Heads up. >> Good morning everyone. This is a regularly scheduled meeting of the local planning agency for Fort Myers Beach. It is 9:00 a.m. on February 10th, 2026 with all members present. Uh would you please
stand for the invocation and the pledge of allegiance? 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. >> So our invocation today is just thank goodness it's warming up even though I heard there's another cold front coming. But uh for the time being, we are grateful for the sunshine. >> Amen. pray a little hard with me to stay. >> Okay. So, the um first item on the
agenda is an approval of the final agenda. Uh may I have a motion for that if there are any changes or or without any changes. >> So, move. >> Thank you, Don. Thank you, Jane. Um there's a motion and a second. Is there any objection to the motion? Hearing none, the motion passes unanimously. Uh,
next item is an approval of the minutes for the local planning agency January 13, 2026. >> So move. >> Thank you. Thank you, Jim and Jim. Any discussion on the motion? Hearing none, may I have a have a vote? >> I
>> thank you. Uh, motion carries unanimously. Next item is public comment. Is anybody here to talk about anything that's not a hearing on the agenda that you just want to say hi or tell us how you're doing? Okay, public
hear public comment is closed and now we're here to the first of two variances that we'll be hearing this morning and I will turn this over to Nancy. >> Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, as mentioned, we have uh you all have
two items on your agenda today for public hearings and for the benefit of the public um I'm going to make a few comments. The two variances that you have, they are quasi judicial in nature and this requires that your public hearing today comply with procedural
requirements that have been established in Florida law and in your land development code. So, quasi judicial proceedings, they are less formal than proceedings before a circuit court, but they will be more formal than the remainder of your meeting. And we must follow basic standards of due process
that require certain notices, the application of the correct standards uh in your code and decisions that is made that are made on competent substantial evidence that's presented to you either in written form or through oral testimony. Your responsibility today is
to evaluate that testimony and those documents and any other information that's provided to you today for each of these agenda items and then draw a conclusion regarding whether the criteria in the land development code has been satisfied. So speculation or
opinion that is not based on competent facts cannot legally be considered by you when evaluating an agenda item. Testimony by individuals who have been qualified as professionals and experts in a particular area has been considered
to be competent evidence by Florida courts as well as testimony by neighbors and residents who have fact-based information such as minutes, surveys, engineering reports, or testimony that is based on their personal knowledge and
information. So, anyone in the public, if you intend to speak, please keep my comments in mind. When you come forward, state your name clearly for the record and whether or not you have been sworn in. I want to remind everyone that a unanimous decision by eligible voting
members of the LPA to approve a variance shall constitute final agency action subject to a request by anyone for an additional hearing or review of the matter by the town council. if the request is made within 10 days. Um the
request is made to the town clerk and received by the town clerk within that 10day period. Um so thank you all for hearing my comments. Um just a couple more few couple more things. Um before I need to just go ahead and dispose of
whether or not the agenda items have been properly noticed. I need to ask the clerk that. >> Yes, they have been. >> Okay. And also, if any LPA member has a conflict of interest that would prohibit them from voting on these two items, if
you would please disclose that at this time so we can make sure that we still have a quorum present. >> Anyone? >> No, ma'am. >> No. >> Okay. At this time, if there's anyone present who would be providing testimony today um regarding one of the two
variances, if you would please stand and the town clerk will um provide the oath to you. >> If you'll raise your right hand, please. Do you solemnly swear and affirm that the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> Okay. All parties have been sworn. And
just for the record, I want to go ahead and remind everyone that Jason Smallley has been accepted by the LPA as an expert in land use planning in the town of Fort Myers Beach. Uh with that said, Madame Chair, I think we're ready for the first item. >> Thank you, Nancy. Um the first item is
uh V026002 and it's 102 Lovers Lane. This is a resolution of the Fort Myers Beach Local Planning Agency approving approving with conditions or denying variance 20260002 requesting a variance from the land
development code section 34-638D2B, which allows balconies and stoops to encroach into the required street setback on the first living level of residential buildings within the RC zoning district to allow a similar balcony encroachment on the second
living level. Living level for the property located at 102 Lovers Lane, generally referred to as strap number 304624 W20003 N00000080 in Fort Myers Beach and providing for
other clarifications as necessary, providing for conflicts of laws, scrier's errors, severability, and providing for an effective date. Good morning, Jason. >> Good morning. >> My name is Jason. Excuse me. Excuse me. Yes. And look, I even have it written down here. >> Mr. Dunlap, any exparte in this case?
>> None. >> How about you, Jim? I mean, Don. Don, >> you Jim today if you want. None for me either. >> No, ma'am. >> Thank you, Jane. Nothing. Jim, >> none. >> John. Okay. I have none as well. Thank you, Nancy. >> Go ahead, Jason.
>> Good morning. My name is Jason Smallley with the town's planning and zoning department. Uh before you today is a request for a variance for 102 Lovers Lane. Um the structure was originally approved with a uh second uh second
living level or what would be the third level of the home uh with a projection into the front 25 ft setback. This was an erroneous approval during the review. um staff caught it eventually at the ad
asbuilt phase, excuse me, asbuilt survey phase. So, literally at the very end before the applicant could apply to CO their home. Um and at that point, we realized that there was no administrative way to deal with this since the second uh living level balcony
extends the same 7 ft into the front 25 ft setback as the first living level balcony. So, right now we have two balconies, one of which is allowed to extend that 7 ft into the front 25 ft setback and one that would not be allowed by code. Uh, the the staff has
reviewed this. In our opinion, um, we think that this is a an an approvable project. Again, this was not created by the applicant themselves. This was a mistake by staff during our review and it was only found after the fact as they were trying to close it out. Uh, the
applicant is here for any questions that you may have, but I am here to speak for staff if you have any questions or concerns you'd like. >> Thank you, Jason. Questions for Go ahead, Jean. >> Why is it that Why is it that we can't have that? I
mean, why is that something that isn't approvable to begin with? >> Well, the code specifically states that the additional protrusion is meant to allow for access to the first level. I was not here when that code was explicitly written, but if I may take
liberty to to sort of inform be an make an informed guess, uh, as the houses get higher, they're obviously going to need a longer set of stairs. And so the two ways that you could feasibly deal with that is either a long single run into the front yard, which would reduce the
setbacks, or you would be forced to make multiple switchbacks um to put it in a smaller area. But the cost and then the pitches needed to meet um ADA or wheelchair uh pitches become more difficult and more expensive. So that would be my assumption of why it was
allowed on the first floor and not subsequent higher floors. H >> it it just doesn't really make sense to me why you can't ask for it because I mean like every condo has a a a balcony
off their bedroom that it comes off the the living room and most houses would like to have that I would think. So, I mean, is that if it came in as a variance and a request, would it be approved or
>> If it came in as a variance, ultimately, town council would have final say on it. The the code is what it is today. Um, I'm assuming that there is some concerns about bulk about the the projection of the of the uh newer structures into
small setbacks, particularly on uh roadways that are very narrow. I think we can all think of a few different uh neighborhoods where everybody seems very close to the roadway. >> Um but if if town council wanted to go ahead and revisit on uh removing that
and then allowing for it on subsequent levels, then staff would be here to go ahead and and review that and be brought before them for their determination. Well, I I might ask that I mean, do we need to ask that of council to consider that or could you bring it up at the
meeting and say that we had questions? >> You'd have to change the land development. >> Oh, okay. Never mind. Yeah. >> Sorry. Sorry. >> Yeah. Yeah. Anybody else have questions for Jason? >> Can I just get clarity for the record? So, you're only asking for one variance, right?
>> This is a single variance for the second living level balcony. Um, and then I wanted to also put put out there the applicant is going to request a um a removal of the fees before town council. We need to make sure that we just state that here because whatever happens here
today, they will be going to the town council to uh request that. >> Well, I'm curious why why would they have to go to the town council? If this passed unanimously, then there uh couldn't that request be included in this or no? Because we just do
variances. You just do variances, right? Because the town council has the responsibility for the town's finances, >> right? >> Okay. All right. >> Thank you, Jason. You're very welcome. >> Thank you very much. Um, does the applicant wish to say something? Here we go.
>> You have any questions? >> Oh, Ron, you're the applicant. Okay. No, it it you're welcome to come up if you want to say something or not. Okay. So, the applicant uh does anybody have a question of the applicant? No. All right. Uh, we'll go for is there
anybody here of the public that would wish to speak on this case? Hearing none, the public comment is closed. Any other questions or concerns from the LPA on this case? Um, if not, uh, may I have a motion to
approve or deny the request? >> I make a motion to approve variance 026002 102 Lover's Lane. uh subject to the four conditions recommended by staff along with a recommendation to uh wave any
associated fees with the variance >> support. >> Nice job. >> Uh so the motion was made by uh Jim Bone and seconded by Jim Dunlap. Is there any discussion on the motion? >> That was very thorough. All right. Um hearing no discussion.
