All right, good morning everyone. We're going to call this meeting to order. Today is Monday, August 3rd, 2026. All council members are present, including town manager, deputy town manager, town clerk, and town attorney. If you'll please rise, we're going to take a brief moment of silence for uh
one of our fallen islanders, and then followed by the invocation and the pledge of allegiance. Um, if you don't know, we recently lost Brian Thomas, who was on our audit committee. His wife, Dawn, serves on our uh public safety committee, so he will be missed.
>> Thank you. We thank you for being with us here today. As we begin this meeting, let us take a moment to express our gratitude for the opportunity to serve this community. We are thankful for the people of Fort Myers Beach, its residents, visitors, and all who
contribute to making our island special. May we approach today's discussions with respect, understanding, and a shared commitment to make decisions that benefit everyone. Let us be grateful for the chance to work together towards a better future for our town. Amen. >> Amen.
I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Next is the approval of the final
agenda. Tom attorney, is there anything you want to say? I know there's one item that we probably are going to have to pull. Um, yes, Mayor. Um, so it's my understanding that we will be pulling the uh item R
which is on your administrative agenda. And that item deals with um the asking you for authorization to foreclose on a lean that's uh had been in existence on 2815 Astera Boulevard. Um I've confirmed
with staff that that lean has been paid. So there's no reason to move forward with that item. Um the other item that I have to uh ask for changes to the agenda is the executive session which was
announced um to occur today at 100 p.m. I'm asking to cancel that and remove that from your agenda and in its place to add a proposed settlement agreement and I will provide copies to you. Um, we're in the process of making those
copies right now. Um, before we get to that item. >> So, that'll be added in place of item R. >> No, that would items. Yes. >> Move to approve the agenda is modified.
>> We got a motion by councelor Kane. >> Second. >> Second by councelor Mlan. Uh, any further discussion? All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. I. >> Opposed? Hearing none. That motion carries unanimously. Next is public comment. Madam clerk. >> Yep. I have uh two signed up. First is
Donna Gallagher and following Donna will be Carol Styer. Steer. >> Good morning. >> Good morning. How are you? >> Fair to partly cloudy. >> I love it. Um >> we just wait for I just need to have you
get up at the microphone. Make sure it's turned on. Should be a little button there you can push to turn that on. Thanks Frankie. >> Hi, my name's Donna Gallagher and I live at 21166 Naughty Turn Drive. Our property backs
up to the church property. Um, we are getting eaten by mosquitoes. If you look at my legs, they're eaten like crazy. So, um, the pond behind us is stagnant. There's no movement in it.
There's no anything in it. It used to get a lot of birds coming and getting fish. They cleaned up right after the hurricane and stuff went back into the water and there haven't been birds
since. No birds. So, um, we have right next to us, we have a a lot that's church property that the grass was this high. I got uh the men there were men mowing over on the church property. I
got their attention by squirting water over the fence and um they did come and mow but they didn't clean it up. So all the bugs, all the mosquitoes, everything's still there. Um then
there's the other end there's a fence from the church and just junk is thrown back there. It's been three and a half years and it's a mess. It's just an absolute mess that we have to look at. I can't even go out of the house because
I'm getting eaten by mosquitoes. I've called mosquito control and they said they come and treat it and everything, but it's not helping at all. And then I also have water that lays in front of my house because I have a manhole that's
high and they were supposed to township was supposed to come out three four years ago and repave it so that the water from the condos doesn't lay there. Well, they didn't repave it and the water comes off the condos and lays
right in front of my house breeding more mosquitoes. So, I'm asking for something to be done, a fountain or something in the water so that it's not stagnant, so it's moving and them to just clean up what needs to
be cleaned up so I don't get eaten. I I gave you pictures. So, okay. Thank you so much. >> Thank you, Don. >> Carol. >> Sorry, Carol. Is Carol not here any longer?
>> Carol. Okay. >> Is there That's all you had signed up. >> That's all I had signed up. >> How's >> Hi everybody. Welcome back. My name's Howie Hoffman. I've lived on the beach 27 years. I use Bay Oaks quite
regularly. And we have these nets that were bought about 2 years ago and they're supposed to be put up. I understand there might be money problems or something like that, but we have people that support the friends of Bay Oaks that'll put up some money. But um
they told me because the fire station was going up, there was electricity out there, we can't do it. And we have the nets. We've had them for a couple of years now. I'd like to see them put up and if you come up with a price on how
much it'll be to put cement in the poles in, maybe we could all raise some money together. And uh also we got pickle ball courts there that somebody's willing to pay to have four more of them put in and that's
for without any expense to the town. I just want to see if we're going to move on that or not. And thank you all. Bye. >> Thanks, Howie. Is there anyone else who'd like to speak in public comment?
Seeing none, we'll close public comment. Next is local achievements and recognitions. Councelor King. And yeah, this is a tough one. You touched on it earlier, Mayor, and I'm sure there's other things going on, but with just the news that happened yesterday, I want to send out my
sympathies uh to Dawn Thomas. U it was very stunning news and very saddened news. Um, I I enjoyed Brian. I respected Brian and I appreciated all that Brian has done for this island as well as Dawn. And I just want to let them know that uh if you if we're needed, we're
there for you. Please just rely on your family, your friends, your community, and let your memory sustain you. >> Sir, >> I'd like to echo that, too. Brian was one of the good guys. He the the amount of time and energy he spent with this
town was just incredible. He was one of the guys that if I had a question or a concern, I'd call him and no matter what he was doing, where he was, he'd always call me back right away. I mean, he loved this town. So, Don family, um, our hearts go out to you and as as council
member King said, if you guys need anything, let us know. But it was a really sad weekend for the beach. >> Rebecca, >> I would just echo those comments. Council Mlean, uh,
>> I feel the same. I feel horrible. Um, >> I didn't really know Brian well, but I knew him by reputation. And, um, my heart goes out to Don and the family. >> Yeah, I won't restate everything again. Uh, for the sake of time, I'll I won't
talk about the other things because they're not nearly as important at this time. So, moving on, we got advisory committees, items, reports, and appointments. Our first is an appointment to the audit committee. We have uh one person, Mr. Dunlap, who has
put his name in to fulfill one of the seats. Um, fill out your ballot. We'll get it to Nancy. >> You want to say anything? >> Jim, you want to come up and say anything? Thanks. Thanks, John.
>> Thank you, mayor. Let me also take a moment pass along our prayers condolences to uh Dawn and the family. Um I'm sure as many of you if you knew Brian he became a friend very quickly. Um he served on the charter review
commission at my request when we were recruiting members through that and he's the reason that my application's in today because he called and said we need you on audit. Would you consider it? And obviously I did. So, we are going to miss him and because of him, he um set a
high bar on how to be engaged, how to be involved, and how to care about something as special as this place. So, just wanted you to know that um the reason that my application end is because of Ryan. He texted me a few days ago and said, you know, I'll support you in any way I can, but he's not here to do that. So, you got any questions for
me on the application? I'm glad to answer. >> Counc any questions for Jim? >> No, I think you'd be a great addition. Thanks C. >> I agree. Scott Ditto. >> John, >> thanks for stepping forward. Appreciate that. >> Thanks, Jim. >> Thanks, Mayor.
>> Ready for the >> Yep. >> Okay. >> Uh, Councilman King, James Dunlap, Mayor Allers for Mr. Dunlap. Council member List for Dunlap.
>> Uh, Council Member Mlan Dunlap and Vice Mayor Safford for Dunlap. So 5-0 for Dunlap. >> Councelor Mlan, is that your vote? >> It is. >> Councelor Link, is that your vote? >> Yes. And it's no easy one. It's just one box.
>> Vice Mayor Safford, is that your vote? >> That's my vote. >> Councelor King, >> yes. in mind as well. Is there a motion to accept the nomination >> and appoint Mr. Dunlap to the audit committee? >> I'll make that motion. >> Got a motion by councelor Mlan, second by councelor Safford or Vice Mayor
Safford. Any further discussion? All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I opposed. Hearing none. That motion carries unanimously. Thank you again, sir. >> Next is the Anchorage Advisory Committee. Um I don't believe Chris is here. >> She's not. >> Is there anyone from Anchorage Advisory?
earlier they uh Chris sent us a a great detailed report um to our email so it's available for public records should somebody want it from from uh the town clerk you can simply ask for it thank her and everyone from the anchorage advisory committee for putting in that work and sending that report uh it's a good read if you have a chance to get
out and read it next is the approval of the minutes from the town council meeting on June 1st 2026 and the town council meeting from June 15 2026 is there a motion to approve the minutes >> I just have Excuse me. One um change in
it is the minutes from J June 15th um on page 51. Uh Beverly Milligan is depicted as Beverly Mulligan throughout that document. >> Do you need a mulligan on that? >> Very good. >> Okay,
>> that's my only change. >> All right. Are there any other changes? >> Move to approve is corrected. >> Got a motion by councelor King. >> Second. >> Seconded by councelor Lake. Any further discussion? All those in favor signify by saying I. I.
>> Opposed. Hearing none. That motion carries unanimously. >> Next is our consent agenda. We have three state of emergency extensions. First one is resolution 26-143- 26-146 for the extension of local emergency tropical storm Debbie. The second is
resolution 26-147 through 26-150 for the extension of local emergency hurricane Helen. And the last is for the resolution 26-151 through 26-154 for the extension of local emergency hurricane Milton. Is there a motion to
approve the consent agenda? >> So move. >> Got a motion by councelor King. I'll second. Any further discussion? All those in favor signify by saying I. I. Opposed. Hearing none. That motion carries unanimously.
Uh items removed. We have nothing. It brings us to our first public hearing. The next three items on our agenda are public hearings for review of various land use requests for the benefit of the public. Please be aware that these items are quasi judicial in nature. Our attorney will further explain.
>> Thank you, mayor. On your agenda today, you have the three items. One is a variance, one is a home rule development agreement, and one is a resoning. Um, these items are all quasi judicial in nature.
um which requires that your public hearings today comply with procedural requirements that have been established in Florida law and in our land development code. The quasi judicial proceedings will be less formal than a proceeding before a circuit court, but
they would be more formal than the remainder of your meeting. And we follow basic standards of due process that requires certain notices, the application of the correct standards and your decision to be made on competent substantial evidence presented to you in
writen documents or through oral testimony. Your responsibility is to evaluate the testimony and the information for each of these quasi judicial items and draw a conclusion regarding whether the criteria in the
land development code or in state law has been satisfied. So speculation or opinions uh not based on competent facts cannot legally be considered by you in evaluating one of these agenda items. Testimony by professionals who have been
qualified as experts in a particular area has been considered 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. Your decision is final. If a decision of approval is not obtained or if there is a tie vote from a motion to approve or a motion to deny, then the matter being
considered is denied unless the majority of the council members present in voting agree by motion before the next item is called to make an alternative motion in lie of the denial. Such action may be moved or seconded by
any member regardless of his or her vote on the earlier motion. Um, denial of an application or a request is a denial with prejudice unless the council states otherwise. Um, if an application is denied with
prejudice, no similar application for reszoning, special exception, or variance covering the same property or portion of the property shall be submitted for a period of 12 months. So, members of the audience that are
here today, if you intend to speak, please keep my comments in mind. And when you come forward, please state your name clearly for the record whether or not you have been sworn in and your qualifications or your interest in the matter. So for purposes of efficiency
before we begin the public hearing on these three items, I would like to go ahead and dispose of a few housekeeping matters. My first question is directed to the town clerk and I ask if all these agenda items have been properly noticed
pursuant to our land development code. >> Yes, they have been. >> And at this time, if there is any town council member who has a conflict of interest that would prohibit them from voting on any one of these three items, please disclose this at this time so that we can make sure that we have a
quorum present when that item comes up for review. Councelor Mlan, >> uh, no conflict. >> Councelor Link, >> no conflict. >> Vice Mayor Safford, >> none. >> Uh, councelor King, >> none. >> I do have one. It's for agenda item C, ordinance 26-10 for the Silver Sands
Reesort. I will be recusing myself from that vote, filling out my form 8B and turning the meeting over to Vice Mayor Safford for that agenda item. >> Okay. Thank you, mayor, and the nature of your conflict. >> I have a business agreement with TPI. >> Thank you.
Um, so at this time, uh, I believe it's time for the clerk to swear in anyone who is intending to give testimony on any of these three items, and that would include public comment, too. U, do you swear or 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. >> Okay. Our first quasi jud judicial item is a resolution of the town council of the town of Fort Myers Beach approving approving with conditions denying or
denying variance 20250260 requesting a variance from LDC section 34 table 34-3 for the property located at 100 102 Bayar Drive generally referred to as strap number 29-46-24-W2-000015510
and Fort Myers Beach to reduce the required 20ft rear setback by 7.9 ft to allow a rear setback of 12.1 ft for an enclosed access staircase extending to the second floor of a two family residence within the residential conservation RC zoning district and
providing for other clarifications as necessary providing for conflicts of laws scrier's errors severability and providing for an effective date. If any town council member has had any exparte communication to disclose, please let us know the subject discussed and the identity of the person, group or entity
with whom the communication took place, any correspondence that you received or observations made of the site. Councelor K. >> None that I recall. >> Vice Mayor Safford, >> I'm very familiar with the property as I resided u two parcels down from it. Other than that, nothing. >> Councelor Link,
>> I'm familiar with the property, but no exparte. >> No exparte. >> I have none either. who's Jason Smallley has been qualified as an expert already by this town council based on his education and experience has been accepted as an expert in the
field of land use planning and development in the town of Fort Myers Beach. Are any other individuals who would like to be qualified as an expert witness on behalf of the applicant at this time? Anyone? All right, seeing none. Jason. >> Good morning, counselors, everybody in
the audience. My name is Jason Smallley. with the town's community development. Um, and before you today is a request for a variance. As the mayor has laid out, uh, the request for the variance is to reduce the required 20ft rear setback of the house to provide a, uh, a
enclosed staircase, which will serve both sides of the proposed duplex. They're requesting a uh reduction of the 20 foot setback by 7.9 ft to provide a minimum setback to the stairs of 12.1 ft. U the applicants property exists
within the RC zoning district. Uh this is considered to be a uh compliant lot for size and area. Uh the applicant's uh submission was reviewed by staff. Uh there was a recommendation of denial initially uh given at LPA. Uh that is
the recommendation uh still based exclusively on the fact that this was a design choice that uh staff felt that the stairs could have been put somewhere else. Um at LPA the uh the outcome was 61 which caused it to come to you today
uh for a uh a review. staff does have uh some boilerplate uh conditions of approval at the end there if you do decide to recommend or to uh approve the the uh recommendations here. And uh staff is here for any questions or
concerns that you may have. >> Uh councelor Mlan, any questions for staff? Um Jason on the um the drawings that they show I understand that the request is strictly about the rear setback but I was concerned about the
height of this building as well. >> Uh was that not something that it looks like the top four which is the staircase um for the top deck >> is 10 ft above. Is that something that's
not a doesn't require variance? Uh, I apologize. I haven't reviewed the height explicitly yet, but if if I may make an assumption here, uh, most many people are utilizing the portion of the code section that allows for an additional 250 square ft of um of usage upstairs.
