hear a motion? I have my second. Ray, can you call the vote? Messing this up. All right. Eyes have it. So move 60. Uh, Miss Cop 5C. Thank you, mayor. This is ordinance
number 2417 CC, an ordinance of the city of Dustin, Florida, amending chapter 6 of the code of ordinances to create a new article 5 property maintenance code providing for findings of fact, providing for incorporation into the code of ordinances, providing for confl conflicting provisions, providing for severability, and providing for an
effective date. This is first reading. Noel, thank you, Kim. Um, good evening, council and mayor. Um, so I'm bringing back the property maintenance code, um, which is to ensure properties and structures maintain the regulations of
the land code and Florida building codes after the issuance of a certificate of occupancy or certificate of completion. It is not the intent of the city to drop in and conduct inspections on a right basis on any property and decimal without due cause. The property
maintenance code is to focus on change of use applications, problematic properties, damaged or dilapitated structures and properties that may may become blighted, unkempt or determined to be unsafe to his occupants or the general welfare of the public. Um
some of the general requirements includes uh governing the minimum conditions and uphold the responsibilities of the owners for maintenance of those structures, equipment and exterior properties. The property conditions include the structures, premises and exterior
properties that shall be maintained free from weeds, excessive grass and um provides increasibility for abatement of those properties. current code allows for abatement of unsafe structures. The PMC the the property
maintenance code authorizes abatement for additional violations to include accumulation of trash and governing weeds and grass and etc. Um, incorporated into the maintenance code from the LC was many sections from the original uh, unsafe building and
abatement code which include um, starting on page 4 through 8 of the current ordinance or if you're in the whole packet of agenda, it starts on page 1724.
Um, so we kind of really revamped what I originally brought to you, um, back in October, um, as far as the, um, administration and enforcement section of the unsafe building or property maintenance code and just replaced it with what we had
currently written in the um, unsafe building abatement code. And then um we did bring in some other sections from the LDC to include um sections from the LDC 9.05 05 which included conservation
um established residential neighborhoods. Um which kind of goes into um requirements for abandoned vehicles. Um again unsafe or dilapidated structures and um also includes
requirements for motor and recreational vehicles, vessels and trailers and where they you know how many you can have that's in front of the property. So we kind of incorporated some of those things into this code this time as well. Um so the the main bulk of this uh is
related to that. We we got rid of the full blown length that we had before. So we we shrunk it down um so that the unsafe conditions um
mimic what we had in the um unsafe building abatement code with the change of um the last section which used to be 12. Um, now we just instead of referencing the
standard housing code as uh that could be found in violations of two, chapter 2 and three, we now reference to the property maintenance code chapters four and seven without bringing in that whole book into the ordinance. So, um, with
that, I leave it to council if you have any questions and I'll be glad to answer them. All right. Before we get into questions, at this time it is a public hearing, so if anyone from the public wishes to speak on this ordinance, this is your time to do so. Seeing none, I'll close the public
comments. Uh, Councilman Braden. Thank you, Mayor. I move to approve ordinance 2417 CC property maintenance code on first reading. Thank you for that. I have a motion. Do I hear a second? Second. Second. And Councilman G. Any further discussions? All right. Councilman Dustin, then
Councilman Traml. Oh, Council. Go ahead. No. Did you? I didn't even I didn't hit the button. He beat you in there, but if you want to jump in. Go ahead. He's yielding the floor. Madam, you're next. I have some misgivings about this ordinance. Um the problem is with that
we're putting all this responsibility and on the head of the building inspector um with no oversight by the elected officials or the city manager. We may not always have someone who is reliable
or as fair as Noel. It seems this whole country expressed pretty clearly that they wanted less government, less expensive. This is more government. And I would propose that what we should do and I I will offer a substitute
motion that puts this responsibility on the city manager at the request of the building official with uh with an appeal process to the city council except in conditions or
circumstances that are imminent and um danger to the public health and safety. in which case the city manager would take immediate action at the request. But I would I would say that that will give us some oversight and not put it in
the hands of one sole official who after all can change as we go through the process of being a city. So I'll make that as a substitute motion. Second. All right. I have a substitute motion and a second. Council member Dustin, would you be okay with that language being city
manager or city manager's designate? Yes. with an appeal to council. Okay, perfect. All right, Councilman Bagby, are you okay with that amendment? Yep. All right, with that, uh, any further? I think they got wiped. Sandy and I. Yeah. Yeah, something got wiped. So, uh, I just want
I just want to know, does this apply to the city itself because there's a lot of places that the city grass is over 9 in and it needs mowed. All right, Cagby. Yeah, I I'm fully supportive. I just wanted to
um at some point have some uh the city manager bring it to us if it at some you know at some trigger point. So on the emergency in particular, so it you can designate an
e, we have to put it in the language, but you can designate as emergency, take action, but I want you to report it to the city council at the next scheduled regular meeting. So I I took this action. Uh that sounds fine. If
city attorney, if you can incorporate that concept into my motion, that would be great. All right, we have two amendments. the same approval. Anything else? Any discussion? I'm seeing none on the board. We have a
substitute motion with those two. Oh, Miss Noel. Okay, that was a substitute. That was a substitute motion. Ask them to add some language. Yeah, with two additional languages. Jesus Christ.