Your vote. Jim. >> Yes. >> And Jim >> I. >> Don >> I. Doug >> I >> Jane >> I >> John >> I >> and I'm an I. The motion carries unanimously with a recommendation to the council to wave the fees. Thank you very
much. Uh the next item on the uh agenda is VR 20260001. This is for 166 and 168 Coconut Drive. This is a resolution of the Fort Myers Beach Local Planning Agency approving approving with conditions or denying
variance 20260001 requesting a 4-foot variance from the land development code setback table 34-3 which requires a 7 1/2 ft side setback for properties with a width of 50 feet to 75 ft in the RS zoning district to
allow replacement of a staircase with a 3.5 ft side setback for the property located at 166168 Coconut Drive, generally referred to as strap number 294624
W20070A.0160 in Fort Myers Beach and providing for other clarifications as necessary, providing for conflicts of law, scrier's errors, severability, and providing for an effective date. Exparte. Anything from you, John? >> None. >> Jim,
>> none. >> Jane, no. >> Doug, >> no, ma'am. >> Don. >> Jim. >> None. >> And I have none. >> Jason, >> good morning again. Jason Smallley with the planning and zoning department. Um, before you today is a request for a variance for 1668
Coconut Drive. Uh, the request is for a 4-foot variance to the 7 and 1/2 ft sideyard setback. Uh the applicant is requesting to replace a set of stairs uh with a setback of 3 and 1/2 ft as opposed to the 7 and 1 half that would
be required by code. Um under the existing code uh in circumstances like this, applicants may be able to take advantage of an administrative variance whereby the replacement of a set of stairs or AC
equipment in the same uh footprint could be allowed. The one caveat to that unfortunately is that no approvals of uh anything less than 5T setback are allowed to be done administratively. So that really uh is the reason that the
applicant is before you today. Uh what they have is an existing structure that was uh largely damaged during the storm, but it's existing. uh the applicant is attempting to rehabilitate the two units and in the midst of that uh the existing set of stairs needs to be replaced
including the the structural support. So it's a complete replacement of stairs but they wish to do it in the same footprint. Um the the lot itself is roughly 50 ft wide. Um and so the setbacks are are tough to hit on with
with a uh with a new home or what one would expect to be built on a new home. Uh remember that we did the admin the uh code change for the the parallelogram lots. Uh but what it did not do is allow for any additional protrusion into the sideyard setbacks for lots that are
larger than 50. They still retain 7 and 1/2 ft setbacks. So what the applicant is requesting today is really just replace what they have. And since it couldn't be done administratively, we were forced to bring it before you today. Uh the recommendation from staff is for approval simply because it's an
existing structure and access to the home is a prerogative I think everybody has. So the applicant is here today to discuss that. Uh staff is here for any questions or concerns that you may have. >> A prerogative or a right? >> It it's not a right if they got to come
in and get a a variance to it. Now there are requirements that they have a certain amount of access. Uh but the what they're asking for is really to just allow for it in the sideyard setback as it existed before. Unfortunately, the the code languages have changed and the setbacks have
changed over the years. >> Okay. Thank you, Jason. Jane, >> the um existing structure is um a ground level unit and an upstairs unit. The picture for the proposed is for two upstairs units.
>> Correct. Um, are they tearing this down and rebuilding it? Uh, >> it's my understanding that they're going to be abandoning the lower floor and then recreating that um in compliance with flood um up upstairs, but I will defer to the applicant as far as what
his design actually is intended to do. >> Okay. I'm just surprised that structure could handle another level. >> I I will defer to the engineers on that one. That's a little above my pay grade. >> Other questions, John? Uh Jason, can we reviewed this previously uh regarding
the second structure or second >> unit? Um can I just ask out of interest why were they not combined into one variance request? >> Uh the the previous setbacks I I couldn't really answer. I don't know why
they weren't combined into a >> It was a special exception. >> It was >> Oh, I see. It was not a variance. >> I I apologize. I was I was not aware of that. Pardon me. >> It's not because you have so many things on your mind, Jason. >> Don't worry. Um, did that answer your
question, John? >> Nancy did. Yes. Thank you. >> Um, anyone else have questions for Jason? J, >> just a quick one. Jason, would you >> um re remind us again what you talked about the limits of the administrative approval into setbacks. >> Yes, absolutely. >> Just so I've got that in case we get in conversation in the future about
changes. So there off the top of my head I believe there's eight or nine different flavors of administrative variance that can be uh offered to people. It's a mix of uh administrative variances for existing homes and for new homes. >> Uh for existing homes you are allowed to
protrude an additional few feet 3 feet I believe into a setback. But the problem is that's an administrative variance. And the administrative variance has at the end of that section a prohibition against uh the town approving any administrative variance where the the
setback would be less than 5 ft. >> Yeah. Okay. I thought I read that right, but I didn't didn't recall what you just said, but that's something we'll look at another day just so we know. Thanks. >> Thank you. Anybody else? >> Thank you, Jason. >> Of course. >> We'll ask the applicant to come up.
Good morning. >> Good morning. Mike Martell. >> Mike Martell. You'll be coming our regular. >> Uh, yes. So, basically what we're doing is we're going to be taking down the existing staircase and bringing it up to code when we rebuild it, of course, and then have that same staircase go to the
second floor and then extend it to go up to the third floor. So, we're taking the non-compliant downstairs unit, completely removing it, and building everything above the flood plane and to the new building codes. So, basically, we will be using the framing and the
structure of the second floor, removing the roof and then building a structure right on top of that structure. >> And you don't have to replace the um the >> pilings. No, not the pilings, but the the supports and everything to have two
stories go up on it. That house, you know, is >> Yes, we the engineers have uh designed >> and engineered um to beef up, let's say, any of the floor joists and to also take the concrete pilings and we're going to double those up
>> and to support the second floor >> structure more because it doesn't look structurally sound. >> Okay. >> Yes. >> Anything else you'd like to tell us? >> Uh, no. basically was going to bring everything into compliance and into code and improve the neighborhood. >> Good attitude. >> Um
>> like all three of those. >> Yeah, exactly. Uh questions for u Mr. Martell. >> My here's my only question. Um in the past uh someone doing something like this, we would almost assume that that
downstairs unit would become an illegal unit. So what um what will be done is will that just be completely open? >> Yes, there's a in the flood uh zoning they allow I think a 300 foot structure for storage. Yep.
>> But everything else will remain open and they ask for additional parking place. We have parking underneath the structure. >> Thank you for clarifying that. Thank you very much. >> Um no other questions of you. Thank you for your presentation. Appreciate it. Is there anybody here uh in the public
who would like to make comments on this case? Seeing none, we'll close the public comment. Uh LPA members, any other questions of staff or the applicant? Hearing none, would someone like to make a motion to approve or deny variance
202600001? I'll make a motion to approve with conditions variance 20260001 to allow replacement of an access stair case encroaching 4 ft into the required 7 and 1/2 ft side setback for a 50 foot
wide block and extending it up to the third floor uh with the conditions as listed in the staff report. >> Thank you John. Is there a second for that motion? >> Second as seconded by Jane. Any discussion on the motion hearing? No discussion. Your vote. John.
>> I. >> Jane. >> I. >> Jim. >> I. >> Doug. >> I. >> Don. >> I. >> Jim. >> I. >> I. Motion carries unanimously. Thank you very much, Mr. Martell. >> That concludes our hearings. And next we're on to the >> This is a record 23 minutes.
>> Well, Jane, it's just because we did our homework. >> Yeah, that's your pay. >> We'll see what happens. Now, >> then we turn it over to government. The next item under the administrative agenda is a discussion on the exparte communication policy which um I brought
up um a few weeks back or a couple of meetings back. Um we did get a um a handout uh from Mr. Bowen. Uh but uh so you know what Jim, I'm going to open the discussion with you since you took the
time to do this. >> Okay. Well, I I think maybe we ought to start with uh I think Nancy has opined in the past that we cannot ban these type of meetings. So
the question is is how can we regulate them? So >> you're talking about with the developers, correct? >> Yes. >> Well, but you know, how do you you can't separate you can't separate it. That's the problem. No, I think you can. It's all
>> you mean developers versus individuals. That's a different I'm saying that this is limited to quasi judicial types of representation. A lot of things that we do are not that. So, they would not be covered by this >> like the two cases we just had were quasi judicial. Okay.