Uh, generally it's associated with mechanicals or electricals. uh if they do have a um uh elevator cab, and I apologize, I haven't dug into the the floor plan of this one quite yet, but if they do have an elevator, for instance, the u the top of the cab with the
mechanicals that are required by flood code to be up there rather than in the pit often times will lead people to need additional height up in that area. The code section that I'm speaking of allows for an the additional 250 square feet to not be counted against your overall
height. and an additional feet additional height of 10 feet is generally within what I'm seeing when you talk about a seven foot high cab about 18 inches for the mechanicals or electricals on top of the cab and then another separation between those
electricals and mechanicals and the roof as called for by the National Electric Code and the Florida Building Code. To your point though, uh, no, I have not specifically looked in here and I would defer to the applicant to see if that is exactly what they're intending to use.
Uh, in this when we're looking at this right now, what we're looking at is really just the layout, sort of the the beginning point. And if they get the setbacks, we will absolutely be reviewing the height ultimately to ensure that it either meets that code section that I'm thinking of of the
additional 250 square feet or it will need to be modified to bring it into conformity with that. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Okay. >> I don't have any questions right now. Thank you, >> Vice Mayor Safford.
the the odd shape of that lot is that if it would have been a normal shaped lot, would we even be here? >> I think largely this is coming out from two aspects in my opinion. That's a because it's a it's a corner lot. >> Um so obviously has more restrictive
setbacks on an additional what would be considered a side setback in a normal interior lot. Um and then the fact that they um that they are utili or meeting today's code sort of pushes them into the middle of this property. So I
understand that it is kind of a a difficult one to lay out initially because you do have more restrictive setbacks, but people do this all the time. They know when they buy a corner lot, they're going to be a little bit more restricted even though they're going to have a larger lot in general.
>> Okay. Thank you, >> Councelor King. I guess mine would be just a pet peeve comment that uh we're here about a design choice, but isn't most everything a design choice? >> I I think that's a fair point, Mr. King. Absolutely. >> All right. Thanks. I just got a two
basic questions. The first one is you you said you haven't looked at the height yet. I find that concerning that if they're here asking for something that's going to require a variance and you later determine that what they're proposing in their drawing doesn't meet code, they would then have to come back again and ask for a variance to the
height. Would they not? >> Ostensibly, we would have them fix whatever problems would be at review stage >> unless they wanted to have the design that they have. Then they would have to come back and do this again. My question is why wouldn't we do that all at once under the same public hearing? Um, just as a general comment about how these
things lay out, a lot of times people don't want to go through the trouble of doing full full-on designs, architectural or otherwise, at this point until they know that their general layout can work. >> Okay. Uh, the other question is you mentioned that staff denial was based on
a design choice that you staff felt they could put the stairs anywhere somewhere else. based on page 135, where would you propose they could put the stairs that wouldn't require them to have a setback because of the oddshaped lot? >> If they didn't decide if they didn't decide to to uh shrink the building in
some respects to add the stairs instead of having usable space, um they could have in theory used an interior uh set of stairs within the existing footprint and would that wouldn't have necessitated it. Although I do admit that that probably interferes with any
um parking or any other uses downstairs that would be then dedicated to stair stairways instead. >> Okay, that's all I had. Thanks, Jason. Uh the applicant is the applicant here. No one from Okay.
>> No. >> Uh are there any members of the public who'd like to comment? There's nobody asking any questions, so I was thrown off a little bit. Uh, is there any members of the public who would like to comment on this matter? If so, please come forward to the podium and identify yourself, provide your address, and
whether you were sworn in. Any public comment? All right. Seeing none, I will now close the public hearing and request a discussion or a motion from town council to approve, approve with conditions, deny with reasons, or a continuence to a time certain. Discussion. Councelor
King. I'll go ahead and make a motion to approve this with the conditions listed in the uh staff report. >> Okay. >> Got a motion to approve by councelor King. Is there a second? >> I'll second. >> A second by councelor Link. Discussion. Councelor Mlan. Any discussion?
>> I share your concern. I really think that there's a potential issue with the height of this. Um we're not asked to um appine on that right now, but uh that's my my point. And I the second thing I'd say is that I think the stairs issue
from my reading into it is it's because it goes up to the second level. If it was the first level, it would be able to have the setbacks and uh I think that may be an issue we would want to look at in the Elise. >> Councelor Link, any comments? >> No comments.
>> Vice Mayor Staff? Now, there's there's like eight lots in that area that have this weird shape to them, and it's not enough for the parallelogram lots where there were over a hundred, but there's right on that stretch of a stero there. I'm very familiar with it. So, I'm I'm
okay um moving this forward. >> All right. Uh Councelor King, any other discussion? The only the only thing I have is it just by looking at the drawings, it looks like it's the elevator shafts that protrude up into that extra 10 feet. Looks like there's two, one for each side. And then it looks like an open
patio, which would meet the requirements that you mentioned, Jason. >> So long as the required um fall protection falls below the the maximum height, they're allowed, the 30 ft in code. Yes, absolutely. >> Okay. All right. Got a motion by councelor King, seconded by Councelor
Link. There's no further discussion. Councelor King. >> Hi, >> Councelor Link. >> Hi, >> Councelor Mlan. >> Hi, >> Vice Mayor Safford. >> Hi, >> and I'm an I as well. That motion carries unanimously. >> Next is item B.
This uh this is this quasi judicial agenda item is the first reading and public hearing on proposed ordinance 26-06. If approved at first reading, a second reading and final adoption hearing will be scheduled for Wednesday, September 9th 202026
or at another time identified by town council. This is an ordinance of the town of Fort Myers Beach, Florida, approving or denying a home rule development agreement for property located at 6890 Estero Boulevard, Fort Myers Beach, Florida. Strap number 03-47-24-W1-00003.0010.
owned by FMBH LLC as authorized by section 2-100 of the town's land development code and in compliance with the procedures and application and approval of development agreements with two phases of development and a request for seven deviations for the purpose of redevelopment of the property to allow
restaurant entertainment commercial parking and resident recreational use providing for terms and conditions including but not limited to the identification of the proposed use of the property a finding of consistency with The town of Fort Myers Beach comprehensive plan commitments and
development obligations, deviations needed for development, providing for other clarifications as necessary, providing for conflicts of loss, scriveners errors severability and providing for an effective date.
Mayor, um, as before we get started on the merits of this particular request, the application, um, the town has been made aware that there are, uh, an individual, uh, on behalf of an association, uh, Larry Gillham.
I'm sorry if I mispronounced your name. He's the president of the San Caper Condominium Association, Inc. They have requested intervenor status. Um if you were able to go ahead and make a determination as to whether you view
them as interveners in this particular case um then we can uh keep a appropriate order um and go through the hearing as as we typically do um and there is the opportunity for the applicant to object to their um their
request. >> Okay. Well, let's hear from you first. >> Absolutely. Uh, good morning, Mayor. Megan Strayhorn. For the record, uh, I'm an attorney for the for the applicant. We are aware that there's an intervenor request. For purpose of the record, we will be objecting to their status as an
intervenor. However, I also would like to clarify that I believe it's a Larry Gillum individually rather than Sand Caper um, as a whole. Uh, my understanding is there is a request for 10 minutes. >> We really should be hearing from the intervenor first making the request.
>> Okay. um and the reasons that they are setting forth and he can clarify the status and then Megan you'll have again the opportunity to put it on the record. >> Absolutely. >> So who is representing him? >> Can you hear us? We can see you. Can you hear us?
>> I can I can hear you. And uh I'm online >> and uh president of San Daper Condominium Association. I'm also representing both the um uh board of directors of San Taper condominium and
also uh uh two other individuals who have residents there and uh so I I request the intervenor status so that I could express our concerns uh as direct neighbors of this property and the impact upon our association. Could you
please for the record state the names of the other two parties you're representing? >> The other two parties um are um Jan Coin C and she's an owner in the association and also uh John Tuttle and he also is u
an owner and and I believe both of them are I think both of them are uh also um residents there. But I I do represent the board of directors. >> Okay. Is anybody else having a hard time
hearing him? >> And I don't know if it's on our end or your end, but we're having a really hard time hearing you. >> For the record, um the request >> be better. >> Not really. >> Oh. >> Um I'm sorry to to interject. However, we do want to keep a complete record.
The request itself to participate as an intervenor. Um what what is your request? How many minutes would you like for your presentation? >> I'd like at least five minutes for the
presentation. The um I have uh delivered a document that is the uh essence of exactly what I will present. Uh 15 copies were presented this morning and should be passed out. >> That's them. we have them.
>> So, um if council then can um I guess we could hear from Megan uh putting her objection of record and this is the document that was referenced. >> Thank you. Thank you, Nancy. Yes, I will uh reassert the objection for the record
as to the intervenor status. Um, as far as Yes. Thank you. for purpose of the record reasserting the objection to the intervenor status. Um, and we would defer to you all if you all were to accept the intervenor as to the time
frame permitted. >> Megan, have you seen a copy of what was just handed out? >> Yes, sir. Thank you. I do have one. Yes. >> Is there any questions for Megan? And Nancy, do you need an official vote from us? >> Um, I do. And the request again is for
five minutes. >> That's correct. You want your request is for five minutes. >> That is correct. >> Okay. >> I'd like to make a motion to grant Mr. Galene intervenor status. >> All right. Got a motion by councelor
Mlan. >> I'll second that. >> Seconded by councelor link. Further discussion. Uh councelor Mlan. >> I. >> Councelor Link. >> Hi. >> Vice Mayor Safford. >> Hi. >> Councelor King. I >> and I'm an I as well. That motion carries unanimously.
Now, you want me to go on with my little spiel? If any town council member has had any exparte communication to disclose, please let us know the subject discussed and the identity of the person, group, or entity with whom the communication took place, any correspondence that you received, or observations made of the
site. Councelor King. >> I've had a couple meetings with the neighborhood group regarding this and have received numerous emails. Most in support. Uh a few against. >> Councelor Safford, Vice Mayor Safford. >> Um I'm the exact same. Had a meeting
couple weeks ago with the neighborhood company and and uh the applicant. >> Uh councelor link. >> Yes. On 6:15 I met with a neighborhood group and their representatives of the property. I also received 22 emails in
support and two opposed. >> Councelor Mlan. >> Uh yeah, I very similar to everybody else, but I also did have a conversation with Mr. Khaled as well. >> All right. I also met with the neighborhood group and Megan was in that
meeting as well uh here at town hall. Um also had discussions with John, the owner, about this over the last couple years as they were moving forward with it. I've received the same emails that everybody else has received. Mayor, it would be appropriate to ask the applicant's attorney if she wanted
to inquire further regarding any of the disclosures that have been made. >> I have no further questions. No. >> Okay. Who's representing the town on this? Jason Green or Small? I guess I just say Jason. >> One of us. Yes, one of us will show up
eventually. >> Uh Jason Green Community Development. Um I'm sorry. Go ahead. >> Let me go through my thing here. Come on now. Nancy will not like it if I don't follow. >> I'm so eager to be back. >> I bet you are. Jason Green has been qualified as an expert already by this town council based on his education and experience. Has been accepted as an
expert in the field of land use planning and development in the town of Fort Myers Beach. Are there any other individuals who would like to be qualified as an expert witness on behalf of the applicant at this time? >> Yes, mayor. We'll have uh two expert witnesses, both of which have been previously deemed experts in their
respective fields for planning. We have Patrick Veness with the neighborhood company and for engineering uh we have Elizabeth Fountain with J.R. Evans. >> Perfect. Um and has the property owner applicant seen a copy of the agenda backup materials from staff? >> Yes, mayor. We have Thank you.
>> Okay, Jason. >> Yes, Jason Green Community Development. Thank you, mayor. Um the as you already described, the application is a multi-phase. Uh it's a development agreement in front of you. Um, and I'll turn over to the applicant to give some more detail, but the initial first phase
is uh essentially temporary uses. Um, essentially with the second phase being built out of additional uses uh in your in the request, there's also additional uses uh that are not depicted on the site development plan. Um, those are just like a zoning district. It would be allowing those uses which would require
additional site plan u updates and come back before you to revise those if those uses were going to be put on the site. So, if you have any questions about that later, I'd be happy to answer them. >> Okay. Nancy, procedurally, where would the intervener come in? After the applicant or before the applicant?
>> I think after um giving the applicant the opportunity to cross-examine if they want, but the intervenor doesn't really have the um the right to cross-examine. >> Okay, Megan? >> Absolutely. If I may, I'm going to move this lectern a little bit over so that I
can hopefully Sorry. >> Or you can move to the other one. It might be easier. >> Is that a design choice? >> Here, maybe I'll pop over here. >> Just got to push the button to turn it on
>> and see if this will work. >> Can we have the slideshow, please? >> Okay. Again, for the record, my name is Megan Strahorn. I'm an attorney attorney for the for the applicant. We're here for a home room development agreement for the old Windham property.
Uh in addition to myself as well as the expert witnesses, we also have owner representative John Callas uh here present as well. This is a home rule development agreement as Nancy has previously identified. It is quasi judicial uh and it'll have to be found to be consistent
with a comprehensive plan as well as land development code. the competent substantial evidence. We are asking for this presentation to be uh included with the public record as well as the expert as well as the expert testimony in this
case. This is a home roll development agreement essentially seeking to reestablish pre-existing uses that have been located on the site with the exception of the hotel. There are two phases to the to the development
agreement. The first phase being the immediate uh phase essentially it will include a tiki barn pole barn uh as with six mobile trailers providing the mobile restaurant and then in phase two the
wave dissipation wall will be coming in. The pole barn tiki barn structure will be finalized or made permanent. The restaurant will be permanent as well as the addition of a pool, a lazy river and then uh there's also the parking. This is not temporary. This is a home rule
development agreement. Although the first phase is that interim um permitting phase is if you will and it's designed as such to in order to get something on that property as soon as possible as quick as possible assuming that we get an approval from you all.
We come to you with a recommendation of approval from LPA uh with I believe there was one dissenting vote if I recall. There were it was a very robust discussion at the LPA level uh and the LPA recommended several either new
conditions or modified conditions. So we will try and keep this as brief as possible while also providing enough uh background and testimony to explain the changes that have been made from LPA to hear uh the one condition that was not
carried over from LPA. We've adopted and incorporated all of those recommended recommended conditions. There was one condition that we will defer to you all and that deals with the landscaping in phase one. So as Patrick is reviewing the master concept plan that there was a
discussion about um including large planters in the parking area for phase one. We have not carried that condition over. Um but we will defer to you all and can explain further. We are aware of the intervenor uh Mr. Larry Gillum. It
is my understanding although I was not present for the for the conversations with the team has made contact um and have communicated with Mr. Gillum. Uh and it is my understanding of course I'm sure that he will um opine on this during his testimony but it is my understanding that he made three
requests of of our team. We are able to accommodate one of them but are unable to accommodate the other two. So, as I understand it, there's a request for no camper parking. No camper parking overnight, which is acceptable. Uh, the
second request was no dogs allowed given the state and federal protections as well as Fort Myers Beach local ordinance regarding animals on the beach or dogs on the beach, I should say, with leeches. uh we're not comfortable including that provision here, although
it's not going to be a dog friendly or or bring bring your pet, but we've are not comfortable including that condition. And then the third condition deals with the wave mitigation wall. I believe the request was to have the wave dissipation wall um not extend to the
southern boundary line, but rather fall short of it because the wave dissipation wall precise location is going to be dictated or determined by FEMA. Uh we're also not comfortable including any sort of condition regarding that.