All right. 6. So moved, Miss C. Thank you, mayor. So the next one is ordinance 202510 LC, an ordinance of the city of Dest, Florida, permitting decks to encroach up to 5T into rear setbacks for town homes that are not waterfront within the
highdensity residential HDR zoning district. providing for authority, providing for findings of fact, providing for incorporation into the land development code, providing for conflicting provisions, providing for severability, and providing for an effective date. So, this ordinance um
does exactly what the title says. It keeps the rear setbacks in HDR for town homes at 10 ft and does not allow any structures into that setback other than it would allow decks. I did have um some
council members um ask questions about providing a definition for deck after it was in the agenda package and they had a chance to look at it. So that is one thing um you might want to consider if you make a motion to approve is to have us define a deck and whether they can be
enclosed or not. All right, with that and this being a public hearing at this time, if anyone from the public wishes to speak on 2510 LC, this is your time to do so. Seeing none, I'll close the public comments at this time and entertain a motion for the
ordinance. Move we approve. We got a motion from Councilman Destin. Do I hear a second? Are you Are you going to add Oh, slow that down if you don't mind. That's okay. There's nothing on the screen to press a button. I'm getting a second so we can go to the discussion.
Do I hear a second? Yes. Okay, Councilman Bagby with a second. And now we have discussion. And it all went away. I was going to say I don't know. All right, Ray, clear clear the vote. We We have discussion
and I had four people up. I know Councilman Traml, you were up first. If you want to lead while we reset the board. All other council members, please plug back in. I I was just asking the question for clarification. Was your motion going to
include the definition of what a deck is and whether or not it could have a screened in environment or some cover on it or whatever all of that in the definition? Councilman Dustin, I would think at the point it's screened in is no longer a deck. That's correct.
That's why we wanted to define it. All right. With that any further cast? Yeah. I just continuing that we're not just talking about screens. We're talk. We want definition of a deck, walls, screens, whatever. Right. I mean,
attorney, right? I just want to clarify. Not just screened in porches. Okay. And would those definitions be there for the second reading of this? Yes, sir. And in fact, the city manager has some definitions now if you want to hear them or we will just incorporate it
for second reading. As long as you start with Wikipedia says. No, it was actually prepared by staff. Okay, fair enough. All right, seeing no further discussions, that seems to be true. Yep. Go ahead, M. Did you want him to answer that? Were you kind of let No, no, I was I Yeah, I
think he was going to make a crude joke at me or something, so I was going to cut him off. I see no further council discussion, so Ray, please call the vote. All right, 51. Eyes have it. So moved. Thank you. And that was our last public
hear. Thank you for that, Miss Cop. Going into the council presentations and comments, council member Braden. Thank you, Mayor. Um have one thing. It was uh brought to my attention that uh one of our um citizens I I guess is under the
impression that if he has a wedding in his backyard, he has to pay a $500 permit fee to the city. No. Um if it's a family, Is it a family? It's It's a personal wedding, not a commercial wedding where he's renting
out his house. Correct. That is correct. If I want to have my daughter married in my backyard. Yeah. Do I need a permit for that? No. Okay. Well, somebody's misleading him or he's read something wrong and I'll pass that information. I'm not aware of it, but Larry and I
will get in touch with us. We'll get some clarity for him. Yeah. Yeah. I know there is on the beach, I guess, but not on private property. So, okay. That's all I have, mayor. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Council member Traml. Yes. I have two things.