>> Right. So, um so technically, but those two if I went and met with either of those two property owners, it would be exactly the same as >> Yeah. >> as Yep. So I guess the point of uh uh starting the discussion was um if you
look at the Florida sunshine laws um which you know I stated here the the section that's applicable says this section does not restrict the authority of any board or commission to establish rules or procedures governing public hearings or contacts with local public
officials. So I guess the discussion is is do we want to recommend to the council um some restrictive procedures uh dealing with meeting with individual
developers? I mean some of these I think are pretty obvious. Um, I see no reason why if we're meeting with a developer, it shouldn't be here at town hall. Whereas, I can think of several occasions where we were asked to
go out to some corporate headquarters to have reviews. Um, which, you know, is inconvenient for us. Um, and it just seems to make sense that business should be conducted at village hall or town
hall. That one might be simple. I mean, some of the other ones uh may be restrictive, but they're not forbidding. If if a developer wants to um meet with us individually or town council individually
um you know maybe we should prescribe some rules to be followed notice um minutes uh audio recordings any of those things or all of those things I guess are up for discussion.
>> Could I I I want to just backtrack for a minute. So, back in the olden days when the town incorporated, when we first assigned an LPA, a local planning agency, uh we had to decide if
we were going to because of course we were running with all the same rules that the county had. and we had to decide whether or not we would maintain the county's code which dealing with any kind of zoning case that the county commissioners are prohibited from
discussing it with anybody goes to the LPA and then goes to them and and you know that's how that supposedly works. >> Um, you know, I shouldn't have said that because that's how it but but in theory that's that's the theory. Um and uh and
we decided that being a small town that would be extraordinarily cumbersome because you know I don't know about you all but how many conversations have you had at Publix where somebody sees you and says oh you know I want to tell you about this whatever the case may be
especially when it comes to big zoning cases. Um my store is a hotbed for discussing uh zoning cases. So, um, we decided at the time that the best thing to do was to have this exparte rule
where we would disclose whatever information we came about or we had prior to going into the to the zoning hearing. Now, that was 30 years ago. In those 30 years, the biggest case that came before us was
Margaritavville. Margaritavville in the ca in the uh in Margaritavville they did so much public outreach. Their outreach was all public, but there was no outreach to individual
council members or LPA members because the council had assigned me to be the liaison to Margaritavville to meet with them to do whatever until which time they had a plan and they would bring it back to us.
But times have changed and now we have tremendous development pressure with tremendously enormous uh uh projects that have um great impact both on our community have great impact financially for the
developers for the town and it's changed and I think that that there is a certain skepticism that always exists with government but now is heightened and and my bringing this forward was just as an
idea of how can we be more transparent or more inclusive in a way to let the public know what's going on. So Nancy had said something in in one of our discussions about you know when we disclose oh I met with uh well let's
just say I had met with Mr. Martell I met with Mr. Martell and I say that and somebody in the public or somebody that not the public um the uh somebody wants the the applicant or the staff want to know well what did you say to Mr. Martell they have the ability to ask
that question but the public doesn't the public has no right to further access other than I met with Mr. Martell. So in this in this quest of finding out how could we improve the um the exparte
rules you know in our LDC there are rules about exparte which I started to ask Amy to distribute last night but I it got too late. um the rules about exparte and you can read and what Jim has come with up with his
suggestions aren't uncommon in other exparte rules. I just think at this point in time we need to decipher are we going to treat developers and residents differently um because that's that might be a slippery slope but it kind of makes
sense in some some sort of way. It's not as impactful what Mr. Martell is doing or what London Bay may want to do. Um, and uh, and what what do our disclosures include? And I think that's the most
important thing. So instead of us just saying I met with uh, in the case of the arches, let's use that since it's passed. I met with the neighborhood group, I met with Mr. Freeland, I met with whatever, and that just sort of lands flat on the floor. Well, what did
you meet about? What did you talk about? That is what the community, in my opinion, wants to know and quite honestly deserves to know. They deserve to know. And uh and and so so that's where I'd like our discussion to go. If
you all agree, if you don't agree, if we just leave it as it is, it just seems to me that we're almost like dangling the carrots saying, "I met with them." And what? We've not disclosed anything. We've not disclosed anything. I saw the
property. Okay. Now, Jane is usually good at saying, "I saw the property and I walked around." And then she'll say, "But I didn't walk on their property because they weren't home and I walked on I walked on somebody else's property." Um, so do you see where I'm going? >> Well, I just drove by this morning, so I
didn't say anything. But, um, I do feel that interaction with residents should be a little bit different because you can't walk on their property without knocking on their door and saying, "I'm with the LPA and I'm just going to walk the property."
>> Well, residents usually are not inviting us to meet with them, >> right? You know, that's just usually doesn't happen. And you know, lots of times, you know, they'll be outside when I, you know, if I'm not going to walk around, if it's visible from the street, I don't walk around the property. But if it's in the back, I got to see the back.
>> So, do you all distinguish that? >> I think it is a slippery sub. I remember way back in the very beginning, a particular single property owner was trying to uh build a walkway >> and reached out to me multiple times to
invite me to meet. So that's a single property owner on something that was unique. So I think I think you have to think about it right and and think about how could you distinguish really or let's say someone especially in a rebuild like this has you know buys uh maybe before it was one house but it was
three lots. Are they a are they a developer? I they might be because they're developing three lots. They're not developing and maybe none of them are their homes. Right. Right. >> So I mean there are lots of those on this island. So I I don't know. I think I think it's I really think it's the same thing.
>> Well, >> so I I I wonder back to your slippery slope comment. Couple things I'd add to Don's. >> Um I don't know where the division is. Um we use developer as a as a bully pulver right now to attack but straw
man. >> But so does that mean there's no more neighborhood company meetings? >> Yeah. >> There's no more Albert meetings? I take I think like we all do my preparation very seriously. Part of my preparation personally is to make sure I understand
what is driving some of the outcomes that have created. I'm really I really hone in on belief systems of people and then their behaviors and then the outcomes. It's the order by which I process. So to understand what's motivating, whether it's a code, whether it's like structures, whether it's
neighborhood compatibility, the amount of information and insights I glean from those interactions saved me an hour and a half in here of interacting with those people. And the same thing that may be only interesting to me, I assume it be transferable to other people, but I'm
doing that to get a baseline of how to see the impact, where it's coming from, and what options do we really have when we're talking to these folks. Maybe we want something they can't do. So, I've learned over the last two and a half years an extraordinary amount about the codes, about the application of the
codes and about solutions to our codes from these subject matter experts. Now, I don't know if that's going to be included and I can no longer meet with those folks to get me ready to interview with the applicant that day, but that would bother me and having to do that or more so to make that so structured and
recorded and documented and all that that it's extraneous conversation. It's you think of something, you say something else. it goes in that that's how humans interact in a normal and productive way. Then I think about EIBC, I'm sorry, the food trucks. I think about the amount of interactions we had
with that organized group of residents. >> Does that go into the conversation? They have to come here interact with that. Are they is that a developer conversation only not with the developer? >> I just can't get I can't discern where the edges are. I understand the obvious
ones. >> I don't think there is an edge. >> Yeah. And there you are. Right. So I wanna I want the hybrid Anita that I think you guys tried so hard to do which is we want to follow the rules. We're responsible following rules. We should have to disclose everything and anything we do in following the rules but it's
still a community that has conversations. It has relationships. It has networks and it has a culture that expects you to take that in consideration when you do things too. And some of the formality >> in my mind sterilizes that mix that makes us so special and unique. So those
are my initial concerns. see what the other members feel. >> How about you, Doug? >> Um, I uh up until you raised the issue, I didn't see it too problematic that people reached out. Again, the gentleman
that wanted to do a walkway over the dunes. I went by his house. He heard his story. I didn't necessarily agree with it, but I felt like it was an opportunity to listen to somebody's side of the story. But on the other hand, I
do recognize that we tend to Yeah, I met with the developer. I met with London Bay, but then we What do we talk about? And I'm I'm sitting here trying to remember what we talked about, frankly. But um I think if we went forward with a little more disclosure about what we
talked about, it would just be a little more burden on us to take some notes and >> make sure that we uh you know are able to discuss what we talked about >> and I'm okay with that. >> Yeah. Jane,
>> I will say that I sometimes feel a little pressure from the developers to identify whether I agree or disagree. And I think that should be not not happen when you go in. >> Well, you're never going to get that not
to happen, J. You just have to I mean >> I mean I just I listen and if I have questions I mean I write down questions I want to ask before I go in and and otherwise I just say well >> I'll consider this at the thing. Thank you. >> So you you don't share any concerns? >> I don't I don't typically well I mean
yes uh like with Seagate I said five accesses off of the Nora >> right? >> That's wrong. And how many do we have still? Okay never mind. Um >> 17 stories. You know those kind of I mean I've definitely shared that >> I do that too. >> Not not only for me but for the
community, right? I feel like I represent the community. So, I'm a voice of many and I say, I know this is a concern. You should consider this. >> You might choose not to and still bring it and you may or may not >> see the way the votes go that way.