Um and from here on I will turn it over to Patrick. He can review the background, the history, review the concept plans, and then when Patrick's finished, we will go through the development agreement and really just highlight the changes that have been made from LPA to here. >> Thank you, Megan.
>> How do you feel today, Patrick? Um, I will uh forego uh talking about my emotions today and I'll jump right into it. Um, so for the record, Patrick Vaness um Megan did a good job
introducing uh the project and again addressing that. We had a an extensive discussion at the LPA. um we uh had a long presentation but we also looked at the development agreement
in detail. So uh with that understanding and that being part of the record and also understanding that we met with each of you um and you've confirmed that you watched the LPA hearing and that you've already looked at your packet. Uh we're going to make the presentation uh pretty
quick today and we'll answer any questions you have. So um first thing that that I want to say is in essence what we're asking for on this property is to reestablish the uses that used to be there except for the hotel. So
and we're all very familiar with the property. You know it's previous home of the Windham of the Holiday Inn. We know what was there. It was a hotel that had been there since 1960s. It was loved by many. It was a a go-to hangout
on the south end for many residents, uh many annual visitors. It was familyfriendly and it was beloved by many. Um what we had there is we had the hotel use that we are not uh pushing forward, but we had a large pool with a
pool deck area for recreation. We were asking to bring that back with a pool and lazy river. In phase two, we had a restaurant. We had an outdoor tiki bar. Again, we are asking to bring that use back as a restaurant, permanent
restaurant. And as you know, in phase one, the restaurant is going to be uh operating through trailers uh just because of flood zone issues. Once the wave dissipation wall is constructed and
we've gone through FEMA for a map change, we will then get rid of all trailers and this will be a permanent atgrade restaurant within the tiki bar. So that existed before we're asking to bring that back. It's also very important to note that and because I see
the the comments uh on social media, this is not a food truck park, folks. This is one permanent restaurant dedicated to this property. And again, it'll only be utilizing trailers until we get FEMA approval for a map change.
Um, we had recreational uses. Uh, we had access to the beach. We had, um, water oriented sports. Uh, we're asking for that use. We had beach public access. We're asking to bring that back. Um,
there was live entertainment. Um, as you all know, um, they've always been good neighbors, very respectful of of the folks around them. Uh, 9:00 music stops, the outdoor portion, entertainment,
uh, ends, and then the patrons are asked to leave, and that's the way it occurred pre-Ian, and we are self-imposing that on the property. Uh, again, wanting to be good neighbors. Uh so we're asking to
bring that back. Um and then with regards to um beach access, I think I don't know I don't know if I mentioned it, but we're we're going to be providing that. And we
are trying to bring back the vibe that existed there. Uh we've we've walked through the reasons why at this point the market and the conditions aren't uh right for a resort on this side. But we
are asking to bring a commercial use that can be built quickly and that can operate quickly and hopefully before next season we are operating and there's a great tiki bar, a great hangout there for um everybody on the south end of the
island. So, just to give you a quick reminder of what the property used to look like, you had three structures. The interior courtyard component um just to highlight was approximately
31,000 square feet. So, uh, when we get to our site plan, our entire, um, wreck entertainment area that we're asking for is roughly 32,000 square ft. So, again, very similar to what was there before.
Um, one of the things also that we have, and if you look here, uh, surrounding the the buildings on all sides except for the beach, uh, we had parking. Uh just important to point out that there used to be over 200 parking spaces
there. Uh without the valet parking where uh top left corner that used to be a tennis courts uh they used to valet that when it was busy in season they could easily get over 200 spots but without the valet approximately 200
spots. We are asking for parking associated with the this uh venue. We know the parking issue has come up. We discussed it at length, but I just want to point out again that was an existing use. Uh it wasn't controlled nearly as
much as we're going to control it moving forward and it wasn't buffered nearly as much as this is going to be buffered moving forward. Um this is just to to show exactly where the property is located to highlight the fact that this is a very large property
11.2 acres. It stems from Mstero Boulevard all the way to the Gulf. Um the development area which is from Mero to the CCCL is highlighted in um this blue color and that's approximately 4
acres. Um so what I'm going to do is I'm going to touch upon the site plan changes that we've made and then Megan's going to take over walk through the development agreement and highlight all the verbiage
changes. uh that uh have made been made. As mentioned, all the recommendations from the LPA have been incorporated. We were happy to do so. The only one was associated with uh the landscape islands and the planters. We don't know if
that's really pragmatic, practical, and we defer to you on that. So, um, with the site plan starting at the northern part of the property, um, we when we went to the LPA, we depicted that, uh,
multi-use pathway beach access, but it ended at the CCCL line. Um, we were asked to just show it extending towards the beach just to depict the fact that we are providing access all the way to the beach, all the way to the water. So,
we've happily done so. That was always the intent. Um we were also asked uh to depict the fact that u when you come in the two access points uh to pave those access points. The parking lot if you
recall we're asking for um the use of stone or crush shell um that increases our pvious area. We see it as a benefit. However, we want a smooth transition from that rock to a sterile boulevard. So we've paved those areas. So we show
the the aprons at both access points. So that those were the only changes on the phase one site plan. On the phase 2 site plan, uh again we carry forward this extended uh pathway to the beach.
The aprons are there. Um and we have changed one of the notations associated with the wave dissipation wall. Previously at the LPA and possibly in your packet right now, it showed approximately 20 feet from the CCCL. Um
the engineers have looked at that. They told us that we will not be deciding that. FEMA will be deciding where that wall is located. So we've changed that and we show it as to be determined. Um uh one more thing to point out the
southern access point again both access points existed prior to Ian. Those are the same access points that we are showing here today. In our initial application and at the LPA, we were um
offering a right out only on that southern access point. One of the council members when we uh met with you all suggested that maybe we keep it exactly as it was before. Uh allow it to be ingress egress. We are perfectly all
right with that. And uh the arrow instead of being a just a unidirectional arrow is now birectional showing you know ingress and egress also. So those are the only changes um that we have
made on our site plan. The other um questions that we had and we thought you'd be curious about also is what's this uh tiki hot venue going to look like? And um what we did at the LPA um
and and it was also to clarify it is going to be a poleb barn metal structure but we wanted to show that it can be very attractive. It can be um basically decorated in such a way to make it look like a tiki hut to make it look very tropical. So this is what used to be
there. Uh the uh prehurricaneanian it it was a pole barn. Um it was a metal structure but as you can see in the interior it was made to look very tropical, very beachy. Uh here's another picture of what it used to be. The
intent is to bring that look and feel back. Also once it's converted to a to include a restaurant inside uh what can that look like? So, we also provided an example. This is uh Backyard Social in
Fort Myers. Some of you may have been there. It's a large pole barn. It's not going to look like this on the exterior, but it's just to kind of show you the size and what can be done. So, they've included inter interior walls. So, when you look at this picture, the wall you see is interior to the pole barn.
They've enclosed some of that space and obviously they've decorated. It's a lot more of a nurban look than what we're going to be going for, but it just goes to show you that we can enclose it. We can have some walls in there and we can make it look uh very attractive. So,
this is another picture of what Backyard Social looks on the inside. Um, and then we worked with um our client um he's got some engineers and I just want to put a little caveat out there. Our architects
did not design this. These are renderings from engineers, so they tend to be a little more basic than we typically put together. But what we do want to depict is the look and feel of what's going to be there. So, uh, as you can see, it's going to be a relatively
large structure with a lot of seating. U, we are going to add some landscaping to make it look attractive, welcoming. It's going to have a direct view of the beach. And what you see a bit in the background is where uh in the first phase we're going to have those uh trailers for the restaurant for the
bathrooms. So this is a slightly different view looking from uh north to south and um a few things to to depict here. The substrate for the parking uh rock for pvious area. As we mentioned in
the first phase, we're not going to have wheel stops for every uh every parking space. We're going to use a rope and bullard um system. And that is depicted here. Um I think the uh the ropes are actually going to have a little more uh
give to them. They're not going to be straight line like that. But again, the engineers do that, not the architects. And then uh we are depicting uh that we are going to have uh bike racks for bicycles and promoting uh pad and bike
use rather than everybody driving their cars. Um we have the multi-use path that we see here. And if you look at where the trailers are, uh again this is not perfectly accurate, but the idea is we are going to have some movable. These
are seem permanent to me, but they're going to be movable. um planters or walls uh with greenery that will make the trailer area more attractive that will shield uh those areas. So that the
the attempt was to depict that um screening, but obviously they're going to have to be movable and we have to allow the trailers to be able to get on site and offsite easily in case of a hurricane evacuation. Um next two slide just give you an
overall perspective from an aerial and uh a few things to point out is in this first phase um the areas of green that that are a little more of a camel green those are depressed water retention
areas. So uh as many of you may know that parking area before for the Windham had no water management system. Uh we are going to upgrade that make sure that we secure our water on site. There's going to be
uh depressed areas to capture the water, treat the water. Um also um what's important that that we want to depict is we in phase one are asking for terminal islands at the end of the parking aisles. Uh we are not uh asking
in the first phase to provide all the required landscape islands. And the reason for that is that as we get to phase two we might have to tear things up and it's a shame to to do it all over again. So, we're asking for uh landscape
islands on the on the ends that will delineate the parking areas uh and they're going to be there for safety. Uh one things that we were asked, we were asking for just uh putting a hedge in there with some mulch. We were asked to add trees. We have uh added palm trees
to each of those. Um, also we were asked, well, instead of just doing a a a hedge with mulch, would you guys think of using planters? And we're not opposed to putting planters. We're just thinking that
planters to really be effective in delineating the the parking aisles would have to be pretty large. And the thought is if someone in the parking lot clips a hedge, they might get a scratch to their car. If they clip a planter, it's a whole different story. Again, those
planters would have to be movable. We have rock as a substrate. Not that easy to move things around uh with rock. So, we still believe that just a hedge with some mulch and the trees that we've added uh should be sufficient for
delineating those parking aisles. So, um, as as we mentioned, everything we've been been asked to do, we've incorporated. That's the only one that is up, um, up for discussion, and, uh, we'd like your input on that one.
>> Patrick, before I move on, just a quick thing I noticed here. From phase one to phase two, it looks like you're cutting off the beach access on the south side of the property. In phase one, it looks like it goes all the way back to the property line, but in phase two, it looks like it ends at where the lazy river or the front of the building
starts. Is that just a design? >> So, the beach access is really the the multi-use pathway on the north north side. The the other one is a sidewalk, regular sidewalk connecting basically providing access from asterero to the
venue. Um people people can can take the sidewalk up to the venue and then if they want to navigate around the lazy river and the pool, they certainly can or they can use the other uh dedicated
beach access. >> So it was intentional. That's all I was trying to get. >> Correct. So um a few other things to point out here. Um we we've got the uh the the little kiosk at the guard gate. So, we are going to have an attendant on
site. Uh, this is for phase one. Um, phase two is going to look a little different. The all the green space on the south end. Um, that's going to be converted as part of phase two where we would have this joint parking area that we discussed at length. I'm not going to
go into those details, but it would be completely controlled uh a access restricted uh used by valet only and it would be well buffered. Again, if you have any questions, happy to go into
that. But, um for now, we you know, just want to highlight that phase 2 is going to look a little different than that. >> Hold on a second. And you've got trees where that you were going to be adding in phase two >> those separations. Why are the trees there but not the delineation that's going to be there in phase two?
>> The the trees are there just because again we had some engineers remotely leave trees there. There are trees on site today. >> Um >> okay >> this is not a perfect depiction just a concept.
Okay so um I'm going to quickly go go over some of the public benefits and the amenities being provided. I want to highlight first of all that uh we are not asking for any additional height, any additional density, any additional
intensity. Therefore, we have no requirement for public benefit. Um if if you guys recall when you go to the comp plan and it clearly states that if you want to ask for additional hide, more more density, more intensity, you need
to provide public benefit. that is not a requirement from us but we are happy to do so. Um the applicant has already provided some of that pre benefit through the years they want to keep doing it and we were asked to um commit to other things that we are happy to
commit to. So quickly go through those. So we are providing the beach access. Uh that property was always used for beach access. It wasn't a dedicated public beach access but we're happy to do so. Um we are providing uh public restrooms. So restrooms can be used for the patrons
of the site, but they're open to the public. Um, we are limiting the commercial uses to uh the m the uses that are presented in the development agreement. Uh, we are maintaining viewsheds and view corridors. Obviously, we're going to have landscaping. We're
going to have a large tiki structure, but we are not asking for additional height. We are not asking to cover the site with structures. Therefore, uh there's going to be plenty of of views, view sheds for the neighboring
properties. Um we have committed to use Florida friendly landscaping. We have voluntarily limited our hours of operation. Uh we are providing bike parking, golf cart parking. We're improving our storm water management. Um we are providing emergency access to the
beach. So we know a lot of beachgoers in that area. Uh the parking lot is designed in such a way where emergency vehicles can use the parking lot and can get right to the sand uh where the pathway is. So the multi-use pathway is going to be paved but right adjacent to
it for an extra 10 ft. We're going to have stabilized subgrade so if a truck does have to go all the way to the beach, they can use that pathway area. Um, when it comes to uh post hurricane sta staging and recovery, god forbid we
have another storm, uh there's there's sufficient park in that parking lot to be used for staging and recovery. We've committed to allow that to happen. Um and um we uh very important um commitment is
to build that wave dissipation wall. I think this can be a great pilot project for the island. uh this might be the first project that can get it done and built. Um I think it it it can be done in um very exemplary manner where it's
going to be attractive. It's not going to be obstructive. Uh we do have our engineer here, Elizabeth Fountain, if we need to discuss uh the design details, but we think this is a benefit not just for the property but also for other properties behind us. Um it's designed
in such a way where it should not have any impacts to our neighbors. Uh scouring is one of those concerns. Uh it's also a concern for the agencies. It's also a concern for the engineers and they design accordingly and the
agencies review accordingly and they have to demonstrate that their designs will not adversely impact adjacent properties. Uh so we feel that from an engineer engineering standpoint there are engineering principles in place to protect adjacent properties and um this
will be um done according to best practices. One last thing that I'd like to highlight in light of all the discussions that uh we've had in the last few weeks and that you will be having moving forward. This is a
commercial use. It is not subject to any kind of residential taxation reform. Therefore, this is going to be on the books. It's going to help the tax base. So, uh, with that said, I'm going to turn things over to Megan. She's going
to walk you through the language in the development agreement, and we've highlighted every section in red that we've made changes to. And once we're done with that, if you have any questions, I'm uh available. >> Just a quick question on your your your type F buffer. If no buffer was required
and you're putting a 10 to 20 foot in, why wouldn't you consider that a public benefit >> or why list why why would you not list that as a public benefit? >> So, at least >> to the neighbors. >> Uh I think if I didn't put it as a benefit, it was just an omission on our part. But we are exceeding uh the
buffering. So, uh you're correct where our parking lot meets the adjacent parking lots, there are no parking, there are no buffering requirements whatsoever. We are putting uh enhanced buffers on both the east uh on the south and the north.