We discussed at the uh workshop with SRS um calling the plan the city center plan versus the town center plan because there was confusion as to what the town center was versus what their report was. So, um in talking with the city manager,
he said he would like to have a motion to that effect. So, in the future, he could now call it the city center plan instead of town center. So, I'm making that motion. I know it's not on the agenda. I don't know if you want us me to put it on the agenda for next week. I
mean, next meeting. Um, nope. With it not being on the agenda, we just need a supermajority vote for it to pass. Well, we have a super majority left. So, if that's okay with you guys, I don't know. All right. I'll make the motion then for the name change. Do I
hear a second? Name. Uh the name change would be from the town center the SRS town center plan versus SRS city center plan because town center denotes some other part of the area that we have in this city and every time you say town
center plan they don't know which one you're talking about including staff or us or or the citizens either one. So all right I have a motion I have a second by Councilman Bagby. Seeing no further discussions, Ray, if you can please call the custom vote.
All right, eyes have it unanimously. That is a super majority vote. So, the motion passes. Uh the other comment I have tonight was uh about the children's park dedication today. It was great. All of the kids that went to summer camp were there and it's probably the most children I've
ever seen in the park ever. Period. But they all loved it and there Lisa and her staff did such a wonderful job. Um, and everyone was here. One of the unique things about it was the fact that uh we had the principal from Silver Sand School come and talk to us about how the
adaptive equipment in there or how the equipment in there could be adapted for her children that attend her school as well as those that attend Dest. So it was a great time by all although it was hot as the Dickens. We went
through I think 10 gallons of lemonade. All right. Thank you for that. Uh, Councilman Dustin. Thank you, Mayor. I have on the agenda tonight the awarding of a number three position on our preposition contract for hurricane depress debris removal. And I
want to make it clear that this is not someone who would be one or two. They would be number three if the other two can't do it. And the reason that I would uh ask that a third one be added is after going through all the hurricanes in the past as long as I've been here, I
I know if a hurricane hits in our area, you get a if it's a big hurricane, you've got 150 miles of coast that has to be cleaned up. And to have a third guy on the on the list who has after all been approved by FEMA for the last however many years they've been our
person seems to me would be a safe and logical uh thing to do. Second. All right. Got a motion. Got a second. Seems to make sense to me. Any further discussion? Yeah, I have a question. Yep. How does that affect the um
the legality or the validity of the RFB process that we just went through? So since these are continuing services contracts, nobody is actually guaranteed any work. It's that if we have a need,
we have these contracts ready and on hand. And the way I understood council member Destin's motion is we recognize we already selected two and that their roles as first and second would not be affected and this is a third party that
we could go to if one and two were not available. So I don't think there would be impact on either of the first two. So um so what was the point of doing an RFB RFP process if we contractor is one of the respon right I guess I'm just curious why do we go through the process
of an RFP go to the streets get people to submit bids and then after the fact if if this were if this were the kind of bid where there was only one winner I would say you suggest that you're probably right but this is the kind of
bid like we have with some of our other continuing contracts that there's a group who's allowed to be on standby and the difference between two and three I don't think is significant. Okay. And Mr. um Bird just brought up in my meeting about possible
FEMA reimbursement issues. Is that anything to be concerned with? I'm just curious the the selection process. I think I don't believe so. I mean Mr. Destin's made it clear that this would be our third option. The other two firms that we've already identified are both well
qualified and equipped to handle most events. Gotcha. I appreciate it. Well, hopefully we don't even have to use any of them. Yeah. We need to celebrate, don't we? Yeah. Council uh member Traml. Um I thought our continuing contracts were five years. Are they had they gone
to three now? No, I was just talking about we have three people that are on the continuing contract. Okay. Because it says a three-year prepositioned and I thought maybe it should say five years. That's that was my only question. If every other continuing contractors for five years, I just don't know why this one's only three. That's why I'm asking
the question. Well, I don't think we can change that without going back through the process. Probably did all of them do three. Generally, most of our continuing services contracts are year-to-year, though we have a initial year for award
and up to four one-year extensions. We do have a few exceptions here and there that are a little different. Our um the one I'm thinking of is our mechanical and electrical services. One is just is a two-year with three possible renewals up to five years. But this this right
here will give us a just at least a more consistent uh working relationship with these people because if you clean up after a disaster, it may last for quite a while. So I think we could agree though that whatever the length of the other two is,
we will make this one the same length. All right, with everyone nodding, I will have Ray call and open the vote. All right, eyes have it unanimously. One other issue. 6. One other issue. At the last meeting, we
discussed how we could make it possible in conjunction with the sheriff's department to have them participate in enforcing the the vending prohibition and they asked that we um change
take the no vending out of the land development code, put it into standalone, I believe. But whatever that process is, I would like to place on the agenda at the next meeting under me and we will vote to take that step which would allow the sheriff's department perhaps to help us with enforcement of
that issue. All right. Thank you for that. Uh do I need a motion for that? Uh are you just putting it under your name? I mean direction. If you want to be the legislative sponsor for first reading of an ordinance in July, I would do um I I don't think you need a motion for that.