>> But here's the glitch. the glitch is. So now we're in the quasi judicial hearing and it's your duty to disclose the the information that you have come to and come up with and discuss that
will or could affect or impact your vote to the public and for the record. So that's what we're not doing. So what I should >> and maybe it's just the quantity of it or the quality or the quantifiable elements of our conversations. I don't know yet.
>> So maybe I would have to disclose that I question the five things and the 17 stories and the mass and the size which I'm happy to do. >> Yeah, I am too. I mean, there's a I think there's a perception that
>> as far as transparency goes that meeting with the larger developers, they're trying to divide and conquer. >> They're looking for their majority votes. >> That's not just a perception, Jim.
>> It's not just a perception. So you you know meeting with them without some sort of complete disclosure about what they prodded you on or what what uh questions you ask I think leaves
a gray area that the public is going to question. >> So let me ask a functional question. >> They're entitled to know the public is entitled to know what those discussions entailed. So whe whether that's done by audio recording, minutes or verbal
disclosure, I think we need to go that step >> so that the the people know >> what transpired outside of the public >> what happens on the way in and the way out though, right? Not everything's going to be recorded, right? So I mean if you're trying to you can't ever
prevent or guarantee one with 100% certainty, right? If someone has that interest on either side, it will happen, right? And so, but I'm 100% with you. I'm happy to disclose it. It's just, you know, it >> I don't know.
>> And what happens when, say, a counselor meets in a setting like that, it's recorded and the other counselors watch that recording of the interaction with one of their peers? >> They couldn't. They wouldn't be allowed to. they could do so afterwards, but if they wa if they watched it, that's that's the slippery slope I've brought
up before about Ed, I know you're listening Beach Talk Radio because when someone when a council member or an LPA member or someone who is in a voting position, that's right, >> talks about a subject publicly like that and it's broadcast, you're broadcasting
your intentions to your other members whether you like it or not. That's what's happening. That is very dangerous. wouldn't be allowed to watch it before the meeting >> and so they'd have to disclose that they didn't watch it. >> That's correct. >> But it's disclosed at the meeting what was stated, right? I mean, if I come to
the meeting and say, "I had this meeting on this date and we discussed these things and I express these concerns. Everyone else knows now what my concerns are. They see what's presented and they go, "Oh, Don's a no vote on this because of what he said was his concerns and what he communicated." Or could be,
right? >> It could be, right? Just because you have a concern about it doesn't mean yes or no. >> That gives them the opportunity to fix it, >> right? >> Yeah. >> Exactly. Oh, absolutely. Yeah. >> That's right. >> Exactly. >> Yeah. >> We hope. >> John, what were you going to say? >> Um, I was going to say that I believe
that >> although at the extremes, we certainly know the difference between a local resident without any real interest in a project and a large developer. And those are easy to differentiate.
where we get to Don's point of citizen developers or what have you, that becomes very very much more difficult >> or even the food truck park because that's a resident doing >> and that that is a resident that's doing it and it was concerned residents around them that actually were reaching out and
pre personally I think it's important to Jim's point that I am as prepared as I personally can be to understand what the issues are from the community as well as from the developers
and to understand how they are trying to broach any differences that they might have and I think it's extreme number one I am open to meet with anybody resident or developer >> I am also willing to disclose that to
anybody I have no issues with that >> I think the practicality of reporting it and then putting in these types of extra bur burdensome steps in it maybe in itself prejuditial. Um, and I have a bit
of an issue with that because I certainly don't think >> the runins at the Publix or whatever else I mean that's just not practical, >> right? Um, but if there's a scheduled meeting with developer A, developer B,
or concerned community group A or community group B, I think that certainly rises to the level where we should at least know what date it was, who we spoke to, and the topics of conversation. I'm not sure that I'm not a great note taker quite frankly.
>> But the other thing I'll say is that not only does that help me prepare and understand all aspects of it, not just one side versus the other, because we all know they're more complicated than that.
What it also allows me to do is understand the areas that I'd like to question or probe further >> inside the session, >> right? which will then help perhaps
educate my fellow members as to what my concerns or support or whatever it may be during open discussion which is public and and perfectly perfectly uh acceptable. >> And I also would say I think it's
incumbent on all of us and we have all had training for sunshine laws. I'm not aware of anybody that's meeting with groups of people or we've got pretty good guidelines of how we're actually able to do this. We've all had our training. We're all doing the disclosures. Could we do better
disclosures? Sure. Absolutely. I think that makes complete sense. Um but information is out there. It's part of what we bring to our
decision making. Whether it's Beach Talk Radio, whether it's social media, whether it's uh whatever it may come from, there's information all around us. >> Yeah. >> You know, and and and it's incumbent on us to ensure that we're only considering
the information that's presented to us on the record, >> right? We can be influenced by that other stuff, but we certainly have to make sure that we are not prejudial or excuse me um we're not
>> prejuditial to that information and if we want to expose something that we're we are perhaps had brought to our consciousness the place to do is in the meeting. >> Yes. >> Yeah. >> And that's that's my belief on it. Let me ask uh Anita would it like result
like if I think like when we disclose whatever meeting we had >> if we just had some guidelines like who what when >> you know all you need hey I met with these people on this date they showed me
their project they uh asked me if I had any questions I had a few questions I asked about this that or the other that simple is that enough Yeah, I I I think it's a good start for sure. It's um you know, I singled out
Beach Talk Radio and I probably shouldn't have because there's a million pages on Facebook and other social media who are doing just the exact same thing. Maybe a contrary position or whatever, but it's the same sort of lobbying that occurs that you read or you notice or
whatever. And we we certainly can't be blind to that and and we aren't. But um I I you know the idea of um and maybe maybe to a certain extent when you know that something is a hot button or once
we know that there's a hot button topic um maybe those meetings do occur here at town hall it it makes it gives it the semblance for sure of being um more above board as opposed to being
>> dinner table as opposed to being I'm going to use the word corded by going to uh a lovely high-rise and having a nice spread of lunch or whatever. I mean, I'm just thinking I'm thinking about and and I hope that the Freeland group doesn't
take offense at this, but I'm thinking of the very first and you all you all went the very first meetings we had at Pinkshell um when the Arches was doing their first presentation. There was food, there was I mean there was every it was it was like we were going to a
little mini party and that's very nice. But I think if um let's just take the average citizen in Fort Myers Beach, if they knew all those details, would they have a lot of uh how would they feel about that? And I think they would feel
like we were being extraordinarily influenced. And that's the whole purpose of it, of course, is for them to pitch their project and show us the details and whatever. I my my whole idea here is for us to present to the public and to
the applicant and to the staff as much information about where we are and how we got there at the moment that we enter those hearings. Um, and to be as explicit as we possibly can. Um that that's my goal. I don't think that as a
small community um you know Jim I heard you say that um when you were when you were on Beach Talk I heard you say that you thought all all everything should be discussed in a collaboratory way with the LPA or with the council. And I agree
with you in theory but I'm going to tell you in practicality it's just not going to work that way. And I think we knew that early on that because of this. I mean, I'm going to use my store again. I I jokingly tell people, but I mean it. If you want to know what's going on, Will, any day,
come and sit down in one of those chairs in front of the dressing rooms. I'm telling you, you're going to hear everything. Everything. >> Don't sit in front of the dressing rooms, Will. >> The barber shop. >> You just And it's like a confessional. People sit there and they just talk about everything that's going on in town. And uh and it's it's quite
insightful. And especially when there's a big case coming forward, it's a buzz and it's a buzz about about town period, not just the chairs in front of the dressing rooms. Um but um I just think that we need to we need to fill this gap
and it's the difference between how we were 30 years ago as a little town that had >> nothing nothing happening. Well, you know, we had that pink shovel case Publix Publix. Oh my god, was that a controversial hearing? The theater was >> Where would we be without him now? So,
>> but you know, the world was going to come to >> I know it was too big and I read all the minutes. >> It was it was horrible. >> You know, Anita, it gets down to um in my mind, first of all, like it or not, we all bring our biases to these conversations because we have experiences in life. We have professional and personal. It's not to
have prejudial um whatever Nancy said on that that kind of bias towards the decision but we bring our perspectives to it in that regard and you you talk about things with beach and I look at that very differently in this way from
social media that is done in the public 90% of what he does you're able to sit in that room and he constantly invites people to come have real time dialogue you don't get that on Facebook with the interactions that are Believe me, we've been recipient of all of them. It's all
one way. There's no way to express without other um >> keyboard warriors coming back to you with that. That is an open forum for anybody to participate in. And my experience is um he will take all sides and put them on the air. So, while it's not perfect for the reasons you're talking about, maybe influence other