>> And prior to Ian, were there buffers there before? I don't remember. >> There were some buffers, but uh there was some fencing also, but it it wasn't kind of a a structured landscape buffer. It was existing trees. Uh, one of the things that to highlight also given that
you're bringing it up and giving me that opportunity is uh, our neighbors did ask us to put uh, a fence. We're happy to do so. I think their concern was we appreciate the buffering, but we want to make sure that no one goes through the buffer and goes onto our property. So,
our buffers do include a fence uh, both on the north side and the south side. >> I've got a question if you don't mind. Um, so you were mentioning about the buffers and I guess I'm a little bit confused because two of the deviations being requested are specifically around
reducing the buffer size from what would be >> required. Is that not correct? >> It it's not completely accurate. So So our buffers on the So buffers are always related to what the adjacent use is. So,
we've got a large property uh closer to Eststerero. The adjacent use is parking lot. So, it's parking lot to parking lot. Code requires no buffer. Okay. Same thing on the south parking lot to parking lot that segment no buffer. However, where we've got our commercial
use or our tiki restaurant venue adjacent to multif family, there is a buffer requirement. We have the option of either putting a 30-foot buffer with a wall or fence or doing a 15 uh no
putting a 30-foot buffer without a wall or fence or doing a 15 ft buffer with uh a wall or fence. The wider buffer without the wall has less landscaping.
The 15t buffer without the wall has more landscaping. So what we are asking to do part of our deviation is marry both of those. So we provide the wall and we provide the enhanced landscaping but in just a narrower um
buffer width. >> So if I understand correctly where the parking lot would be there would not be any requirement that deviation is strictly for adjacent to the commercial pole barn area. >> Correct. >> Okay. Thank you.
Okay, if there's no other questions, I'll turn some questions for you. Um, >> and maybe this is in in the next pace that Megan is going to do, but I'm looking at the conditions that the LPA gave you, and I don't see that all of them were addressed. Is that
>> is there a reason? >> We are going to go through them one by one. >> If we've missed something, happy to to go through it with you. I thought we'd covered everything. Um, but if we've missed something, we'll uh we'll address it. No problem.
>> Catch it later. >> Thank you. >> Thanks. >> Yeah. Go ahead, John. >> So, Patrick, previously the primary use for this was obviously a resort. >> Yes. >> Right. And now there seems that although we're keeping the zoning the same, there's only accessory uses or the
primary use could be argued as a parking lot. Um my question to you is strictly for the commercial use on the property, how much parking would be required? Because my concern obviously where this
is coming from is a person that parks at a resort would tend to stay there for days at a time. Whereas the usage that we're considering right now is going to be very transient. Um, and I'm concerned
about the impact of the traffic on the south side. Quite frankly, the people that will be visiting this venue now will have a very different stay pattern than they previously had. So although there may have been 200 parking
spaces before, how many are actually needed strictly for the restaurant? >> Hold that thought. Yeah, we're going to take a 10-minute break. We just had a power blip and I don't know that we're online for everybody to be able to see it. So, >> we take a 10-minute recess. We'll come
back at uh 10:25. might have jumped the gun. He's giving He was giving me a finger. Now we're good. >> All right. We're going to call this meeting We're going to call this meeting back to order. It is 10:22. Where' we leave off, Patrick? You were going to say something.
>> Yes. Um we were I I was asked a question regarding the parking. >> Correct. >> Um Mr. Mlan was uh identifying that the uses are somewhat different than they were before from a resort to a restaurant and u restaurant bar venue
with wreck entertainment. Um so so just I will definitely address your parking issue. Just to clarify uh this notion of accessory uses versus primary uses. Um yes it used to be a resort and the
amenities associated with it were accessory to the resort to the hotel. What we are asking today and through this development agreement is we are indeed asking for the tiki the bar the restaurant to be primary uses. So those
are primary uses with those uses we have required uh p parking that we have to provide. So in phase one um the required parking per code is 144 parking spaces
and in phase one we would be providing 163 parking spaces. So that's in excess of 19 but that is very consistent with what code requires uh just a slight increase over the the minimum required.
Uh so in phase two as we've explained the southern portion is a area that's going to be secured fence gated separately and that area is going
to be for joint parking. So joint parking uh as you know in the code if if you're a little short on the ability to provide parking uh on your site uh there are multiple remedies. You can ask for a
parking reduction. You can ask for off-site parking and the off-site parking typically occurs through a joint parking agreement. If you own a separate property offsite then you know it's your own property not problem. If not, you can go to another property owner ask to
share parking. A lot of times some businesses are open for example during the day but the business is not open in the evening evening restaurant might need that uh peak parking in the evening. So you can enter into a joint agreement. So the area the additional
parking that we are providing in phase 2 would bring us to a total of 237 spaces and with adding the lazy river and the pool our requirement would be 147 parking spaces. So this is in excess of
90 parking spaces that would be for that joint parking use. So we see that as a benefit. Um, again, that use, the parking and the parking in that location used to exist prior to the hurricane. Um, and I've brought back the aerial to
demonstrate that a large majority of the parking was along that northern boundary and it wasn't buffer. It was in control, meaning that hotel guests could park there and if they wanted to leave in the middle of the night or pack up or whatever, they had complete access to
that parking area and they could use it. In this case, that entire area is going to be available just for valley parking only. So again, very controlled. It's going to be valley person dropping off the car and it gets picked up hopefully the next day and there's no need to ever
go to that parking during the night. Uh but I guess if someone forgets their wallet in there or really wants access to their car, you still have to get it, but it's going to be very controlled. So we think it's a better condition than it what it used to be. It's going to be buffered. It's going to be controlled. Yes, it's excess parking. Yes, it's also
a solution to this parking issue that we have on this island. Uh we have numerous projects that have come before you that when they have to build, rebuild, and meet today's code, it's very hard to provide all the required parking. This
is an opportunity to provide some parking for those businesses. So, it's a win-win for each of the business and it's also a win for the island in that if there is a parking shortage at any given v menu, we venue, we have a way to
address that. So, um I know it's a long- winded answer, but I think I've covered everything here. Yeah, you haven't really addressed the nature to the difference between the type of traffic impact that
this parking will most likely cause. Uh, by that I mean the change in use from a resort to people coming and going for lunch, dinner, entertainment, what have you. uh
staying for maybe an hour, staying for maybe six hours, but not staying multiple days or or what have you. >> Yeah, I I'm happy to address that and I can also have John talk to this. So, uh John and his family have owned the property for 25 years. I've been on this
island for 22 years. Uh we did our traffic study. Our traffic study shows no impact on the adjacent roadway. So this is from a expert certified study that he's provided. Uh also personal experience as a resident
for 22 years in season during peak activities like sand sculpting days never seen the traffic back up in front of that property. So again I it's never been an issue. We don't see it an issue. We we see it as
traffic has always flowed well in that area. We have sufficient parking for our facility. We have sufficient queuing with regards to the nature. So the the hotel again, we would like our visitors to
come to Fort Myers Beach Park once and only stay here. Um we know that a lot of people that come here have family and friends in the area. Uh there's a lot of movement back and forth. The hotel had a lot of movement back and forth. There was a restaurant there that was very popular for people that did not stay at
the hotel. >> As as a as a resident and also someone who's got young kids, my kids could eat for free. I could go hang out by the beach. >> Patrick, you don't have to sell me on that. I live right down the road and that was my watering hole. don't worry about and I drove there and and you know
back so so there was always that traffic that was a transient traffic in nature associated with the venue because it was a very popular restaurant very popular hangout so I I materially we don't think
the the the traffic nature will change all that much >> can can you um address I I obviously like all of us we watch the LPA A and then it was significant. There was a lot of discussion that was involved. Uh one
of the things that I believe was agreed to was uh just no public parking. In other words, parking for the venue only. >> We were asked to put some signs we're um Megan's going to show you where we've put that language in there. We were asked to put some signs visible from
sterile that would say uh for patrons only, you know, not not public parking lot. Uh, and it's going to be a parking lot that it's going to be a paid parking lot. So, the intent is, you know, you make people
pay, uh, you give them a voucher or discount to use at the venue. We understand that it happens all over the place where people might might go to business and then, you know, go hang out at the beach for the day. Uh, that's not the intent. That that is not a dedicated
uh beach parking area. It is for the venue. It is for the patrons. We are going to charge. And the way, as John has explained to me, if ever this were to become a problem, you hike up the parking fee and give a bigger voucher.
>> That's how you most are operationalized the other way, right? If the parking associated with a venue is you typically free for the patrons of the venue as opposed to paying for the parking which thereby kind of you're paying for parking and
>> you only get your discount if you're actually using the establishment. This has turned it completely up. >> Yeah. And I think we've got examples. Hotels have done this for a long time. When you go to a lot of of resort places, you pay for your parking everywhere you go. you you pay for your
parking for your hotel. Uh you know, take for example the cottage that was a very popular spot. They always did valet. There was always a cost associated with parking there. Uh so so I I don't know if it flips it completely around. I I understand what you're
saying, but I I think I think this is appropriate. Uh I think it's it's uh it's been thought through by the owner. They do want to charge parking for their venue. They think that people will it it won't dissuade patrons from from going
to the tiki bar in the restaurant and uh again they they in turn provide a voucher and provide a good experience and and a great meal. >> Thank you. >> Patrick, you said tag on it. Did I know that you charged before similar to what
you're requesting now and then you got the voucher. Did you do that with hotel guests prior to Ian as well or did they get to park for free or did they have to get the voucher as well? the the gas parked for free. >> Okay, thanks. >> Yeah, >> Patrick, I have a question in regards to
parking and if you stated it, um apologizing if I missed it, but if you should build a hotel again at some point, what would be the parking requirements for that? And that would negate this agreement.
>> So, so the right >> we don't know what the continuing phases could be. Yeah. and what the parking needs may be. >> So, so as as Megan um you know explained clearly is that this is not temporary in
nature. Uh this development agreement once approved is approved in perpetuity. Um and it's subject to the site plans that have been approved. Meaning that uh the general concept layout uses uh that
were allowed have to be consistent with those site plans. However, if ever in in 15 20 years John's kids want to turn this into a resort, uh they have to come back to a public
hearing. They have to either amend the development agreement, which would be a full hearing process, or they have to extinguish the development agreement, come back in with a CPD and go through the public hearing process for the CPD, outline all the uses, intensities,
densities, heights, all that stuff. So, we're not allowed to make any of those changes unless we go through an amendment process or a CPD. >> Thank you. >> Okay. What's your lighting proposal for both phases? >> So, lighting is going to be co-
compliant. >> We're going to meet CO requirements. >> Talking Well, I I know it's got to be, but how are you're going to have the parking lot? >> So, so ideally, and again, the engineer is going to have to to see if it meets
code requirements. One of the things that we find attractive is um as you drive down Hickory Boulevard, there's a private club with kind of a lower lighting. But Ballard, it's kind of amber lighting. Um that's a great look that we'd like to emulate. I don't know
if we're going to be allowed to keep the lighting as low as that. I think our code calls for a little taller lighting, but that's that's the lighting scheme. We're looking at something attractive. Uh amber lighting. Again, there's always a safety component that we have to meet,
but there's also kind of trying to keep a a good look, good ambiance, and and being, you know, respectful of uh turtle regulations also. >> Thank you, >> John. Any questions for >> Nothing currently. >> All right. Thanks, Patrick.
>> All right. Thank you, Megan. >> He's hiding back there. >> Okay. Let me skip forward here. So, we will review the conditions recommended by LPA that we've incorporated into the
development agreement. Um, if at any time you want to ask questions or slow me down, feel free. And my apologies, let me pull it up here as well. Okay. The first condition is going to be
>> Sorry, it's hard for me to see this far away. >> You're going to start with the conditions. >> The Yes. So, we are going to talk about the conditions that have been added from LPA to to here. So, the ones that have been recommended by LPA that we have
then um changed. So the first one's going to be regarding parking and section E regarding the controlled access. Um, sorry. Okay, there we go. Okay, there we go. Uh, that the attendant will be present on site
from 6:30 to 9:30 p.m. This was recommended by LPA. We've incorporated that in. The next conditions come under the second phase. uh one of which pertains to the restrooms. Just to clarify that the restrooms will remain locked outside of uh operational
business hours. The second one pertains to the COP boundary that there will be signage indicating the where the cop boundary starts and stops. The next >> goes to uh parking again and this is in
phase regarding phase phase two. So the controlled access it's just re restating the parking is going to be monitored by a parking attendant. Uh they'll be present from 30 minutes before opening until everyone starts leaving around 9:00. I think it the official ending
hours are 10:00 but from 6:30 to 9:30. the parking surface. We are asked we were asked to uh concrete or or harden more of the apron. So, we've included uh that that reference as well. There's another condition that we
actually have not modified that I that I identified. We will uh if you look at section 8, it pertains to the ingress egress access points. When we started, we had initially requested for the northern to be ingress egress, southern to be egress only. We've modified that
to retain the right for ingress egress on both locations. So we will have to uh modify that condition further. >> What you said is maintain the right. So it means that you haven't decided if you're going to keep it just eress or on the on the south or you both going to be ingress egress. >> They would both be ingress egress.
However, from an operational standpoint, they're not going to you be used the southern portion will likely not be used for ing for ingress egress unless it's busy. >> So you'll go in one way, but you have the option to go out either direction. Correct. But um as the property sits today, both access points have been used
for ingress egress. Previously in this application, we limited the southern to to egress only. So we're reverting back to allow ingress egress on both access. >> It was just the way you worded it. >> My apologies. >> Yeah. Maintain the right to. That doesn't mean that you're going to do it.
It just means you maintain the right to do it if you want to do it. So >> correct. My my apologies and thank you for clarifying. Uh the next condition was suggested by staff regarding um kind of a drop dead date if you will of the agreement you
know in in the event that phase one is up but there's no signs of phase 2 coming on board what sort of safeguards uh does the town have. So we did include uh this language. I will say that this was something that we had proposed. belief staff's recommended language was
a little bit more lenient, but the intent is to have the wave dissipation wall and permanent structures. So um applicant, we were comfortable including this which outlines that in the event that phase 2 is not um completed within 5 years of completion of phase 1, we
need to come back. We either need to explain what happened, ask for a modification, an extension. Uh but there would be uh a discussion about that. I have I have a question on this one and it just comes from what I've seen over the last well since hurricane of
developments that are coming online. >> There's a big difference between a TCO and a CO >> and sometimes those can take a year or a year and a half to get a CO versus a TCO where the building is being operated under its normal use but it hasn't technically got its certificate of
occupancy. >> Okay. >> I would feel more comfortable if this said TCO versus CO because it could go a year and a half. We've seen it with with talking about amber lighting and and things like that where it the TCO is in place, but a CO doesn't happen for a year and a half or two years later
because of things that come up that maybe changed over the last couple years with lighting or it usually revolves around environmental stuff. So for me, I would prefer to see this say TCO versus CO. I don't know how staff feels about that or if that makes a big enough difference, but just going off of what
I've seen on some some other projects over the past few years >> as in temporary. >> Well, it's a it's a temporary certificate in C. So, allows them to operate, >> but they don't have their permanent this certificate of occupancy and and a lot of it seems to be held up on things that
are outside the control of of the the developer or the property owner at this, you know, could be something that has nothing to do with planning. It could have to do with environmental or it could have to do with public safety. So I to me five years, this could be seven years or could be eight years because of
the language that's in there. >> Okay. >> And it's something I mean you don't have to make a decision this second unless you're comfortable making a decision. But if it goes to a second reading, I'd like to to at least have you consider that. >> That's fine. >> But it wasn't sure if staff was going to >> Well, that's a building code issue
related. It's not really a planning issue. So I don't have any input on that but we can look into that to see if that terminology is correct to be used if it goes a second. >> We can include clarifying language um C co CO or TCO whichever is first something.