Council will vote on the ordinance. That's exactly what I need to do. So, we won't need a motion. Okay. Thank you, mayor. Thank you. Thank you. All right. With that, Council Bagby. Thanks. Just remind everybody your form one is due except for Mr. Dest who, you know, waits until it's time to pay. Yeah. The day
before it's time to pay, but they're they're actually due July 1st. Uh, I want to give a shout out to the sheriff's office. I don't know, my watch. I I must have been talking to my wife about 911 or something and all of a sudden I got a call from the sheriff's
office and I oh I'm sorry I made a mistake cuz they were on and they wrote it off and even though they wrote it off like three minutes later and I can't remember his name. and I wrote it down at the house, but a sheriff's deputy was
on my front porch ringing my bell doing a wellness check on me and uh and so I said, "Nope, I'm fine." Uh but I'm probably not going to be fine when you leave here. That's but uh great job. I also want to put uh
my third thing and thank y'all. Uh, I want to put Andrea Ansley underneath my name as my uh nominee to the public works public safety committee unless they have a meeting between now and our next meeting in July. Do they? I don't
think they do, but it'll be the day after. Okay. Well, you can hopefully You know what? I'll just go ahead and I think everybody knows Andrea. It's not like you need a sheet to see if she lives in town or whatever. I'll nominate Andrea Ansley to be my
nominee to the uh public works public safety committee. I'll second that. I have a motion in a second for a nomination for the public works committee. I see no further discussion. Ray, open the vote. Look at that. A good little public
shaming does good. Thank you, Mr. All right. All right. Anything else? Councilman Bagby. No. Thank you, sir. Cele, thank you very much. I have just a couple things. First and foremost, I want to congratulate former council member Johnny King and Emma King for their new
baby girl that was born this morning. Frannie, congratulations. Um, second, I'd like to ask for clarification on something that was presented earlier today during the public comments. Uh, we had one citizen that claimed we had uh no authority of
the uh meanh high water line. We have another citizen that claims D expert uh expects the city to regulate and gives the city full authority. Is that something we can clarify today or do we need to wait till after certain hearings? I think we should have our
code compliance hearings tomorrow. Okay. Then I'll wait until the next meeting if you don't mind just so I can have absolute clear clarification. Sure. Um something else I'd like to offer up. Um, and I respect Councilman Destin's
request. And just to give council an alternative, I would like to ask staff to come back with options to include an RFP allowing at least three vendors to apply for beach vending and let council consider options. Um, right now we don't
allow any. We're looking at potential one potential side of this. I would like to at least see the other potential side that the staff could make recommendations on that would allow other vendors to potentially do this and then we can all vote on that collectively. Okay. So now I regret saying we didn't need a motion because
you have two different directions on conflicting ordinances. Well, why can't they just bring back just options? I mean, just so we have discussion. So So um Dewey Dustin asked for first reading of an ordinance and you're asking for an ordinance that would conflict. So now
maybe there should be some discussion and a motion to clarify this. All right. I'm just asking for options. I'm not asking for anything to go against. I just want to know if there are other options out there. Or we could do the ordinance that council member
Dustin requested and in the staff report include other options and then if you vote down the ordinance, we can do your other options. Would you agree to that, council? No problem with that. I'm I'm fine with that. Okay, I got it. Will that work? Yeah. However you all want to do it. No, no. As long as everybody agrees. I mean, I just want to make sure
that I think that for beach vending. Correct. For beach vending. Correct. Yeah. I just want to see what's out there. Final thing that I want to bring up. Oh, do we have to vote? I want to vote. Yep. I'm sorry. I apologize. All right. With that, any discussions?