counselors, other people, it's much deeper in the information share and there seems to be a lot more debate going back and forth. Yeah. with whether it's his personal position or one he's representing he's hearing a lot of than you get in any other social media environment. So it's informative. >> So to me it's down to the one thing and
that is how do we more further disclose what it is we did where we did it what the scope of that was >> and even to the point if you did say some things like Dora there's too many putting that out there I don't see that as presidential I see that as being honest and absolutely that's a good
deal. So I'd like to be focused on further disclosure guidelines I think which Doug talked about and us have an obligation requirement to stick to those and disclose accordingly versus overeng engineering the front end part of this. >> So does anyone think that we should not
have meetings period? Do you think that? >> So >> no I mean and then was that directed at direct you go ahead. Hi. >> Um, I mean, every person, regardless of what we adopt or recommend, has the
option to say no. >> You don't have to go and have any of that. If you feel uncomfortable, you shouldn't do it. >> Um, as far as >> should we we can't forbid the meeting. So, we need some what would you say
guard rails whether that what type of disclosure that is. Maybe that's the first step and and we we come up with some guidelines there and we say who, what, where, when, why, and we're going to uh go on the record and and make that
disclosure on any expire date. That's a good step. >> Okay, Nancy, did you want to involve >> I do. Um, so I I think the conversation that you had is is really really good. Um, thank you, Nancy. Well, no, you all
you all went to the specifics. Um, and if you would indulge me, I'd like to give you uh the bigger picture and kind of the framework. And I think that that may help guide you ultimately to what you decide to do or not to do. So, going
back to what Anita said, she said, well, we used to never have to do these things and we used to have a free discussion. And that is very true because legally all resonings a lot of things were legislative in nature not quasi
judicial. That's right. There was a case that came out was the Snyder decision and the Snyder decision sent shock waves through local government communities because the court said that sightsp specific
reasonzonings are quasi judicial which then raised the flag in the Jennings case about how much conversation could you actually have with someone who is proposing a reasonzoning case. The
Florida legislature then reacted to that, which is what Jim was saying. >> Second, Patrick, you don't need to fill that out. I'm glad you're here. Go ahead. Go ahead, Nancy. >> Which is what Jim was saying that the legislation um regarding Sunshine says that you can adopt procedural rules,
which is true. Then all a lot of local governments I think to virtually everyone adopted some ordinances that allowed uh access to those elected and appointed
um uh decision makers in these quasi judicial proceedings. And here in Fort Meyer Beach, the ordinance is 34-52, which starts setting forth what the parameters are for um communications
with public officials. Public officials are defined as elected or appointed. um a definition of legislative action which is more policy orientated rather than real private property rights orientated which I think you've probably
heard me say a couple times uh because when you talk about infringing upon someone's private property rights then they they have the rights to due process which is certain notices the right to the uh correct application of the law
and their decision to be based on competent substantial evidence. I mean, how many times do I say that all the time? So, that's kind of how that piece of the puzzle fits into the the bigger picture. Um, I will also say that
um at when the legislation was passed that Jim brought up, local governments fought so hard to be able to make sure that that dialogue between they made no distinction between whether it was developers or residents that that
dialogue remained because that was very very important. So then it becomes kind of a balancing of of how do you um how do you safeguard private property rights and still allow access to elected or
appointed officials. So in your code of ordinances um there is the uh the very last part it's pend it talks about disclosures made pursuant to A B and C must be made before during the meeting which the vote is taken so that persons
who have opinions contrary to those are given a reasonable opportunity to refute or respond. Um and then it doesn't subject the public officials to any type of uh code of ethics for uh code of ethics violation under chapter 112 which
it does not. So then based on that if you remember you all adopted policies and procedures and in your policies and procedures there is a section in your quasi judicial land use uh page that
talks about during the process as we had today we had two quasi judicial matters uh the chair is going to ask the LPA if they've had any exparte communications this includes any site visit receipt of expert opinion conducting of investigations,
discussions with any persons direct or indirect in the form outside of a public hearing and not on the record. Sometimes when there's a lot of disclosures made, I may ask the question just to say
having made all these disclosures, has anyone brought any biases or predetermined uh decisions to the qu to the public hearing? Because the property owner is entitled to an impartial decision maker.
A decision maker that's going to look at the testimony and the record that is presented to them in the public hearing and then apply the code to the facts and render a fair decision. >> And the public deserves that too, right?
>> The public deserves that as well. So I I do want to caution you that you know having these forums and outside you know conversations it is very important that you do not suggest that you have already made up
your mind because that will taint the quasi judicial hearing and it will be a basis for a challenge in the event that challenge goes forward. Nancy, let me say something. You know, bringing this up, I I want to be very clear that I do
not think anyone, council member, LPA, applicant, uh our friend Patrick, I don't think anybody has done anything wrong, illegal, immoral, everything is okay as it is. I just think it can be better. And I I think it
we can have more disclosure. But the process that exists right now for us because I had a lady say to me, "It's illegal for those council members to be meeting with developers." No, it is not. It is not illegal and it's not wrong in any kind of way. They are allowed to do
that. And as John and Jim both said, it it helps them be prepared for the case. The only sort of empty box here is the amount of information that is disclosed in the ca in the course of the hearing
about what did we bring what what's in our basket as we come to the meeting. >> And that is correct and I think Doug brought it up the who, what, when, and why. And yes, um I think Jim did as well as others. Um, so you already have a framework in place and and the ball is
kind of in your court as far as how much more do you want to go forward and making those disclosures. Now, some of the things that Jim's brought up, you could already go ahead and do right now. Um, or if you really wanted to, you
could try to embed it in your procedural rules. This is how you govern your uh the matters that come before you. However, you know, we do have SB 180 which talks about, you know, more burdensome procedures. So now you're going to make everybody come down to
city hall. Some people may find that to be a burden. Some people may find it to be a pleasure. >> So Nancy, do do procedures policies and procedures you're you're indicating as a potential option. Do they bolt on to an ordinance and therefore would enhance or
override the baseline requirements of the ordinance itself or are they standalone document? They are they are your procedural rules and basically I believe your code and this is usually how they're written they will say that the LPA shall adopt procedures to govern
their um their work. So, so here's why I ask. If you go back to the ordinance you cited in sub paragraph A, it says clearly about disclosure like this, uh, it's not presumed to be presidential or >> prejuditial, I'm sorry.
>> Um, if here's the criteria. If the subject of the communication subject identity, the person, group, or entity with whom the communication took place is disclosed and made public prior to any action, then that's what the ordinance requires. subject and the
people. That's it. So clearly that's a very low baseline for disclosure. So would we not have to embed in an in an ordinance what we really expect to have happen to make it have the rule and the effect of law versus just a policy and procedure that would look more
optionality or changeable? I guess before you go embedding it in the rule because once you put it in the rule, it's a rule and you need to follow it and if it's not followed then that raises possible objections. Um you can do these things
>> voluntarily >> right now as a matter of when and where. Um and you know sometimes too um I know in other municipalities that where I have worked a very controversial matter would come up lots and lots of
disclosures made. Um you know I ask the question of the body you know are you still impartial? Can you render a fair fair decision here? And sometimes too, I will ask the um the applicant just to put on the record whether or not they
felt that they've had a fair opportunity to have a decision made having heard the exparte disclosures. Do you have any questions? Some attorneys will ask further questions. Anita, you said that you had a meeting with uh
>> that happened in a case >> what what did you talk about and how long was the meeting? So, so those those parameters and frameworks and are in place. I honestly my recommendation is is that you just use the framework and
the process that you currently have. I don't think you really need to make the rule harder. You just need to comply with the rule. You know, on a lighter note, it's kind of like, okay, I need to lose a little little bit of weight. So, I'm going to try this diet. It's not working. Why? Because I'm not following
it. So, I'm going to get another diet. But if I went back to that first diet and actually did what it said, it would probably work. >> So Anita, I bring that up. >> Story of my life right there. >> I bring that up so that that conversation happened with her because as you know um on charter review, we're
being asked many many times to put chapter and verse in there down delineated down to the expected behavior. And that is an abuse of that document when there are other ways that she just talked about to have the same behavior come out and give the
flexibility for the contemporary council whoever it is to make those updated policies as they fit the moment. So I think that's great answer. I'm glad it's public again because I'm not sure how many people watch the charter but clearly with this we can make our own policy and procedures without having to
deal with the legislation itself and follow those accordingly. Well, but some of the things too that I think Jim's brought up and I mean, you know, meeting at town hall, if I were an appointed member to a board, I might want to have that meeting in town hall.