>> Okay just something to look into between now um >> drop my notes down. Okay that has to do with the timing. The next this is a very basic one. We just added EL uh Lee County Department of Transportation to the needed approvals.
Next, turning to the public beach access. We were asked to clarify that the public beach access of the multi-use path on the northern boundary will extend all the way to the main uh high water line. We've included that absolutely um and it will remain for the entirety of the agreement. Turning to
the restrooms, we're reiterating that the restrooms are going to be locked outside of um operational hours. Going to moving to sound, uh there was a discussion about the live music amplified sound. We are
asked to reduce that um from 10 from 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. So, we have reduced the amplified sound to 12:00 p.m. or live music from 12:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. That will be within the tiki barn. In addition to that, we've added
um what a clarifying additional language regarding ambient sound that we're requesting the ability to provide ambient music um from 10:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. And the idea being um around the Lazy River, around the pool, small
speakers dispersed directly into that into that area. We were also asked for noise mitigation measures to be taken of which of course we we incorporated so that uh we'll have sound curtains or established sound curtains on the southern and northern
sides of the tiki bar uh to help limit any of the noise impacts to the to the neighbors. Regarding signage, there are uh two different signage requirements that we've included herein. one regards the cop boundary and then the other pertains to no public parking, no beach
parking, parking for patrons only, something of that nature. And in order to develop or move on to phase two, a an additional traffic study will be conducted uh prior to phase two moving forward.
Turning to the deviations, >> will that traffic study be a privately? >> Will we will? Yes, the applicant, the property owner. >> Okay. >> Not on not on behalf of the town, but on on the property owner will provide that. Absolutely. >> Uh regarding deviations, turning to
deviation one, it just outlines that the aprons will be paved for both phase one and phase two. This will prevent kind of gravel getting into the, you know, storm water system or onto a sterile boulevard. keep it nice and clean and also provide for additional stacking or
queuing of the vehicles in the event of um >> one of the things I'd like to see you guys consider again if this goes to to a second reading is this first condition I would feel more comfortable in phase two that it was more of a permanent whether
it be pavers whether it be something just for the reason that you mentioned gravel things like that I don't know how it would change I know you couldn't answer it now on the spot how it would change your water retention should you go to a pvious or non-pervious surface, what that would do for calculations.
But, uh, something to keep in your mind if it goes to a second reading that I'm going to be asking about because I think having if it's if what Patrick has said is this is going to be a a this is the use, this is going to be essentially the permanent thing, it would be nice to have a permanent um parking lot there at
least in phase two. You know, not necessarily have to do it in phase one because you are going to change some landscaping if it's approved, it sounds like. So, in phase two, I would like to see you at least consider that um if it goes to a second reading. >> Okay. And I believe is that it?
Oh, uh one of the conditions was making it was clarifying that in order to come back with a resort, um they would have to go through the CPD process. And I believe that concludes the conditions that have
been added from LPA. Uh, Councilwoman Link, you had suggested or or said that there were conditions that may have not made it over. Is there something specific? >> We've checked I've checked everyone on my hat off. Thank you. >> Okay. Cuz when you said that, I said, "Oh, no. Did I forget something?" Human error does exist. So, we're we're
>> they're all there. Thank you. >> I'm not infallible. >> Oh, my apologies. >> All right, >> Mr. Mayor. >> Yes, sir. If I don't know if any other counselor had me suggested, but I have a recommendation that condition be added that we include some language in the
requirement similar to the ETP application. When it comes to the trailers themselves, I don't see that anywhere in here. Since this isn't going to fall in the category of an ETP application, >> I would like to see that uh there's some conditions in there and really just it's
it's in the application under general conditions. There's specific ones in there about that have to do with flood plane management that have to do with FEMA requirements and our emergency response requirements. And we're I we'll work with you on making sure that right language is in there. I don't think it'll be anything that you'll have a
problem with, but we can absolutely uh >> I think either if you provide the language or if we just take uh the language that's already in the ETP ETP uh associated with uh that's not easy to say. Uh associated with having a plan.
>> Yeah. Yeah. And you'll see we there's some in there that won't apply to this case. So I just want to make sure that we remove those and you include the ones that do apply >> if that's good. Good. Good, good catch. Um >> I'm May I piggyback on that?
>> Um Mr. Town Manager, when you talk about the emergency temporary uh permits, I'm not sure that we ever thought anyone would have those for 5 years, is there anything we need to add to the language to say that they are inspected or tested every few years to
make sure that they can still easily be removed? I'm sure with our salt air and you know the conditions we live in just something that ensures us that if they have to go they can go not that they they fall apart in year four or something like that.
>> Any thoughts about that Patrick? >> From our standpoint that can definitely be included. >> Yeah, I I think that's part of the permit. I think they uh there's language about they have to be maintained and and they have to to be plated registered road. So, so we don't have a
problem with that. That makes a lot of sense. >> Covered in the uh >> Well, I language. >> I certainly don't want to speak for you, but what you're what I'm interpreting you're saying is everybody understands the roadworthiness. But what we have seen obviously through these ETPs over the last four years is you give someone
an inch and they take a mile. And what was temporary once now 6 months later has become a permanent fixture. And now we have to start code enforcement. So, I'm not trying to put words in your mouth but >> that was not my issue, but I think that's a good one as well. Is there any kind of process we could put in as a condition that the applicant has to
provide some sort of or the town can inspect to ensure that quick disconnects are being used, not hard plumbing. You know, those kinds of things are what I think the town has seen a lot of over the last couple years is it starts out temporary and then all of a sudden it's hard plumbed and then all of a sudden we have issues. Well, we we are happy to
defer to to what will um wants to have in there, but I think we'll be subject to the code requirements on those issues. >> I think it would benefit I think it'll benefit you just as much as it would. >> Absolutely. I can >> So, if we can have that be clarified. >> Yeah. Um before the uh concluding
remarks, just a quick question. Um Mr. Allers, um with regards just I just want to clarify. So you're you're suggesting that we look into in phase two putting pavement rather than >> pavers, pavement, something hardcape, I guess, you know, I don't want to tell
you how to do, but to eliminate the rocks and the potential for more stuff getting into storm grains with a surge. I mean, hopefully we don't have to deal with that, but just something more permanent because if it is going to be a permanent use, it'd be nice to have something >> permanent looking. It'll just I think
dress up. >> Yeah. just >> I think I think our our client is open to it. Um just just to give you a little insight when we were going through the design discussion of this part of the discussion was well if we if we use
gravel obviously there's there's advantages in costs and especially if you're going to modify things but but there is also this idea of it provides more pvious area. So again, if if it's the will of
the council where we less pvious area, meaning that we don't use the gravel, uh more hardcape, if you guys prefer that, we can certainly include that. But again, I I we we were trying to weigh both. Uh obviously when you when you
pave everything, you've got the pvious issue, but also the heat that is generated from from pavement. I guess if you're asking my preference, I'd prefer to see pavers over asphalt, but it's kind of a happy medium, but I know the cost associated with that is >> So, so maybe as we move to phase two, if
you guys can give us direction as a board, that that'd be awesome because we we are open to either way, but we'd just like some some feedback. >> Okay. >> Okay. So, with that said, um in my professional planning opinion, um we are
consistent with the comp plan, the land development code. Uh we have reviewed uh the staff report with the conditions that they have requested. Happy to abide by those. Um we as mentioned we've incorporated all the LPA recommendations
except for the terminal islands and again open to your direction on those. Um we have talked to Mr. Galene and I know Mr. Galen is going to uh make his own presentation. So do not want to put
any words into his mouth, but when he did talk to me and I talked to him personally, uh the three requests were associated with uh no no camper parking and we're happy to abide by that. We can add in our sign section that we'll put
signs up on that. Um the dogs, unfortunately, I don't think we can supersede federal law. Uh I think that would cause more problems u than than solutions. Uh and then when it comes to the wave mitigation law, um look, I
defer to engineers and to sound engineering principles. I know that neighbors can have concerns. Uh I think there's a a bit of a misconception between like traditional seaw walls versus what a wave mitigation wall is. And I think they are designed uh to
address potential scouring to also address um impacts to adjacent properties. And I would just ask that we defer to sound science and to um you know sound engineering principles. >> Just one quick question before we and
then I'll see if anybody else has a question. The question I have is we did receive an email from someone questioning the consistency with the comprehensive plan based on no new paid parking lots. What would be your what would be your rebuttal to that claim that this is not consistent because of that
>> that the primary use is a restaurant venue and restaurant entertainment bar venue and this is required parking per coat. >> Okay. >> Um so with that said make sure nobody any questions before we go to Larry?
>> Yes. Um just about dogs. So when you speak federal rules I'm thinking service dogs. >> Service dogs. Companion animals. people have cards, right, that they can bring them. >> So, I think I I would like you to consider the no dogs. There are so many
people who are concerned about the critical wildlife behind you. And I can only imagine dogs and the code enforcement calls we'll get because dogs may be running around in an area they're not allowed. We cover that by leash laws on the beach, but I just want to make sure we don't fall in the gap. So
>> yeah, >> there are areas where you don't allow dogs, but that does not mean that you have a service dog, you can't take that dog. So >> I would like that to be something you maybe address or consider before you come back to us. We we need to balance people taking their pets, service dogs,
and protecting our critical >> and and in vain with the other issue that we discussed, what I would ask is I don't know if I'm smart enough to have an answer as to how we address that. So, I would ask direction from council of how do we balance both? Do we do we put
up signs that um technically are not enforceable, but at least we've >> Well, it's my understanding. >> We've made an effort. I don't I that's where I'd like direction from you. >> Yeah. I I think it's my understanding if we say no dogs allowed,
>> that does not exclude someone who has a service animal. They're allowed anywhere. >> And if that's the case, I think We're definitely open that gives an idea that this isn't a pet friendly park. We're not going to have to be worrying about picking up dog stuff and we're also not
going to worry about them heading off where we can't really >> um enforce it when they're in the critical wildlife. I'm just >> give it some more thought. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Maybe >> we would never >> maybe some educational signs. >> This area is surrounded by critical wildlife area. Please mind your dogs.
That >> I like that idea. I I like being proactive on on the protecting the environment rather than prohibiting something. I think that's a that's a good approach. >> I like that. >> Anything else, Council L? >> That's it. >> Council ML for Patrick before we move on to Larry?
>> Nope. >> Okay. So, hold on. We got two more. >> You thought this was going to be >> Is there a way I can request that Elizabeth um step in and explain the >> Absolutely. Let's make sure let's make sure John doesn't have any questions for Patrick or Megan before we bring up.
>> That's exactly where I was going because we received a couple of Yes, you did. a couple of emails regarding that concern and then this intervenor concern as well. So, I think it'd behoove us to hear from a little bit. >> Absolutely. >> Yeah, that that was my concern is we we've gotten some emails even on other
projects. It it seems like there's a a theory out there, and I defer to you because you're the expert, that a wall will affect negatively neighbors on both sides. Can So, can you explain the difference between a seaw wall and
and a mitigation? >> Yes. Uh good morning, council. For the record, Elizabeth Fountain with J.R. Evans Engineering. Um, so the the wave mitigation dissipation structure, it's really more of a system and it's
it's primarily designed not only to reduce wave impacts, uh, but it also takes into consideration the potential for scour around, you know, if it's if it's not if it's not a contiguous wall from property to property, a lot of times we'll have to
do a return section on the property lines. Um but we also account we we put in to the design scour protection features that are part of that structure. So it reduces those impacts. Um and a lot of
times those return walls will have to end up a little bit inside the subject property that we're focused on. Um probably on the order of like maybe six or eight feet. So there is a little bit of a gap that's typically um put into
place between the um adjacent property. And when these walls are reviewed at the FEMA level, it's a very technical review. We have to go through and demonstrate that we've put into the design all those components to address
any potential adverse impact. So that's that's the difference between like a standard maybe seaw wall where it's those those same considerations aren't taken. >> Elizabeth, would be a safe statement to say that these are not meant to divert
water. They're meant to break down the angriness of the water. >> Exactly. So I think there's a misconception that these walls are like 6 8t tall meant to like stop the surge and stop the waves. They're not. A lot of them are going to be between two and a half to three foot above the ground
that you would see. And that's just enough to to trip up the wave energy. So, it's really just affecting the bottom part of that wave water column that's supporting the velocity of the wave. And um so we're not trying to stop
the surge or trying to stop the waves. It's more of a a reduction in the energy. And as those as the water comes around, um, it's not going to deflect or push more
water onto adjacent properties that because that adjacent property is getting the same or more direct impact from the coastal waves coming towards their subject property. I know that's kind of hard to visualize, but it's, you know, everybody within that line of a
coastal event is getting hit. >> Yes. By the same level. It's just the ones that have the wave mitigation wall are getting less wave heights coming onto their property. >> That answer your question. >> It did. Thank you,
>> John. >> Took care of mine. Yes. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Council plane. Anything? >> I'm good. Thank you. >> Fine. Thank you. >> Thanks, Elizabeth. >> Thank you. >> All right, Larry, are you still there? >> So, with that, I will conclude our
presentation and we're happy to follow up after Mr. Galen and answer any other questions. >> All right. Thanks, Patrick. >> Mr. Gene, you're up. >> My microphone. Can you hear me any easier? >> H, we'll just be quiet.