Why don't we uh Miss I think Miss Cop wanted us. No. Miss Cop, do you want any direction or a vote on this on the vending ordinance on on adding this to the No, I I understand it. Okay. Okay, we're good. All right. Y basically, we're doing the ordinance for first reading that council member Dustin
requested and then we're putting options for um other options as far as allowing beach vending, allowing some beach vending as council member Guile requested. that just so that we can understand fully the capabilities and hopefully that definition comes back the discrepancy between the two points of
view over mean hot high water line and DP regulation so that we can be more educated when we make that decision right gotcha cool I'm just making sure we're comprehensive here finally any any
update on the harbor dredging and if there is uh we heard the public today talk about the some of the public transient slips are filled with silt. Are are we considering that? Neither dredging operations. Nobody's here to talk about it. I think
that's Jeff. Uh we've got quotes from continuing services contractors to uh perform the uh the bidding documents and then help us with the CI portion of that. So, we'll be bringing one of those uh forward for council's approval in the
near future. All right. Do any of those include dredging out the public transit? because we had some or at least an evaluation whether it needs to. We had a a couple our citizen today make the statement that they're filled with silt and they can't be utilized. We can add that into the scope when we
go to contract. Wonderful. Thank you all very much. I appreciate your time. All right. Appreciate that. Love the idea, too. All right. Councilman Schmidt. Yeah. I'll try to be brief. I have a few update questions. Uh the bonfire public hearing will be coming the July 7th
meeting. Is that correct? working on it. Yes, it will be coming in July 7th meeting. That's the plan. Okay, we can get it. That's what the council I believe asked or that's what Mr. Destin asked, I believe, the July 7th meeting for the
bonfire discussion. Okay. Um, did we get any update on the Clement Taylor Park uh from Treasury and the county? Any response yet? No update. the uh county did confirm that the
everything that was requested of them has been turned in. So, you know, we're just waiting to hear at this point. Could y'all check in with them, Larry, this week and let council know, maybe kind of make sure they got it like a read receipt or something. Um
the park opening today was beautiful. It was hot. Good job, Councilwoman Traml and Lisa and all your team. Um, you know, you you had a lot of great words, Miss Traml, about what you said today. Um, very special. Um, I really liked a lot of the stuff you said about, you
know, we have a lot of plans in place and we have a lot of plans about making things better around here. So, I'm very excited about all those plans. I look forward to them. Um, thank y'all. There was a wreck um westbound uh by the track
this evening on the way here. It made me think about the airport turn lane. I might have missed that meeting. Was there a conclusion to what was the DOT was here on May the 8th, I believe, and was not interested in putting up any
delineators or any any means of separating that track. Council Schmidt on that. I know Councilwoman Traml and at least I agree on the allowing for um further
further back um awareness that that lane would be ending. Did we ask for any comments or consideration on on that perspective? I know we talked about it internally. Michael, do you know if we got anything back from them? Yeah, because I don't think they responded. Okay. Mayor. Yes. Yes, sir. Um when they
gave us that email asked this earlier um did they stay say what what is their criteria? What when do they deem it necessary for some kind of separation there? Because I mean you see them in multiple places around town for Walton
and whatnot. What what's what how do we meet their criteria to do so? I don't think they gave us any criteria. We just asked them to look at what was there and they said it did not warrant captain uh in a conversation I had with DOT about it, they said that their concern
was that the delineators would c would um limit um bicyclists uh opportunity to to escape a vehicle coming over them when they were in the bike lane there. So they were they were looking at it as a safety issue for the for the bicycle
lane because you should bike an idea. So it sounds like I need to get out in that turn lane and start rear ending people and maybe it'll be a problem then if you make the hot map the heat map big enough they will they will take action. Do we have do we have a date for the
parking lot RF? I'm sorry. Before we move topics, Councilwoman Tramble, do you have anything else on that topic? I I just wanted to say what I was asking for is one of those big signs that looks like the interstate out there, but right at um the intersection previous to that
one that says it's going to end. Yeah. So, if we can ask about that, I'd appreciate it. All right. Close yours, sir. Do we have an opening date for the parking lot RFP bids? Yes. When is it when? The suspense was
killing me. I I had to do that. I'm sorry. Uh, it was going to be Thursday, but I didn't realize that Thursday was a holiday. So, we issued an addendum and we pushed it back one week. I didn't either. So, then we can expect to see that the
July meeting that would be next Thursday, July June 26. That and then a whole another week and a half before the next meeting. If uh the opening is June 26th and the next council meeting is on July 7th, correct?