Um, simply because maybe I don't want people knowing exactly where I live or where I hang out. I don't want the perception out there. I mean, town hall is a great place and it's available. It's very neutral and but do you have to put that in your
rule? No, no, >> no. >> Just a matter of practice. Exactly. Exactly. What were you going to say? >> Um, well, two things uh to address Jim. First, uh, the LPA rules only apply to
us, whereas 3452 would include the council, which would take an a resolution ordinance. >> Yeah, there you go. Um, and going back to what I think Jane brought up earlier is, um, and Nancy brought up
is we we need to be very cautious about somebody asking for an advisory opinion before the public hearing. They all want to know, well, what do you think about this? >> Yeah. But to come in uh and be
objective, you you can't say those things up front. So I'd be interested to see what Pat has to say since he >> Yeah, I am too. And so um is there any objection from the LPA to um have three minutes worth of commentary from Mr.
Vaness? Do you object? >> It's a long time. >> Three minutes long time. >> That's why I said, can we start with a minute and half and see how it goes? >> Yeah. And we don't care how you're feeling. just minutes. Yeah. >> Okay. Go. >> Well, good morning. U Pat for the record. >> You guys are like good.
>> As you guys can probably guess, I was at home working from home and I saw the discuss >> and you said, "Oh, hell, I got to go." >> I figured I I am get in the car and rush over. So, uh, well, I'm glad you're talking about this and I I figured I'd come down and um give you my thoughts
and if you guys want to ask me questions, I I'd be happy to answer those. Um I've worked in uh and I still work in multiple jurisdictions. Some of them which allow um us to meet with elected officials and have these
discussions. Some others once your uh application is in process and submitted uh you can no longer talk to them. You can talk to them before but you can't once once you're in process. Um, in my opinion, this this ability to meet with
people one-on-one is constructive. Um, and and it's an equal playing field. You know, there's a lot more people out there in the public than there is of of me and my team and those people all have access to you and can provide their
input. I think what it does and and sometimes when people people don't fully understand the the development review process um and and we've seen this on social media or in in some of the local papers
about projects coming before you and negotiating public benefits for example and and what people what I've explained to people is you know this this is a year process a lot of times by the time we get to the hearing the entire year process is a negotiation with the local
community. So it it's you know this idea of of bartering on the dis I don't think is good for anybody. I think when you have an opportunity to meet with elected officials and get an opinion from them as to what their concerns are, what they
may or may not like about a project, we take that to heart. We make adjustments. Again, ultimately, if I'm going to do a good job for for for my client and for a project I believe in is I want to make it attractive and beneficial to get a
yes. So, there's a lot of benefit in me meeting with people, knowing what the concerns are, and making adjustments as we go along and once we submit. The other thing is um what we see in a lot of communities is we see
mandated public meetings with the neighbors. Um it's not a requirement here. And personally, I like the fact that it's not a requirement because it does give a little flexibility if it's if it's something like a a small little um
variance or for example development order for old San Carlos for the old Killwinds. you know, it's a minor project. There's a lot of support. Does it really make sense for us to to to have a meeting with the community, open it up to everybody? Uh, but when we have
a a a project where we know there's concerns and we know the public is maybe uh wants more information, we've gone out of our way and just voluntarily done that to open it up and get input from the public. So I think I think the
flexibility and the openness and the options is a good thing. I think it's worked well. But in any political process or public process, I think it's it's education. It's education. Some, you know, I think Anita, when you're getting questions from people is I'm sure there's a big very informed base
that know and then you have some people that might be up north for half the year and they come down and uh you know they haven't kept up with everything and they ask a question. So, I think I think right now I don't see the process as being broken. I think it's working well.
I think that no matter what you do, you will always get questions from people and you'll always have a very informed group and a lot of people that are not informed. And >> but Patrick, look, you're sitting at your house, you hear us talking about this, boom, you run down here and you have the entree
>> to sit in that seat and have us say, "Patrick, come up." >> Yeah. But 5,000 other people who might be listening to this meeting, assuming they are, don't. >> Um, now I'm not saying that if 20 people didn't show up to talk about this that
we wouldn't have said, "Okay, this is a public hearing. We want to hear from all of you because that would have been good." But >> it's it's no surprise to anyone that of course you want this to be open and flexible. We're not we're not talking about it shouldn't be. It should be. The
only thing that we're trying to figure out is how do we bridge this gap of the old world to now this new reality of ours to create a greater comfort level for everyone of
disclosure like how like me saying that you know when I met with you and I you know not disclosing every little word because like Don said you know a lot of it is just conversation. It's just conversation. But what was the gist of it? What concerns did I raise? Was it
something substantial that I'm coming into the meeting like Jane say said about Seagate, five entrances and exits off of Dora. This is ridiculous. You know, saying something like that, that's substantial. Um, that's really what we're talking about, not eliminating
this, it wouldn't be healthy in this community to eliminate it, I don't think. And I know that there are people that think the door should just simply be closed. it should be closed because it's wrong or it's unethical or whatever. I I don't happen to be of that opinion. I'm just trying to find a in
this new reality a better way of keeping everybody informed. >> Yeah. And I I I think, you know, and I value when Nancy at every meeting goes through through a pretty detailed, you know, spiel, but but it's useful in that
it reminds everybody of let's let's be a little more thorough on our disclosures because as I mentioned, we've got a lot of other jurisdictions and it's just a quickly any exparte. No, no, no, no, no. Yes. And a lot of times there's no description as to what that dis
I think I think you know Nancy is doing a great job kind of urging you and and nudging you along to to provide a little more detail and I think I think that's very helpful. >> Okay. Um does anybody have a question of Patrick? Please say no. >> Okay.
>> Thank you. >> It's nice to see you Patrick. Thank you for coming down. I'm just curious. Will Frank, do you have any comment on this? Have you had any issues with it? They're both waving their head. No. Okay. No comment. All right. Um Okay. So, Jane,
what were you going to say? >> Well, I'm I'm going to just say that most of these meetings happen before we have minutes or or a package. So, I I don't mean minutes, but our agenda package. So,
>> we're going in blind for me anyway. Um, I I go in for anformational gathering from them so that I will help it will help me read and digest the package when I get it because, you know, if it's 300 pages, you need to have a little
more information sometimes and a visual to start to create what you think you're going to read. and I typically don't converse back and forth unless I see absolute things that are terrifying
me. Um, but I think it is important to have the meetings so that we can have an understanding per our package because it does help us digest it. But I do think that it needs to I would prefer to
have those meetings here and not have to travel. You could say that. You you you can say that. Um uh so can we all agree that maybe as a start an an effort towards this the who, what, where, when
will be part of our disclosure. >> Yeah. >> Great. Yeah. I think fine for sure. >> I mean that will be that will be a lot um especially for people who either don't take notes well like like John said or pe people who don't remember like me. >> But every meeting that I ever take is at
least in my calendar. There you go. Exactly. Is at least >> when and of course what we spoke about. >> Okay. Um we could discipline. >> So what I'm hearing then is perhaps that the LPA at this point in time is going to do some leadership by example.
>> Um and then >> Well, that sounds a little uppy, but >> not just I hope it's not just this point in time. >> Also sounds like we weren't >> That's what I'm hearing down there. >> Kicking the stomach there. No, it just this is just an idea and it it is, you know, I think it's going to go a long I
really do think it's going to go a long way to people feeling more when I say people, I mean I mean the residents because you know darn well you're included in every conversation, but not everybody is. And so they'll feel more represented. >> Oh yeah.
>> Transparent, too. >> Transparent, too. Yeah. >> Okay. So, it it might also create a little bit of an awkward moment uh for for you guys in that if if John comes and does his disclosures and he's got five or six of them with details,
>> Jim does the same. I'm going to skip Anita. Go on to Jane. Everybody does. But then, oh no, Anita doesn't. She She knows she met. So, so you're >> going to happen pressure the whole thing up. Yes. you know, so just wanted to put
that out there. >> So we'll have no scorning of members who do not uh >> choose not to meet you. >> Oh, come on. Tell the truth, Anita. >> You sure no one was in here? >> Well, I think it it you know, it's quite
often that some of us have had the experte and some of us haven't. Absolutely. >> We couldn't make a meeting or we didn't want to go to a meeting or if you want to meet I'll meet you at city hall. >> Yep. I mean, we have the option of declining or setting the the terms of a meeting
>> and we don't always all have the same exparte experience on any individual. >> Very true. Yep. >> Okay. Anything else on this at the moment? >> Good good conversation. >> Great conversation. All right. So, um Pat, thanks for coming down.