>> Okay. Well, um, thank you for the opportunity. I represent the board of directors of San Caper Condominium Association at 6900 Eststerero Boulevard, Fort Myers Beach. We're immediately south of the old Windham property. You've received a copy of the
presentation I made to the LPA on June 16th, 2026. But I do have these additional comments and requests I would like you to include in your consideration of the development agreement for the Old Windham Garden properties. I've asked the neighborhood company uh through Pat uh and the owner
of the property to commit to three things. I'm thankful they responded on Friday uh 7:31 to my request for changes on the development plan. I want to add here also that um I'm appreciative of the buffer zone alternative that they
are proposing between our properties. Um the three requested items as they have uh told you about before. We could go to slide three if you have the presentation there. Um, though there have been no restrictions on overnight parking at this point, I asked them to commit to no
overnight parking of campers, no overnight stays of individuals in their parking lot and they responded favorably on the request and I'm very thankful for that. Um, I've asked them to prohibit dogs from being brought onto their property. This would be similar to the prohibition at Bonita Beach Park next to
Doc's Beach House that quite clearly marked with illuminated signage. In my LPA presentation, I noted current problems we have already had with dogs on the beach and in the wildlife area. And you know, I just say we don't need another dog beach. Their primary purpose
of the property is to service of food and drink and entertainment. Other than service animals, pets would not be in keeping with the purpose of that venue. They responded with concerns about federal law and service animals, which I do understand. At this point, I would request that they explore the reasons
that Bonita Beach can prohibit dogs. Um, I'm going to add to my comments here that when I did a brief search on Bonita Beach Park, it says that no pets or dogs are allowed on the beach park property or on the main sand. So, someone is
doing this and I'd like to know um how they can do that and if that can be worked into uh this application. But in any event, uh I would ask for no dogs other than service animals be allowed. Uh if you move to slide four,
I've asked for them to explore with the designer of any wave mitigation wall to consider tailing the wave mitigation wall at least 40 ft from our property, turning it to the east between the Lazy River and the Valley parking lot if necessary. I'd also ask to see um
perhaps a wall at some distance between our properties that could decrease the possibility of redirected water impacting our property. I understand that wave walls are supposed to be designed to prohibit scouring of the property, even adjacent properties in
theory. Again, I ask if there is a need to extend that wall to protect a parking lot or if it could be cut off prior to the park or right at the parking lot. So, I'm asking the town council to include the agreed upon restriction of overnight camper parking in the
agreement. I asked that no dogs other than service animals be allowed. And then I also asked for a promise to research the Bonita Beach dog restriction to see if greater restrictions could apply here. And a promise to explore an alternative wave
wall design as I have requested that would stop short of our property by quite a few more feet than than standardly is done. and I uh thank you for your ability for me to make this uh presentation and uh look forward to your
consideration. >> Mayor, just for the record, um were you sworn in when we swore everyone in >> your testimony? You were okay. Thank you. >> All right. Does anybody have any
questions? We can council member is going to ask questions of Larry. Correct. >> All right. Councilor McLean, do you have any questions for Larry? >> I'd like to Excuse me, Larry. I'd like to explore a little bit further the last statement about protecting the wave mitigation wall protecting the parking
lot. So your feeling is if they were able to provide the permanent structures and uh change the FEMA maps for the commercial area excluding the parking lot to the south that abates abuts your
properties that that is what your request is? >> Yes, I'd be more amanable to that. Um I'm not an expert in the design of these walls, but um where they're intending it
to go uh includes potential impacts on the wildlife area and potential impacts on our property. Um it would be actually less expensive if they cut the wave wall off uh quite a bit before our property
and and ease our concerns about that. If they need to include um turning the wall to the east uh so they can get the rating that they need on the property, we're fine with that. If providing some wall protection between our two
properties on that west end uh would help. That'd be fine, too. But I just want them to consider an alternative structure that cuts it off sooner. >> Okay. Thank you. I understand. Councelor Link, any questions for Larry?
>> No. >> Mayor Seafford? >> I do not. >> John, >> not really questions, but um you're comparing a a county park to private property regarding the dogs. So, that's where you're going to see probably the
difference. Uh animal dogs are not allowed in the critical wildlife area and all dogs on bene on our beach have to be leashed. So, I guess I'm I'm I'm not sure why that's such a concern. >> Okay. Well, first of all, uh the
practice is not being um uh done at this point. I see dogs uh running in the waves. I see dogs running up and down the beach. I see dogs chasing birds in the lagoon. So, uh you know, it's not
enforced. Um and I don't know if uh a private property can enforce um the same as the county park can for no dogs on the beach. But I do know that that you could restrict animals that are not service animals. So if you required
it to be no pets um and then have them prove that it is a service animal, that would be helpful. >> I believe the leash laws are being enforced and keep it out of the critical wildlife area. But if there are uh times where it's not being enforced, uh it
does require somebody to call and alert the town to those issues. >> Right. And and and I talked with a with a uh woman who who said, you know, there was a a man with two large dogs and allowing him to run
in the lagoon. And she went up and asked him, you know, told him, you know, they have to be on a leash. They can't be in there. and he basically told her where to pound sand and uh you know so he's got two large dogs and he's a a pretty good sized man and so now the woman has
to call and the people have to react by that time they're gone. So, I'm just I'm just saying that this in theory enforcement is right, but there are not people down there to enforce that um on
a regular basis and and it happens in a short time and there's not enough time to call in and get some somebody to react. >> Anything else, John? >> Larry, does does Sand Caper allow the residents to have dogs?
>> We do not. Okay, >> we are under the uh federal housing authority and so there are occasions when service animals um can be allowed but we are a a no pet uh association.
>> Okay, that's all I had. Thank you, sir. >> Megan, >> um I don't believe I have any cross-examination questions from from Mr. Um I I still have concerns about the dog
condition, particularly if the the beach the town does have a regulation regarding leashes, allowing dogs to be on the the beach, how to enforce that on private property. Um, we're open to including a service animal only or
please be mindful of the environmentally critical area, but th those are kind of my initial concerns. >> Or or perhaps even dogs must be on leashes. All dogs >> that that's very helpful. >> So I it's kind of confusing if if
they're going to have a walkway and then they say no dogs, but you're taking your dog to the beach, >> right? I mean, >> well, I think that's why maybe the compromise is there's a sign that says all dogs must be leashed because they have to be leashed on the beach, right? >> Then it covers. >> This is not
>> I apologize. >> Sorry. No, no, no, no, no. >> This is not intended to be a come bring your dog facility. It's just trying to navigate course how >> how to address that. >> You know, I'll just tell you where I stand on this.
As much as I wouldn't want to put a policy in place to force San Caper to have dogs, I don't want to put a policy in place to force a property owner to not allow dogs to go down a beach path to get there. Um, I'm in I'm I'm a
bigger fan of education. We know we have people that don't follow rules. every rule out there someone's going to not follow. But to try to create policy on a small group to me of people that do things that they're not supposed to do. Um, education and then enforcement I
think is always the path I select. But I'm just putting it out there for my fellow council members. If this moves forward, I'm in support of of educational signs about the critical wildlife. Educate people, but to stop people from bringing their dogs down your dog path to the beach. You know, I'm a dog lover, right? I got two dogs,
so I get it. But we respect the laws. We keep our dogs on a leash. Not everybody does that. But um just again, I won't reiterate it, but I wouldn't I wouldn't want to do a policy decision on someone saying they had to do something as much as I wouldn't want them to do not something.
But that's just me. >> That's all that that's all that I have. >> Okay. >> If there are any follows, >> anybody have any other questions for Megan or Patrick before we open it up for public comment? Well, I I do have a question or for you, Elizabeth, please.
>> Oh, yeah. I had a question, too. >> So, I understand we're not we're not the engineers. We don't understand wave mitigation walls. We do understand what is there an opportunity during the design phase of the mitigation wall. I would assume that the line that you have
drawn here is not an engineered design. Correct. Correct. >> And so I guess what I'm asking is could there be consideration for for not extending that wave mitigation wall
beyond the commercial or less than as is necessary to help address some of the concerns of the neighbors? Is that something that could be considered during the design phase? And I'm not sure how we would word that, but this mitigation law isn't designed yet.
>> Right. I I think there are opportunities. Again, we want to approach it from a standpoint of trying to optimize the level of mitigation we're trying to achieve for the property and then the landward properties, you know, on the other side of Ster
Boulevard. Um, so I think, you know, definitely want to be able to try to protect as much infrastructure as possible on that on that property. So I think but we can look at it during the refinement phase. It's
>> Yeah, I would think that in some regards it would be in your best interest to protect the critical infrastructure that you're trying to protect as opposed to spend the money to build it larger than it needs to be. >> Correct. Yes. Okay. Thank you. >> You're welcome.
>> Just before you run off, >> can you talk a little bit about what else it does as far as changing flood zones should FEMA adjust it? What it allows a builder to be able to do versus what they could do if they don't have this in place. >> Correct. Um so this property is
encumbered by the FEMA map zone VE which is the highest risk flood zone you could be mapped in. Um, implementing the wave mitigation wall helps reduce those wave heights such that you can change the map
from a VE to an AE zone, which is the next >> moderate risk flood zone category. Um, it is still considered a coastal AE zone. So, there's still some wave action coming coming in. But because of that
designation, you're allowed to you've got more flexibility about what you can the types of uses you can have on the lower level floors um as long as you implement proper dry flood proofing as well. So for instance, you could have
the restrooms on that lower level. You could have um a restaurant space. The only limitation is that because you're also seawward of the CCCL, the D coastal construction control line. There are certain things
that still have to be at that higher elevation based on D's um criteria. Um but they do have allowed uses such as retail, restaurant seating area. You just can't have permanent kitchens above um at that level. Those have to be at
the Dundredyear elevation, but you can have other recreational spaces and restrooms at that lower level. >> All right. So, >> anything for anything else for Elizabeth? >> All right. Thanks, Elizabeth. >> Thank you. >> All right. Public comment.
Amy, we have anybody. >> Um, uh, first up would be Denise Clint. And following Denise is Dan Dugen. >> Good morning, Denise. I think it's still morning. Yep, still morning. >> Okay, good. Good morning.
>> Is that mic on? Is it? >> Yeah. There you go. >> There you go. Uh, I own a condo in the Sanderak condominiums north of this property. I also own a home in the neighborhood across Astero Boulevard.
Um, I apologize. I came in at 2:00 this morning simply for this meeting because I felt it was so important to be here and I've been in Minnesota with some medical issues with our family. So, I've
not been involved in all these processes that have been going on like I should have been. Um, one of the problem was we did meet with Patrick and um, John back in April, I
think, or May, and our president did send forth a letter um, stating that in favor and support of the project. However, he didn't listen to some of us
on the association and not do it as a group. It was him personally. Some of us still had reservations. And so, it is my fault that I haven't been involved. So, I just want to say that. Um, so at this
point, I'm just going to highlight some of my concerns that have been brought up today and and then moving forward. Let's start with the dogs. as long as that's just been the latest one we're talking about. We too have a no pet policy. No dogs on our property unless it's service
dogs. And we constantly see dogs running all over the beach unleashed. It is a problem. And I know that they say they're going to have some kind of um security or whatever on the pro on the property. Uh, I don't know if that's
somebody who can also monitor whether or not the dogs have leashes. I don't know. Um, a big issue is contrary to the pictures you saw in front going out to the beach from this property, it's very
narrow. It is not a whole big ocean. We have that critical area that has the mangroves there. Our biggest issue is how people, traffic, dogs, anything comes
over onto our beach, our private beach. Um, one of the things I talked to Patrick about is maybe since they're having a public walkway, can we have some kind of like ballards and ropes going down the beach more to designate?
Just in the past, you know, since this project has come up and people haven't been able to walk down there, we have personally put up a walkway with a fence so that people could come down. We're getting people swearing at us, yelling at us, throwing garbage all over our
property. That's our concern. I know I'm out of time. Um, so there's there's a lot of concerns with it. You know, how does it flow over? How do they go out to the beach rather than on our property? I also
asked um Miss Baker to send out a a photo that shows the rain from a couple of weeks ago. >> We got it. >> And how it's going over. And I know the engineers have to look at all this and they will, but they also want to build as soon as possible. And I don't think that can
happen until this situation is fixed. >> I need you to wrap it up, Denise. >> Yeah, I'm sorry. That's okay. >> Um, it's just there's a there's a lot more concern. The traffic, people, the beach access is the biggest issue right
now. So, if you have any questions, feel free to contact us. But thank you for your time. >> Thank you. Thanks for coming. >> Dan's on his way up. >> Good morning all. Uh my name is Dan Dugan. I'm the president of Captain's
Bay Condominium Association, which the address uh that is listed for all five buildings is 22704 Island Pines Way. Uh yes, I have been sworn uh earlier. Uh Island Pines Way, if you're not familiar with it, would
run right into uh it's east of Vero Boulevard and would run into the north public beach access. By the way, thank you very very much. That was a huge concern amongst uh residents that live
uh uh in our area with uh uh the six associations under our uh master and next door at uh uh Asterero Cove uh for the longest time. And by the way, at
Island Pines Way, uh, if it would extend, I side note, I just think that probably would be the better location for a crosswalk. Uh, the south end of the island has been dealing with a, uh, entertainment and food desert, I'd say,
for years. We all understand takes time because of the devastation that Ian uh, uh, has caused. Our nearest place was 2 miles away uh, behind Publix. Thank god we have some movement in Santini Plaza uh which will alleviate it but in season
it is uh extremely uh uh crowded. Uh I have pled all the members of our association and without one disscent we are in favor of this project uh moving forward. Many of our residents have
enjoyed uh the pinchers over at the old Windham property and uh the family, a lot of friends uh in the association that uh know the owners and uh would like to see this move forward as uh quick as possible. They have been good
neighbors. Uh the sound restrictions always have been adhered to. Uh we have never had a complaint from any of our uh residents whatsoever. Uh wrapping it up, just thank you very much for uh uh
moving forward with your plans. Thank you very much for the consideration. Uh as far as everything else that was said, uh we really don't have a dog in that fight. Thank you. >> Well played, Dan. Well played. >> All right. Is there anyone else who
would like to speak in public comment? Mayor, I have one question for Megan. >> Okay. >> Um, you've heard a lot of uh comments made about the public beach access. It's the intent that it's an easement. Correct. >> Yes. >> And um that just for everyone's
information that that easement would then terminate when the development agreement terminates, at which point there would no longer be the public beach access >> and it might be in incorporated in a future application. But yes, we could only talk about what's here for the
duration of the development agreement. So for the duration of this development agreement, it will be public. >> Okay. A public easement for beach access. >> Yes, >> correct. We'll add that language. >> Yep. >> Okay. There's no other public comment. We'll
close public comment. Do you have any additional rebuttal comments? >> No. No comments. No, thank you. >> All right. All right, I'll now close a public hearing and request a discussion or a motion from town council to approve, approve with conditions, or deny a second reading or a continuence
to a time certain. >> Mr. Mayor, >> yes, sir. >> Could we discuss the planters? I think that was an open question. >> Absolutely. >> Um, so I would just share my personal u experience with very large terracotta
planters that I had at my house. and three times I've had to go to neighbors to retrieve them as even though I can't lift them up, they float. So, um that would be my personal observation on planters versus
something that was permanent. But I'd like to just have the discussion so that >> Sure. Yeah. I'm I mean I'm with you. I I you know, even if it's hedges, I'm I'm a fan of color. I've always said it. if you can add some sort of color to I mean you look at the one that was done up on
old San Carlos you know there's a lot of color a lot of a lot of delineation I I agree with you I'm not a big fan of the planters they do float and getting them out of a truck is not easy just don't ask me how I know >> or my feet uh but
>> yeah they uh I I'm with you I I like the permanent visitation versus the the planners >> Rebecca >> I would agree we talked about that in our meeting and uh those planters were not of concern to me. I' I'd rather see them go as well.