What were you asking for? The parking lot RFB, the paid parking lot system. Yes, I was thinking black asphalt. Oh, I apologize. We're paving parking lots. Come on. Sorry. Yeah. 10:00, man. Well, I
understand, but I can't wait two two and a half more weeks to Gotcha. Um, ice cream discussion earlier for whoever's here and listening. Um, my email address is listed on the website. I haven't heard about any requests for meetings,
but um, as a council person, I'm happy to meet with constituents and I think all of us are. So, you our contact information is out there if you want to reach out to us. I'm sorry, council. Can I jump in on that topic as well? Oh, you just keep on piggybacking off. Come on. You got great ideas. Um, yeah, I just
wanted to comment as well that um, regardless of what the video was, I've had no contact and I I have I'm about to send an email after the meeting just to staff. I have no problem with them using our names and whatnot as far as things that we have truly done up here. But if
that's the case, I just like um some information and notice when these promises are uh conducted. So, you know, whether it's a training thing of how to deescalate or training on what can and can't be done, uh, I just like, you know, to be notified if if any of our
elected officials title or names are brought up, uh, in these conflicts. So, I appreciate that. What is yours, sir? Sure. Um, last thing tonight for me, um, we had a lot of a lot of discussion tonight about public
access and waterways and all sorts of stuff. Uh, it was mentioned as well tonight about the Norgo Beach Park and not being able to use it. And I cannot agree with that more. Um,
we we were told from the state and the general contractor back in January 31st that they were going to have it open by the end of May. They specifically asked this council to shut down the access on
the harbor so that they would be able to do the job that they need to do to get it open. Unfortunately, it seems that they have continued to run into delays. Um, and there are probably a number of reasons
that they will give us and that we could come up with. Um, I I went out there the other day with Larry and some other representatives from Taylor Engineering and it it is a beautiful project and it's going to be
amazing when it's all done. But I am going to ask uh and we have another meeting scheduled on Wednesday. Wednesday. Yes. With them. Uh, but I'm going to ask tonight that we support uh
opening back up the Harborside beach and to allow po to use and make and and maintaining the safety of the construction site that that
they're responsible to do. um but allow the public to come back out and use this beach because for one reason or another it's not open yet and I think we need to get through the summer and let the citizens and others use that. So I'm going to ask the motion to open that
back up and let people use it. Absolutely. I'll second. All right. I have a motion and a second. Any further discussion, please. All right. Council G. No, I'm sorry. Go ahead. Um, I agree with Councilman Schmidt. It
is the as a contractor, it's my obligation or the contractor's obligation to create safety barriers and uh prevent egress. So, it should be at the cost of the the contractor. It should have been his responsibility from the beginning. I think we've given quite a bit of leeway and it's time to go
ahead and open that up for our public. Council Bagby. Okay. So, I asked the question in my briefing. What'd you find out? What's the question? Remind I asked the city manager to contact the contractor and the the actual permit holder and
say, you know, what where are we and what are we going to do? You know, cuz I I understand and I, you know, I read the emails. My concern is all it takes is one kid to get hurt. I mean, we got a kid out there, you know, not far from there who at least when we came in here,
we still couldn't find. Uh, so I'm I just want to know what their plan is and what, you know, how best we can help facilitate that because I don't want people out there because if you let them back on, they're going to be crawling
all over that damn thing. Can I speak to you? Well, I I I want him to answer me first. The answer is we'll know Wednesday at the meeting. We've not had that conversation. Uh we did have a conversation with D and they indicated
that they weren't in favor of it. However, they did not they agreed to meet with us Wednesday with the contractor. And so that's that's so D is in in favor or not in favor? As of Friday, they were not in favor. However,
they did agree to meet and have that conversation with the contractor to determine if there was a way to get there. Yeah, I would I mean if you want to modify your motion or make a substitute motion to put it on the city manager depending on the outcome of the
meeting with D, but I'm not until we understand what the heck is going on. Uh I'm I'm not willing to just do a blanket open up floodgates type thing. Okay, Council Member Braden.
Thank you. Are they not supposed to have a fence around that construction site like everyone else? And do they not carry some kind of liability insurance if people do get hurt on their on that job?