>> I haven't heard from you in a while. I'm wondering why nothing's going on, but that's another conversation. All right. Next item on the agenda is LPA members items and reports. Um, John, anything? >> Uh, no, I have nothing at this time. >> How about you, Jim?
>> Nothing. >> Jane, >> nothing. >> Uh, Don, uh, Doug? >> Uh, nothing to report, ma'am. >> Don, >> nothing. >> Jim, >> yes, I have one. >> Jason, could we borrow you for just a second at the mic? >> Discipline here.
>> And Jason, maybe you could introduce whoever's sitting next to you. Of course. I plan to do that on our portion of the agenda, but if you'd like to do that now, we can do that as well. >> Well, since you're up. >> Absolutely. Um, so I'd like to introduce uh Luke Cornbball. And hi, Luke.
>> He has just joined us in the in the past uh what do you been here now? Less than a week. >> Two weeks. >> Two weeks. >> Wow. >> It flies by here. Um so I'm going to I'm going to defer to Luke to give a little bit of his background, but it's really great having somebody in the in the seat now. Um Luke's coming in as a as a
planner one position and we really look forward to him jumping in with both feet. >> Oh, wonderful. >> Welcome. >> Welcome, Luke. >> Hi. Thank you for uh welcoming me. Uh it's two weeks here. Uh was a planner up in New York. Just moved down here about a month ago and all that. I was working for Wayne County up in New York and uh
I'm excited to be down here and help out the department. I know there's uh a lot going on. So very happy to help. >> Very different. >> It's very nice, very nice to meet you. >> Very nice to meet you. Welcome aboard. >> Thank you very much. We're very tough group, so get ready. >> Please prevent us from becoming New York.
>> Wouldn't be wearing that short. >> So Jason um the other Jason was here before and uh Anie and I spoke about >> getting um a document that gives us the current status on all of the um pending projects, permit applications, all the
thing. Are number one, assume you're aware of that. >> And is March still look like a date you can bring that to us? >> I don't see any reason that we wouldn't be able to do that. Um, so I'm working with Jason right now on a couple other projects. As soon as we're done here, I'll remind him that that is an expectation for delivery on that's
>> all I have. Madam Chair, >> I I'm going to piggyback on that because that's my item also. And what I'm wondering is would it be um would it be possible to have a spreadsheet of some sort? I say spreadsheet just for lack of a better word because I want to be
fancy. um a spreadsheet that gives us an indication of where a project is. Uh it's been approved, it's in review, it's I mean I know you guys must have that in your system, but for for us just to kind
of follow along, you know, we've asked for updates, but it that could be the update in and of itself, just being able to chart all of that. Um because once we pass something, I mean, people ask us, "Well, why haven't we seen anything?" I mean, that's a big discussion right now. Why don't we see anything? And we could
tell them, "Well, here's here's where it is. Here's what's happening." Um that would just be um a very good visual aid and help us keep track of what exactly is uh going on and and going down the line. Amy, Nancy, Nancy, what do you
think is that is I mean, yeah, it is. I think that would be a helpful thing for us. >> You know, the development and then across the top and check, you know, uh, approved by LPA, approved by council, plan submitted, blah, blah, blah, all the way down to see all
>> and even if you could put that on the website, I think the public would love if they would love it. Yes. >> I'm I'm particularly interested that just like you talked about administrative approvals, there is a process outside of your process that many of these applicants have to go
through. So those delays >> are not representative of anything we're doing or not doing. So as you're aware those D and all other things and you know the wave wall is a big discussion and you can't get that done till you have the entity done all the the things that we all know because we sit here a lot the public may not be as well
acquainted with but any of those asterisks that you have there that there's a second third or statewide party that says it's in that process. We don't have the ability to necessarily monitor that real time and I'm asking to do that. But it does illuminate that there are things outside our control that look like delays here that we
shouldn't be accountable for reflect on our performance. >> Okay. >> And when he's saying our he means the town because absolutely because it's it is that perception of what are they doing wrong or why aren't they doing anything when in fact there is anything
and something being done. Are you leaning in for a reason? >> No, I'm not. I'm listening. >> Okay. >> All right. So, um, so we do keep a a running schedule for our own purposes to make sure that we know what's coming up. Um, my idea was really to just take the
first three or four columns that doesn't have any um what we would consider to be proprietary information about our reviews and our intern um discussions. But I I envision you getting a list much like we have a
running list and essentially you'll be able to see everything in red is stuff that is we're waiting for submission from the applicant. Everything in green is generally waiting for a scheduling for the meeting and the odd ones in between that we may be waiting for a submitt. So they may be gray. That's the
sort of document that we have. Now is that something that you think would be beneficial? >> The dates are going to the dates are really going to matter. the dates of submission or >> dates of the LPA approval like Jim was talking about all the way through. So if if somebody was approved two years ago and there wasn't there's a permit
application yet at your level or that that's going to cause a different reaction at least for me on all the effort we went through to do what it is and we're going to get the illusion of of what's really happening and not happening out of the out of the way. And I love Jim's idea about posting those
updates whenever you can but I'm looking for the dates on these things >> and there may may need to be a comment column. I mean, I know some end up held up in >> financing >> legal or financing issues. You know, there's a lawsuit filed and now suddenly it's not happening. So, >> that's fair. Yeah. >> And that could be posted also.
>> Yeah. >> So, >> well, it just eliminates the whole discussion of what are they doing wrong. >> Exactly. >> Yeah. >> What are we doing wrong? >> So, there let me let me just say that there's a little bit of a disconnect from things outside of the town. So if we have a jur a superior jurisdiction
like FD uh they may have applied to get our uh certificate from the town to show that it is ready to be reviewed by DP, but they're not necessarily required to let us know that they've begun that process or they've actually finished the process. If they hand us what they get
back from the state, we absolutely make it a part of the package. But if there are particular projects that you would definitely like to specifically know that you're hearing about, um staff staff through through Frankie would like to know what you're interested in because anything that has already gone
through approval generally comes off of our list so it doesn't become too unwieldy. So if there was something two years ago that you're looking at at the lot and saying, "Well, why haven't they put sticks in the ground yet?" That may not be available on the list that I have, but if you contact us to
get specific information about where we where we've gone with it and where it ended, I can definitely provide you that information. >> I think we're all looking for the same thing. It's not um whether or not the pool got built. >> It's not major projects. >> Exactly. >> It's major projects.
>> You know which ones. And if that if it has been approved two years ago, it just should say approved 2024 and now it's just it's approved. And so you see what I'm saying? It just it it it's going to take away some chatter
that doesn't need to be happening. >> Completely understandable. >> Okay. >> Anything else, Jim? Great. Um my only Oh, go ahead, Jim. >> No, go ahead. You start. My only my only other my only other issue or or comment I was going to bring up and I'm glad you're here Patrick is um you know we've
also asked for updates on the major projects you know to g to give us some verbal thing of what's happening and I had another idea what if we actually were to invite uh the person that came to mind this weekend and I almost called
him but it was Sunday I thought no I'm not going to do that I was going to call Bill Woulless and say Bill come in and tell us what's happening with the pink shell. How's your business? What's your plan for your project? And give us an update. And maybe it would be better to come from those property owners or their
representative than actually having staff give us an update which will be very um uh staffy. Exactly. And what we really >> And what we really want is some, you know, juiciness of what's really going
on. What do you all think about that? >> I like it, but we can't depend on >> communication to happen. So, I want the charge. >> But look, Patrick's sitting here >> and and you know, maybe we could invite them, you know, one per meeting to come in and give us an update on
>> I'd like to see the information and I think our invitation is going to be on pretty obvious. >> Yep. >> Okay. >> Yeah. What do you think of that? Just nod. >> Yes. >> I mean, you know, I I don't charge for that. I don't want somebody to have to get up I don't want somebody to get up here and say you know what I can't get
any money. I'm not asking them to do that. We just It would just be nice to hear you know what this is in our our 2030 forecast. Okay. It's in your 2030 forecast. Great. Now that just sort of
takes it out of people's and my mind that it's 2030 because quite honestly the perception is you all approved this. Why aren't we seeing it? >> And and I'll just say one thing. You know, the comments that I get repeatedly
are, "We need a restaurant. When that restaurant's not going to be here, these people won't be alive when that restaurant is built." And and which I don't mean that meanly, but it's >> Wow. I mean, I beg your pardon. >> I plan on living a few. >> I plan to eat at all the restaurants.
>> Nancy, you were right to point me out because it is going to be a problem. I'm the problem. Um, but just to have some have some kind of update. It would be nice to have those regular updates just so so everybody knows. >> And deadlines matter. And I'm not sure all of us remember.