>> Scott, >> yeah, I totally agree, man. Just like John said, they they float. >> John, >> I'm in agreement as well. The only question I had and I brought it up in our meeting was what was going to
delineate between the the areas and still to be worked out. Whatever is going to be in the parking lot, whether it's shell, whether it's pavers, what is going to be? Is it going to be a curbing? Is it going to be a uh what is it just going to be mulch that's laying on top of, you know, what's what's going
to differentiate? What's going to stop? I know you said you're not going to use the ballards or or you're not going to use the uh parking stops. on phase one, you're going to use the the ballards and the rope. What what's going to is it going to be ballards and rope around it or what what's going to keep people from going in there or driving over it?
>> So So I think we were talking about um having mulching at the base. Um benefits of mulching, you know, retain water, humidity, all that stuff makes it more attractive. Um, I think we were suggesting more the um um you know in in a garden when you use
a a plastic kind of for lack of a better word curbing that you put on the edge of your your mulch bed versus the rest of your lawn. I think we're thinking something like that. The other thing that um you had suggested was maybe um
some some of those concrete papers that that you don't have to build a whole foundation. you don't have to dig under and build a foundation. It just laid on top. I think that works also. It's it's attractive. It does retain the mulch, but it's not permanent where you
>> Yeah, that that that was my concern is, you know, there's companies others called that they do the small residential concrete curbing. You've seen it. They make all kinds of waves and stuff and it >> it's there to keep mulch in because we all know when you get that heavy rain, if you don't have something keeping that mulch in, it just goes everywhere and it turns into a big
>> But it can be removed easily if needed. I mean, anybody that's been around since the storm and been down to Fifth and Crescent understands what kind of uh shovels are needed to clean up that kind of mulch when it goes all over the place. So, I would like to see something to be able to I mean, it's not it
shouldn't be a huge cost even if it's just something to try to keep >> just gave you the nod that that's not a problem that that uh curbing that can be moved. That's kind of just at the surface. We can do that. >> Okay. Um what other discussions did you
have? No, that was an open one that they were asking for direction. I just thought we should give it to them. >> The the question I had since we're talking on the landscaping is the reasoning behind between phase one and phase two, why it seems like there's only two other areas that are going to be in there that
would be differentiators between parking spaces. Was that to keep the additional parking spaces to meet the requirements or what was the reasoning behind >> My apologies. Can you can you repeat the question? >> Yeah. So, if you look at your your phase one and your phase two, basically in the middle down the middle of the property,
there's it looks like you're just adding two more of those, for lack of a better term, racetrack oval looking areas that would have the uh I don't know, we don't have do we have it up on a screen we could pull up? I could kind of There's three of them actually. It looks like >> we can pull up the
>> That would be almost in the center of the parking lot. It looks like the only difference is you're adding three more of those. I'm just curious what the reasoning was for not having him in phase one versus bringing them on in phase two. It's a minor thing, but since when we're pulling that up, the other thing I
noticed was it from phase one to phase two, it doesn't look like the areas that you're putting the bicycle parking in changes. So why are you not having the bicycle parking in phase one in the same locations they're going to be in bike two or in phase two? It's on our page. It's pack packet 189. So see there, it
doesn't have the three sections. And if you go to phase two, you'll see the three green oval sections in the middle of the parking lot. >> See, it just added the three there. >> So, >> I'm just curious what the reason why they were >> talking about the landscape islands. >> Yeah, the landscape islands.
>> So, so the the reason is um in phase one, um we're asking for deviation for no midblock landscape island. That's not really a term, but >> yeah, I understand why you're asking for the I'm just understanding what the reasoning would be.
>> And the reason is again this is more infrastructure needed where we're probably going to have to reconfigure that parking lot. So the idea is once we get to phase two, we're going to be code compliant. We incorporate all the required landscape islands. In phase
one, it's it's fewer islands, fewer ve less vegetation that you have to, >> you know, we're gonna have to find a way to to water those areas and less infrastructure associated with that. >> So, it just makes the transition between >> I'm just curious as to why figured there
was a reason why. >> Can you answer the bicycle parking why that isn't that area doesn't seem to be changing? >> Just look as you're just adding more bike racks. >> I'm assuming that's what's going to be there is bike racks. You see on the top there, you've got on phase one, you've got them just down by where the it looks
like the dumpster area would be and then in phase two you've got them as you come in along the water retention. >> Yeah, I think the thought was just that phase two expanded use uh we're >> we're going to add a little more parking in phase two. The requirement goes up slightly and we were just going to add
some more parking space uh bike parking spaces. Again, I think I think uh John is going to provide sufficient parking. If there's a lot of demand, we've got space. We'll >> add >> we'll put those bike racks in. >> And just one other thing since I have
you up there. It's these are all minor things. I'm just based on one of the comments that was made at the public hearing at the beginning or at the at the public comment and the bidding was stagnant water and mosquitoes. >> Yeah. >> Is there anything on these water retention areas that you could put in to potentially eliminate? Not that there's going to be a lot of mosquitoes maybe
coming from here, but um I mean I I don't even know if you can >> the answer I can give you being a a non-engineer is we're gonna have to go through the proper district permitting districts requirements. Again, it's going to be >> it's going to meet standards from at the state level. It's going to meet local
standards if we have any from a from a town requirement. So, um the intent is you've got to dress your water on site. You got to go through the proper permitting and you you've got to abide by those regulations.
>> Just a personal question. >> Water features always seem to get my attention when I'm driving by. >> Yeah. >> Well, we we know that, you know, both there and at Santini with heavy rainstorms, uh the sidewalks would get covered completely.
>> So, so we've got uh larger identified u water detention areas. And again, conceptual. They're going to have to go through the engineering design and they're going to have to size them accordingly. >> All right, that's all I have with the landscaping.
>> John, any other discussion? >> No, I'm good. Thank you, Mayor Rebecca. >> No, thank you. >> Scott, >> I'm good. >> John, >> I'll go ahead and move ordinance 26-02 to a second reading on September Wednesday, September 9th.
>> Uh, if I may, >> can we also get direction? We got a motion. Let's see if we get a second, then we'll do some discussion. >> So, we got a motion by Councelor King. I'll second discussion. Go ahead. >> Um, I was hoping to to possibly get some
direction on the phase two if we want pavement or if we want kind of >> um some of the rock. >> Well, since I brought it up, I I would prefer to see pavers over actual pavement. >> Okay. But I'll defer to council on
whether it's just me that thinks that or if they're okay with just the shells. I'm just trying to look at potential mitigation strategies for filling up drains and things that we've said in the past. >> Happy to address your concerns. We'd
just like a little direction on John, how do you councelor Mlan, how do you feel about it? >> I I actually am leaning towards the shells because of the less heat that comes off of the obviously interlocked pavers are very very nice and they're very expensive to put in. But as far as ashalt versus
shell, I I would say shell honestly. >> Okay. for the water retention and the heat that's generated off of. >> My question would be, are you concerned, mayor, about the sewer system on Asterero, those shells making their way to
Asterero? >> Well, what we've seen in the past obviously with when when surge comes onto the island, even if there's a mitigation wall there, is all that stuff ends up in somebody else's property. All those shells, all those rocks end up in somebody else's property across the
street. and now they're stuck with cleaning it up. So, yes, it's about the storm grains, but it's also potential mitigation for those across the street, which is what mitigation wall will help with as well, right? That's going to help the neighbors that are all across the street from it. >> To me, it's counter productive to do
something that would take a bunch of stuff and send it across the street. Um, I agree with you. Pavement, if I had to choose, pavers would be the choice over over pavement. Um, or I would choose shell over pavement over pavement. But um I know it's expensive and that's why I'm not putting in there is it a
condition is just to have a discussion with your application your applicant and see if that's something but if the council doesn't feel that it's important I'm just one vote just one person >> and you're just thinking about if there is another storm that pushes everything as opposed to just day in and day out
shells being brought onto a stereo from normal wear and tear. Well, and and and I can tell, you know, being off island, I get to see a lot of cars that come off the island and the amount of stuff that accumulates just from tires that come off, sand, salt, shells that you clean
up at the end of every day. >> Will this have that? You know, you're driving your cars out. Is it going to bring all that out onto a sterile boulevard? It's that's my only concern. Again it's >> I'm not dying on a sword over this, but >> just trying to think in the future for people that may have to deal with an
unintended consequence. Well, I'm wondering if there couldn't be a compromise, some considerations to think about. Um, maybe closer to the road there's pavers or the drives out are pavers, but I like having the um
absorption as well >> or just something to think about. I think before next meeting, >> I just want to clarify that the abrids from Eststera Boulevard, I think it's roughly 70 90 ft from Estero Boulevard and that is going to be paved. >> Right. We've extended that further than
what was initially proposed. >> Scott, how do you feel about the >> we're as a condition? That'd be a big nut for him to that that's a lot of money. I I just don't like
imposing that. I I I think that, you know, they've they've extended the entryways, so I I think that for now that suffices. I agree with you that it's inexpensive and and it's but so is cleaning it up if it's in my property across the street.
So I >> I I can't argue that. >> But you know, again, John, how do you feel about it? >> Does it make us hypocritical when we have it in our overflow parking? I mean, I when I park over there, my the inside
of my car gets full of shells because of walking through it and then it's in my tires. So that bothers me to a certain extent, I guess. >> Good point. I don't remember if the town came before the town to ask for a deviation to to do that. So I don't
know. >> I know the town doesn't have money to put papers there right now. >> Well, but again, we're we're we're in a discussion with an applicant who is requesting things outside what they can do by right. and is does this make sense to ask is there enough benefit to
outweigh both for the applicant as well as as the neighbors in in the town and it's just I'm not asking to put in there as a condition now but it's something for you and your team to consider between now and second reading um to come back and say yes we want to do it or no we don't want to do it and here's
why you know or maybe by then council decides they don't want to do it or they decide they want you to do it I don't know but just something to put out there for discussion to see if um if it makes sense but you make a a good point, John. >> Thank you. >> My my truck fills up with sand >> and beach accesses as well.
>> Yeah. Is there any other Well, >> the Is there any other discussion? >> Yes. >> Um I request could you add uh 1 p.m. or thereafter to the second hearing? It was for September 9th. There was no time associated with that.
>> Oh, did it not? Uh, >> so if you could just add 1 p.m. or shortly after, I think that's what your normal meeting is scheduled. That that would help. Thank you. >> Our meeting is scheduled for 1 p.m. on the 9th. >> Yes. >> That's right. >> So, in the motion, as far as when you're setting the second hearing, could you
add 1 PM to that, please? >> Yes. Well, Councelor King, would you like to amend your motion? >> So amended. >> Thank you. I will amend my second to reflect having it at September 9th, 2026 at 1 p.m. >> Mayor, there was discussion regarding um
including the conditions that were in the ETPs. Is that also part of the motion? >> Well, I think both sides does it have to be? I guess both sides agreed on record that they would >> Okay. >> they would work with >> So, they just come back with that
>> to have that before the second reading. >> Okay. We can always add it at the second reading if it >> you can add it at the second reading. Correct. >> Yes, we'll go back. >> Just voluntarily put it in. Yes. >> All right. If there's no other discussion, councelor K. >> I.
>> I'm an I. Vice Mayor Sackley. >> Hi. >> Councelor Link. >> I councelor Mlan. >> I. >> Motion carries unanimously. See you on the 9th >> at 1 p.m. >> At 1 PM. Yes. All right. Do you want me to read this and then turn it over or do you want to read it?
>> I'll just take it over. >> Okay. >> Vice Mayor Safford is now going to take over and run ordinance 26-10. >> Let me get to it. One second, please. >> Click on the click over here and then click on public hearings
>> and then Oh, click on the arrow and then click down there. It takes you right to it. >> Eric, can you go ahead and stop the Zoom link please? Okay, we good. Okay. This this quasi judicial agenda item is a first reading and public hearing on
proposed ordinance 26-10. If approved at first reading, a second reading and final adoption hearing will be scheduled for Wednesday, September 9th, 2026 at 1 p.m. or at another time identified by town council. This is an ordinance of the town of Fort Myers
Beach, Florida, approving slash approving with conditions or denying a reszoning of property located at 1207 Sterile Boulevard, Fort Myers Beach, generally identified as strap number 19-46-24-W4-0150D.0050 0050
from downtown zoning district to a commercial plan development with 11 deviations to allow for a 60 unit hotel and 2500 square ft of commercial retail space and 46 parking spaces providing for other clarifications as necessary
providing for conflicts of law scriveners errors severability and providing for an effective date. Let's see. Uh if any town council member has had any exparte communication to disclose,
please let us know the subject discussed and the identity of the person, group or entity with whom the communication took place. Any correspondence that you received or observations made of the site? Council member King, >> familiar with the site. I've had a
couple meetings with the neighborhood group and their uh uh developers and I've received uh emails in a couple of them recently against the project. >> Council member Link
>> uh also met with a neighborhood group on the 15th of June. Um and no other exparte unfamiliar with the site. Uh, so I also had a meeting with the neighborhood group. Um, I
don't believe that I've had a conversation with Mr. Toruson about this one. I don't think I did. I may have. Uh, if I do, it's doesn't stick in my mind. Uh, but I have seen several of the, uh, neighbors on Primo have uh, voiced concerns about traffic and
parking. >> Yes, same goes for me. I had a meeting with the neighborhood group about two weeks ago and received the same emails that everyone else on council did as well. So Jason Green has been qualified as
experts already by this town council based and based on his education and experience has been accepted as expert in the field of land use planning and development in the town of Fort Myers Beach. Are there any other individuals who would like to be qualified as expert witnesses on behalf of the applicant at
this time? >> Yes. Thank you, Vice Mayor. For the record, Megan Strayhorn, council for the property owner and applicant. We all have three um expert witnesses with us today, all of which have been previously been deemed experts in their respective fields. So, we ask for them to be
recognized as experts here today. First, we have Patrick Vaness with the neighborhood company for planning. For engineering, we have Brandon Fry from J.R. Evans uh engineering. And then also for architecture, we have we have Albert Albert Damrose from Studio A. Um, I
believe Albert might need to be sworn in. >> I think you need to be sworn in. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Is there anybody else that needs to be sworn in as well? >> Okay. Amy, >> if you'll raise your right hand. Um, do you swear or affirm that the testimony
you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> All right. Thank you. >> I believe they've all been deemed experts in previous meetings. Is that correct? >> Okay. Fantastic. Um, has the property owner applicant seen a copy of the
agenda backup materials from staff? >> Yes, we have. >> Okay, fantastic. Um, so would the applicant proceed with your presentation at this time? >> Actually, >> sometimes the staff will just do a a
very general introduction. >> Sorry, Jason. That's okay. Um, no problem. I appreciate that. Skip right over. I've been waiting years to do that. >> Yes, thank you. I've been waiting years for you to do that. Um, yeah. So, the application in front of you obviously is
uh CPD reszoning uh for a 16 unit of OT hotel, some commercial ground floor commercial spaces. There's uh several deviations that are included in your packet. And um one of the things that want to remember to do is anything like this if it's going to be approved or put to a second reading. We remember that
the the drawings that are there in front of you are being requested to be confirmed by you that they are consistent in your opinion with town codes. Uh that way they don't have to do this later on. A weird kind of process that um is very cumbersome. So through this hearing process they'll be looking
to have that those architecturals uh accepted by use consistent with the code. Um it's just a unique CPD thing. Um that's all that's just the introduction to that and obvious it's in the future land use category of times square mixeduse commercial area and currently with downtown zoning district.