I would think yes and yes. So do they have a fence around their their project? If so, why did we have to put one up? the extent of the fence is a more of a visual barrier. The orange ones you see that um
it's not going to keep anyone out of there that wants to cross it the way it is today. But I think that the idea is, you know, it's a a visual barrier as opposed to a keep you out barrier, if that makes sense. I I thought a lot
of those sites like that had to have a chain link fence or something put around them. But um I mean they need to put a put a fence or something their barrier up a silt fence or whatever they supposed to have up at that boardwalk. I mean they don't need to be they're not working down on the water. So, um, like
I say, I I agree. We gave them time and, you know, they've had a couple guys out there pilling around and just not getting it done and now they want to blame it on waiting on tile that they're not even ready to put down and, you know, weather and just it's going to be four weeks and then and then four weeks
going another four weeks and then we're at the end of summer. Um, so they knew this going in, you know, it was coming into the summer. They knew when they started and I would support opening up. They just need to put their own fence up and put it up there by the boardwalk or something so people at least pull their
boat up, not just have free ran a hole the whole point, but at least they got a place to pull up. All right, point taken. Councilman Dustin. Thank you, Mayor. Um, I understand what Mr. GS and the supporters of this are trying to accomplish and I agree with
that. We want the public to be able to use it as soon as possible. But I also understand what Mr. Bag is saying is we can't go monkey up where it's going. Can we change the motion to rather than just to say oh we're opening it to press the
D and the contractor to open it and tell them that is a priority of ours and stop short of saying we're just going to open it. I I personally will not um because they're they're not going to
want to open it. They've made that clear. They've also made it clear that they're not going to micromanage the contractor. Um so I I can't support that. I think it's their responsibility to to secure their construction site.
The city took it upon themselves to put that orange fence in the water. City city did. Um, so again, we're not holding that contractor or the state to the same standards that we usually that we should be. So I I just I think they
should. So no, I'm not saying if we pass this tonight, we go there tomorrow and take out the fence. We'll still meet with them on Wednesday if this is supported and we'll tell them we are opening it up maybe within so many days. We'll give them a time. But to me, if we
just continue it, it's all summer's over. You know, they just need to hold up their end of the bargain in my opinion. I get your point. I get I get your point, but I also would tell you that D says they own that water and they can put a fence in it if they want to. And I don't know how we would
even take it up without their permission. And uh you know, it's getting into conflict with them at this point. My only question that then is why did the D come ask us if they own the
water? Why didn't they put a fence in the water themselves? Why didn't they put a fence up? They're trying to be polite. I I hear you, but I just can't agree with that because they they asked permission to shut it down. You know what I mean? Yeah. So, why' they even
ask if it's theirs? Councilwoman Chandel, you're up. I just have real concerns because this is a construction zone. None of us want kids running around our houses when we're doing remodeling. None of them want. And believe me, it's going to
happen. I'm Oh, I'm on. Y'all can have your opinions and and I said, "So, well, I want to open it up, too." And somewhere August the 4th floated around. I don't know where that date came from. Where did that Yeah, they sent they sent an update that that's a that's a deadline that they're working on and
that Gulf Power, sorry, Florida Power and Light is going to have power there by the approximately that same date. So, there's no even power there yet. And you're right. Um, and I don't I don't want a kids to get injured. I don't want grandparents to get injured. Nobody does. That's why it's the contractor's responsibility to secure a construction
site. Have you ever been in New York City? Yes. Have you ever walked underneath a construction zone? Many times. Pretty much every time you walk in New York City, you're walking underneath a construction zone. You know what I mean? Like we can walk the streets of New York City. I mean, we can
if they put up a fence correctly, then we'll be safe. If they don't, then that's their contractor's responsibility. Well, there's a big difference in walking underneath a platform in New York City versus pushing your boat up onto the beach and going over the the the boardwalk. And there's
no bathroom. I mean, who wants to swim in that? I'm sorry. Hundreds of people. Look at Crab Island. People pissing out all day long. I go to Crab Island. I go wherever. We have plenty of transient slips for bathrooms now.
Oh jeez. Councilman Bagby. Yeah, I I think we all want it open. So, I I'll make a substitute motion that we direct the city manager to in his meeting on Wednesday, uh press D and the
contractor to put up a fence around their uh construction site prior to July 4th weekend or figure out how to secure it and that we
and let them know that we will remove our fence. or the fence that D asked us to put in uh by that time. All right, I have a substitute motion. Do I hear a second? All right, I got a second by Councilman
Destin for the substitute. I do have a a question. Um what is not finished of the construction? the uh it help a lot quite frankly. Uh but in
the area would be a good bit of the deck. Mhm. For the boardwalk. You can walk all the way around it, but none of the railing. Okay. I I I don't think any of the railing was up. Uh if it was, it was very minimal amount of the railing. And that's on the surface level. That's on the flat boardwalk. That's correct.