>> I don't remember the expiration dates on all the development agreements. >> Ah, yes. >> So, get that on there. >> Oh, >> and then we have the gap becoming self-evident. >> Yeah, >> indeed. Okay. Um, I think I think I have marching orders on >> Tracy, you have to fill out a speaker
card. No, I'm kidding you. No, I'm kidding you. I'm kidding you. >> Jason, have we heard back from the state on comments on the comp plan? >> I've not heard directly, but I'll ask again. I think we were still within that 30-day uh window that they have to
respond back to us. But I'll double check the date. I I think I sent that to you an email and I forget the date at this point. It was 28. >> We were looking at the end of January. So, >> um I will double check on that one to see if we've had it come through again and I will let Frankie know to reach out
to you with where we are on that. >> Okay. Thank you, Jason. Thank you very much. Um any other LPA items? Tracy, >> thank you. >> It's nice to have you here. It's nice to have all three of you here. It's like either what did we do wrong or hey,
look, we got all three of them. >> No, this is this is some exciting updates actually. Tracy Kohler, deputy town manager. I'm here today to just quickly speak to you about our advanced digital tools that we are pursuing as a town. Um, as part of this, it will help the efficiency with which you were
asking Jason and community development to produce for the LPA. So, I'm going to give you a couple of examples of of things that we're currently in pursuit of. Uh, one is a virtual assistant. Um, that is kind of, you know, when you go on those websites and they say, "Hi, how can I help you?" And you can type in
well there's going to be a virtual assistant soon coming to our town's website where residents can come in you know when you're clicking away right some things are so buried deep down and it's impossible to find you can go to the web assistant type in your question they'll bring you directly that link
>> what a great idea >> yeah and it'll bring you right to where you need in the town's web page so that's going to be a big help um for residents it'll bring them directly to for example the permitting page I think you you may have gotten an update on gov well which is the new permitting system
and eventually code system. We also have another digital tool. >> Wait Tracy, I didn't get that update. I don't know. >> We did not. Oh, okay. So, there is another tool that the town is pursuing right now. It's called Gov Well. And Govwell is a platform where we've all
worked in I works right and it's like really cumbersome and difficult to understand and the naming convention is difficult with the files. Govell is an updated platform separate from IWorks, brand new company that is going to help us with our permitting process. It'll be
very clearly flowproof, which means you can see exactly what staff member is reviewing it and what the status is. So you get a better update, clearer, cleaner update of where the project is. That's in development. Really exciting for us. Again, the links will be clearly
marked so you understand what you're looking for. Um there's a code enforcement or code compliance piece that's coming further down the road. Does that kind of help with that portion? Fantastic news. Um so as an addition or a supplement to that, we have another digital tool that we're
pursuing right now. The company is called Madison AI. And Madison AI is kind of like our internal chat GPT because it will keep all of our searches. It will help craft reports, but it'll keep the public records
request as well. So, it creates a a whole different um digital footprint, if you will, for all those things. So, here's what I envision. Jason has to craft a report for you, and you need it efficiently and effectively. He'll be able to use Madison AI, connect into
Govwell, and say, "Hey, generate this report for me that talks about the steps of where this development is. Has it already been approved? well, what other comments or conversations have we put into the system as notes? And he'll be able to craft something much more easily
to present to LPA so that you can have that information and update it. So when you have Patrick Vaness or someone else come in to speak, there will be this complimentary component to it that should be able to give a better narrative. Again, I know right now you may say that well you're talking vaporware and vaporware just means it's
coming down the road. It's not yet in place, but at least it gives us some forethought and some visioning of where the town is going and the possibilities that we have. So, we're really looking forward to increased communication and conversation. >> Bravo. Wonderful. >> So, great. That's the update I wanted to
provide today. AI has made it to the beach, but all I keep hearing in my head is Nancy one time saying to me, Anita, we don't make legal decisions based on what Google says. Because I said to her, "Well, Nancy, I Googled." And she said, "Uh, yeah, okay, that's good. Well, you know what? I'm glad you brought that up
because Nancy and I and human resources have crafted a we don't like to use AI because AI because it's a little gets a little bad rap. So, it's more than that. It's an advanced digital tool and um in our policy we talk a lot about when we
craft our reports, when we do our research that it's not purely, in this case I'll say AIdriven that there always has to be a human component to it. So there's a responsibility policy on how we use these advanced digital tools so
that so that staff have that ownership of not just hitting search it spits it out we send it off without any human because I can tell you from personal experience in working with all of our FEMA activities um our advanced digital
tools like chat GPT can pull from wherever and tell you that this is the regulation but when you really get down to where that citation came from it's not always accurate. So, human intervention will always be important when you use an advanced digital tool.
>> So, speaking of human intervention, and I'm sure you're considering all this, but we all have real life experiences of digital uh freef falls where you get in the loops when you're asking questions and whether I'm asking Xfinity what the weather's like tomorrow, they tell me to
unplug and reboot my modem over and over and over. Um, so my preference and the way that I ran my company and the influences we had was there's always an exit ramp that a human can be contacted by a human whether it's spontaneous or whether it's a follow-up. That's just
the user friendly things and I'm sure you've got all that attitude in the way you're building it is very very important to protect the relationship we have with the public. >> Very good. >> That they can get out and talk to somebody or get a call back when they need to. So, we do have a virtual voice
component coming as well. >> So, thank you for the setup. >> Yeah. >> Thank you for the outside pass. I'll shoot the three-pointer now. >> And what does that mean? >> Um, so that means you'll be able to call in. You'll hear a digital voice saying, you know, who would you like to speak to? And the digital voice will connect
you to that department. If at any time you do not wish to speak to said digital voice, you can ask for operator. But some people just want to say, "How do I get a parking permit?" >> And it'll just tell you. >> So, it's all about efficiency. But please know there's always, to Jim's
point, a human factor that you can connect with. >> The relationships are important. right now. Yeah. >> I think if I could make a commentary almost, it's the customer service aspect of town's responsiveness to the residents
>> is only improved over the time that I've been sitting here at least continues to I can tell that it's of forefront to >> Thank you. That's that's important for our staff to hear. So what you're trying to do that and >> to Anita's point maybe she's going to
say operator or >> I'm going to hit zero or star or whatever as soon as I dial >> you're just going to walk either of us would prefer to >> you're right the window >> doesn't need a window. Yeah, >> but no, it's appreciated and that that
human component is extremely important in any of these tools because they are strictly that they are tools. >> They're you know the shovel may be good for this thing and the spade may be good for something else and you just you have to give people the opportunity to to
make their choices interact. >> Yeah, sure. Yeah. >> All right. So, hopefully that gives you some excitement to look forward to. >> Congratulations. That's just marvelous. >> Please come in every meeting. That was good to hear. Yeah, >> nice to have a little stuff at the end. >> Very good. Thank you. Thank you. And thank you, Will. And thank you, Frankie.
Thank you. >> Okay. Um, next item is community development member items. Do you have anything, Jason, or you used up today? >> I'm not asking Nancy anything because it'll be long. >> Patrick, what are you doing today?
>> Have to. So, um, we we do not have any specific large projects coming up. The one that we had assumed would be on this one has been pushed. Again, we don't have any determination on when they will choose to come in, but we will have it on the
agenda as soon as they do. >> So, so you're saying not mar not >> we have we have not >> we've not been given the go-ahhead by the applicant to schedule anything yet. >> All righty. How how how long in advance does an applicant have to I mean can
they do it the week before or does it have >> we'll be flexible but we have to meet the notification timing. So in general I think the minimum we would be talking about is 17 days um at that very least. But >> here's what I hope doesn't happen. All the other people who want to come in
don't get pushed aside. >> We have we have made sure that we pulled everybody that was ready to go. that was not a large project and we've tried to backfill these past two meetings with stuff. Um, some things worked out a little better than others, but we've cleared the deck on a lot of the smaller
projects that honestly would have been displaced by this larger project. >> Good. Well, they shouldn't be displaced. So, >> that's good. All afternoon now. >> Good. We go to lunch, violate the sunshine law or something. >> I just said I said that as a leadin to Nancy. Nancy,
>> LPA attorney items. >> Look at her face. >> No items. Are you serious? No, I don't know. I I'll come up with something for next month. >> Come on. >> Motion to motion to adjurnn. >> Thank you, Nancy. Um, any items that anybody wants to put forward for next
month's agenda? Jane? >> Yes. I need an excused absence. I will be out of town. >> You're not going to be here for March? >> Denied. >> Okay. >> You're not going to be here for March either? >> No, he denied my second. >> Okay. Um, anybody else have anything?
>> Motion journ. Thank you, Jim. Is there Thank you. Uh we stand adjourned at uh whatever time it is 10:37. Thank you all. >> Do you have a minute? I would like to