That's correct. So, you know, you would if you pull your boat up there, you would need the the boardwalk's just a few feet up the hill from there. Okay. And there's nothing currently to prevent you from moving from one to the other. So, we have a we have a flat hard
surface that would be great for a fence. They're substantial. There's room enough for a fence. Yes. Good deal. All right. With that, I have no other discussions. No other discussions. All right. I have a substitute motion to press D to get the contractor to install
construction licensing prior to July 4th weekend. All right, with that Ray, open the vote. Oh god, this going to be 13 and 14. Ouch. All right. I wanted I wanted number 13
so bad. I wanted a number 13 so bad. Can we have Ry read back the understanding of that and what's going to be on the action agenda that we all go forth with? Direct the city manager to press D and the contractor to put up a fence on the
construction site prior to July 4th weekend or figure out a way to uh secure it. Mayor. Yes, sir. This item is not on the agenda for tonight. Actually, it takes a majority. Yeah,
it's 2/3. We do have super. Yeah, we we're at at the cusp of twothirds. Super majority. But I like where you're going with that. Um I know. I appreciate that. I know. I
like the I like the try. All right. Anything else, sir? Good. All right. All right. With that, I have nothing tonight. City attorney. Nothing. Thank you, mayor. Thank you. All right. Public comments.
He she infertility IVF cycles giving birth. survive the blood infection. All right. Okay. Push. I don't know if
she gets three minutes as well. You already know my name. I'll tell your my address if you want to email me or maybe have that meeting that I've so tried to get, but no one wants to call me back. Okay. I'm here to correct a serious misunderstanding on perhaps a convenient
excuse that the city of Destin and Rainbow Frost ice cream Carrie Harbor keeps using to justify its in its unlawful interference with beach vendors. Let's get one thing straight. The Florida Department of Environmental Protection does not own the water. It does not give the city of destined authority over it. The D is a regulatory
agency. Its job is environmental oversight. Protecting wetlands, preventing pollution, not dictating who can sell ice cream on a public beach. Some have claimed that because the DP, the Florida Department of uh Department of Environmental oversees our state's natural resources, that the city can
somehow use that authority to stop ice cream vendors from operating on the beach. But that's simply not true. It's legally unfounded. The D is not a land owner. It does not own Florida State's water or submerged lands. It's a regulatory agency tasked with protecting the environment, not issuing business
license or enforcing city codes. The area where we operate below the mean high water line is stateowned land held in the trust of the public under article X section 11 of the Florida constitution is not owned by the city. It is not managed by the city and D does not
transfer ownership or enforcement rights to the city of Destin period. Citing DP D as a justification to chase us off is legally baseless and frankly it reveals just how little effort the city has made to understand the law it's trying to enforce. We are licensed by the state of
Florida. We have met every requirement under FDACS and DBPR. We are operating exactly where the constitution says we can. And DB D has no rule, permit or regulation that says otherwise. So if the city is leaning on D to claim
jurisdiction it doesn't have. Let me be clear, that's not the law. That's a bluff. And as a disabled combat army veteran, I didn't come here tonight to be bullied off public land by a bluff. So when the city and Rainbow Frost Ice Room claims that the D somehow grants them power to control or banned vending
operations on stateowned beaches, they're not just mistaken. They're misleading the public and abusing the law. We hold valid state license. We operate responsibly on state controlled lands. And we have led we have every legal right to be there. DP's role is to protect our environment, not to be a pawn in a local attempt to monopolize
the beach economy or drive out small businesses. So the council and Rainbow Frost Ice Cream, stop hiding behind the D. The law is clear. The water belongs to the people, not to you and to God. Dewey, Destin, we're not operating on city owned land. We're on our sovereign
state property below the mean high water line. Your city ordinance does not apply here. Change it all you want. The sheriff office knows it. We have them on body cam saying we're allowed in the water with our state permits and you know it. Change your city ordinance. We're on state property. You're wasting
your time. And let's not forget Rainbow Frost Ice Cream isn't just a competitor. They've been the subject of a court issued restraining order. Have had documented history as well as multiple police reports of harassment, stalking, and death threats. This isn't about fair business. It's about targeted
intimidation. Thank you, Kevin. I'll be emailing you tonight and we'll see y'all in the morning. Thank you for being here. How do y'all get from the black top down to the water? Um, you use a boat or you state property? Not your property. State state property. Where's that state property at? All right. With
that, All right. I If there's anyone else from the public who wishes to speak, this is your last time to do so. Seeing none, I am going to adjourn this meeting.