>> I'll turn over the applicant. >> Okay. Does anybody have any questions for Jason? >> Not at this time. >> Not at this time. Scott >> can't remember that. >> Nor do I. Thank you Jason. >> Okay. >> Thank you for the record again. Megan Strayhorn along with me as well as the
export witnesses which I've previously identified. We also have uh owner representative Chris Flag um who will come up after me to discuss the property and proposed project. This is a request to reszo the property to a commercial plan development for the purpose of a
boutique hotel. Uh we do come to you from LPA with a unanimous recommendation of approval. uh this will have you will have to find that this is consistent with the land development code consistent with a comprehensive plan uh based on the application the LPA hearing
this presentation the expert testimony that will be presented to you today uh we ask that the presentation also be included in in the public record at LPA it was a um a unanimous recommendation of approval there was one really only
one issue that was identified at the LPA level and that pertained to the proposed parallel parking spaces located on Primo Drive. So, we told the LPA, "Yes, we'll we'll review it. We'll look at it. We'll come back with a plan." So, the
engineers and an applicant did so. Um, we're going to be eliminating a couple of those parallel parking spots, but shifting the rest of them further into the property while also voluntarily um deeding or giving up or allowing the
town to use 5T of the property for the Primo Drive rightway. So, that's kind of the compromise that that we've reached. Uh, but before I go any further, I would like to introduce Mr. Chris Flag to discuss the property and project. Good morning.
>> Morning. >> Um you we all we all refer to this property as Silver Sands. Um we have we have just now um recently uh reached an agreement with Margaritavville that it's going to
be called One Particular Harbor. It one particular harbor is Margaritaville's new upper scale upper upscale luxury hotel brand. There's one in Nassau, Bahamas. There's one going in Bradenton. Uh it some are condo components, some have condo components to them. This one
will not. Um this is we intend that this one be just a uh regular hotel rooms like we have at the resort. Um and uh the the the the real benefit of having the Margaritavville brand on it is the
full complexing with the with the existing resort. So, from a parking standpoint, from a system standpoint, from a checking in standpoint, from uh cards, uh uh access access uh guest access bands, all of that's going to be
seamless across uh that this property as well as the resort. So, just wanted to uh let you all know that our name has changed from Silver Sands to one particular harbor. All right. >> Okay. Can you hear me? Oh. All right.
Well, um I apologize if I do get confused and refer to Silver Sands, but I'll do my best. Um, you know, one thing though, when they told us one particular harbor, we uh immediately said, "Okay, we're
going to have to change our signs and get bigger signs because uh there are a lot of syllables in that name." So, um what you'll see as part of our presentation, we are asking to change our sign deviation to allow for a little more face uh area to accommodate the new
name. Um, so, uh, for the record, my name is Patrick Vaness, certified planner with the neighborhood company. It's a pleasure to be here today to talk about, uh, this CPD reszone for one particular
harbor, uh, formerly Silver Sands. Um, same thing I said for um, with the previous application. Uh, we've met with all of you. Um, you had some questions for us. I think we did our best to answer all your questions. We are completely aware that you have watched
the LPA hearing uh that you also have uh reviewed our packet. So again, we're going to keep it brief and more than happy to answer some questions, but we'll uh quickly zoom through this if possible. Um just a reminder of where the location
is. Um intersection of uh Primo and Eststero Boulevard. Um, a little bit about the history dating back to the 1920s, several iterations over time, but right before Hurricane Ian, there were
22 units on site. There was also a small um hot dog stand refreshment counter called the dog house. Um, so everything was destroyed um at um with the hurricane Ian. So,
this is a an aerial view of what it looked like prior to the storm. Uh, and this what is what it looks like today. Um, as Megan mentioned, we are asking for an all suites boutique hotel of 60
units and 2500 square ft of ancillary commercial at ground level. Um I'll quickly go through this slide but from a location site design compatibility standpoint just want to highlight that we are in the downtown
core. Um this is an area slated for the highest densities intensities activity uh within our town. So we believe this is an appropriate area for this use. It is very complimentary to surrounding uses, creates synergies
amongst businesses and again I think it's uh a hotel that is attractive and fits into the character and is going to benefit uh the downtown area. So biggest change that occurred as um
Megan ma mentioned is we were asked um and I think it stem from one uh one comment from a neighbor down Primo of the roadway is narrow uh and you are asking for parallel
parking along the roadway. Just want to highlight that the parallel parking is completely within our property. It's not within the the town's right ofway. Um and we were asked, can you look at that? Is there a way to maybe improve those conditions? So, um the engineers went
back to the drawing board and um came up with a good solution that we think addresses their concern and also the applicant's concern. So, one thing you may recall at the LPA that we discussed is one of the important components of
this boutique hotel is to provide self-parking. Um, they've been in the business for a long time. They know what their exact needs are. They have anticipated how much parking they need. So they as they describe
uh they need 42 to 45 parking space to feel comfortable that they are providing sufficient parking that they don't have to go to a valet parking. Um so if we eliminated all the park the parallel parking along um Primo we would be under
that 42 number and again they don't want to trigger the need for valet. So what we looked at and what we think is a good compromise is let's address the rightway width um and through that we are
providing an easement to the town for an extra 5 ft um and the town can can uh do what they please from an improvement standpoint or if it's just extra space uh between the property and and the
traveling traffic, it it provides a little more comfort level. Um, so what you see here is the revised master concept plan. We had two parking spaces that were at the intersection of Primo
and Eststerero Boulevard. Um, we have eliminated those two parking spaces to though. So this the the intersection is where you're going to have more the most activity. So by eliminating those two uh parallel parking spaces, we avoid any potential conflicts resulting from that.
Um the sidewalk in that pocket plaza remains in place and you do have a sidewalk from a stero to the entrance to the parking garage and to the back side of the lobby area. However, moving north, um we had to eliminate the the
sidewalk and what we've done is we kept the parallel parking and again to offset that we have provided that 5-ft easement along the entire length of Primo. Um so going back to the amount of parking in
doing so we were under the 42 parking spaces minimum that they require. So, we looked at modifying our loop road, our little loop drive that is internal to the project. So, let me just fast forward here to what it used to be.
Okay. So, um that that little loop drive used to cut back in under the building and then you had your exit um on Primo. So, what we are proposing is to extend
that loop drive. Unfortunately, we had a bit of a green facing the waterfront, the canal. We've unfortunately lost that, but uh it's more important to have the parking and keep it a self park hotel. So, um if we look at this, we've
extended that. We were able to fit in a few extra parking spaces. And also, we've hugged the uh the building as much as possible. And just I want to highlight that the plan that you have in your packet is slightly different than that one. So the difference is we've
taken that loop robe, hugged it closer to the building. And what that allowed us to do is to put one consistent buffer at 18 ft adjacent to the property. The requirement is a 15t buffer. We now have
an 18t buffer along the entire length of that uh uh that yard. So, we think it's a bigger better configuration um on that side and again it maintains the minimum parking spaces that we need. We've actually increased uh the total
parking spaces to 51 parking spaces. So, what you'll see is as part of our deviations because we had a parking deviation, we've had to modify that. I'll walk you through that. So, it's a reduction in the deviation. So, um, also with this new name change,
we figured we'll, uh, update our renderings and show you what those signs would look like. So, um, what you have on the side of the building, the proper term for those, uh, signs or blade signs. So, we are asking for a deviation to increase, uh, the square footage
associated with the blade signs. Also, uh we've determined that at the front of the building there's going to be a logo for one particular harbor and we're still going to uh need one possibly two little retail signs. Uh so what you'll
see is in our deviation we account for that also. Megan, did you want to point to No. Okay. Um so again just same renderings that we had at the LPA just showing um the the
signs and the sign faces that we have there. Um we can always go back to this if you have any questions, but we've got Albert here. We've got our our footprint. We've got uh each floor depicted here. If
you've got any questions, happy to answer that. Um our height exhibits, nothing's changed. And this is just the layout of the parking that has been modified. So we just wanted to show that quickly.
Um density intensity at the LPA. We went through this in detail. Uh the important thing to highlight is the code has changed. The well the comp plan has changed. The code hasn't caught up yet, but the comp plan is now we have now
gone from instead of doing a density conversion ratio for hotel uses, we are going to a straight F. Want to point out that the F that is allowed in this future land use category that we could ask for is a 2.5. We are asking for 2.0
um well beneath the uh the allowance through the comp plan. Uh from a transportation standpoint, again, transportation is always a hot issue. We know that. Um but the TI's conclusion from the expert is it's not going to
adversely impact a roadway that is already impacted essentially. We we all know that that in in season um it is a constrained roadway and it's going to continue to be constrained with or without this project. However, we do
understand that we have to do our best to mitigate and to help out as best we can. So, we have committed to being part of the don't rent uh a car program, which is kind of the educational program with the guests, encouraging people not to drive a car if possible, encouraging
people to use transit or uh bikes or or or uh or walk around instead. Um we are going to provide bicycles to the hotel guests. Uh we're going to have uh bike racks. Uh we are making improvements to the pedestrian realm, widening the the
uh sidewalk in front of the property. Also providing for a little pocket plaza which is going to have seating area and is going to be for public space, little landscaping included in there. And one of the uh big um measures that we are
providing and is going to be a public benefit. We we all know that as you get near the base of the bridge, traffic slows down and we tend to have a lot of jaywalking in that area in season. So, we have committed and the nice thing is
the owners own both Margaritavville and uh this one particular harbor property and they've committed to a pedestrian barrier uh along the side where the pool is for Margaritavville all the way to the entrance to that pool area and to
the Lida area. So, this is going to prevent any day walking back and forth. Um I've got pictures of what a decorative barrier could look like, but we showed that at the LPA. can be very attractive and we think this will provide a a transportation benefit. Um
so going back to the parking our deviation is going to change. We were asking for a 20% reduction. We are now asking for a uh 10.5 we rounded that up to 11% reduction uh from what code requires. So we are uh now providing 51
spaces and previously we had 46 spaces. Um not going to go through our our list of public benefits in detail, but again um small property, small infill property, doing our best we can with with the location we have and the the
size of the property, but uh mitigating for transportation issues, u widening the sidewalk in front of us. Um, again, this may not be a public benefit per se that we're giving something to the town,
but with new regulations, we have to provide updated, hardened, resilient structures. I think that benefits us as a community when everybody rebuilds. I have to do it for my house, you guys have to do it for your homes. But if we have another storm, we're going to do way better than we did last time. Um,
and again, public benefits. Um, you guys are going to be talking about taxes, um, statemandated requirements possibly with residential taxes, tax reform. This is a commercial use. Uh, it would not be
affected by residential tax reforms. This is an operator that has a proven track record in this town. They are ready to go. They are ready to build. And as soon as they build, this is uh, tax revenue on our books.
Um, I'll skip through the deviations just to highlight where we've made changes. Um, so what this deviation says is that we are asking for a deviation to the minimum sign face requirement, a maximum sign face requirement of 32
square feet per sign, excuse me. And we are now asking for two signs, those blade signs to be uh um to allow for up to 80 square ft, which would essentially allow what has been depicted on this
rendering and also for an additional 81 square ft to allow the signs up front where we're going to have the logo and the retail signs again consistent with what is depicted. Um
and then um deviation 11 as I mentioned were the only change to deviation is to allow a deviation for an 11% reduction. Prior to that I believe it was 20 or 21. So that's different than what you have
in your packet. Uh and then we've added deviation number 12 which is a new deviation. And that was just as we were working through this. Uh Tom I believe said, "Hey, I'd love to have a uh wayfinding sign just like we have at
Margaritavville." And I said, "We can certainly add that." So, uh it's a deviation that would allow wayfinding uh wayfinding pole sign and it would be a maximum height of 9 ft from grade and it
would be roughly consistent with what is depicted there um on the uh on the photograph. So, uh, before I go to my conclusion, I just like bring that up every time we talk about hotel on this island. Uh,
this is the latest data from the visitor bureau. Just want to remind everybody that compared to where we were prior to the storm, we are still over 40% down on the number of rooms on this island. Um,
so I think we need those rooms back. We need heads in bed. We need people to uh spend money on our island and help all the local businesses and this is a uh what I think a great project, great boutique hotel that will contribute
towards that. So um with that said, we obtained unanimous recommendation of approval from the LPA. Um we've uh read the staff approval, the the staff conditions of approval. We support all those conditions of approval. We were
asked by the LPA to address the parallel parking issue which we've uh provided uh what we believe is a is a good compromise. So in my professional planning opinion uh this CPD is consistent with the comp plan. This is
the newly revised comp plan and the older comp plan and we meet or exceed all LDC requirements. So based on that, I um ask that you support our application, move this on to a second
hearing, and um approve the project. So with that said, thank you, and I'm available for any questions you have. >> I have one housekeeping matter. Um if you will, if you may. Post submitt of this package, we made some modifications
to the concept plan and and learned some new um information. Can I respectfully request for Vice Mayor Stafford to reread the title? Um, there are two areas in the title of the ordinance. One, it should be 12 deviations and two,
it should be 51 parking spaces. So, I would request just to have the title reread before uh moving on. >> That is a statutory requirement, the actual reading of the the title. >> Sure, I can reread it. So, we have 51
parking spaces and >> 12 12 >> deviations. Yes, sir. >> Well, I then we'll re reread it. Um, this is an ordinance of the town of Fort Myers Beach, Florida, approving approving with conditions denying or reszoning of property located at 1207
Boulevard, Fort Myers Beach. generally identified as strap number 19-46-24-W4-015D.000050 from downtown zoning district to a commercial plan development with 12 deviations to allow for 60un hotel and
2500 ft of commercial retail space and 51 parking spaces. Providing for other clarifications as necessary. providing for conflicts of law, scrier's error, severability, and providing for an effective date,
>> Nancy. That good. >> Yes, that was very, very good. >> Actually, I think you left off the last zero on before the D. >> You did on the draft number. Oh, dear. >> 015D.005. >> Okay, that that's sufficient. >> Okay.
>> Yes. Okay, question time. >> Mr. Mlan, what do you have? >> I actually don't have any questions at this time. >> Okay, Council Member Blank, >> I do not. >> Me?
>> Yep. >> My turn. Okay. Uh, going off a couple of the emails we received from residents in the area. Uh, number one, is the property still for sale? >> No. >> No. the propert that this the listing
agreement expired months ago. We didn't I we didn't realize it was on the website. It it was on the website still. So, it's been taken off the website. >> No, the property is not for sale. >> Thank you. Also, they have concerns again about the the traffic on on the
street, but they're talking about uh the town giving away height, density, intensity uh with nothing in return. And how would you react to that? I mean, >> for the last year on social media, I've seen all the smart people tell me that
Margaritavville is the gold standard. >> Yeah. >> of this town, and now we've exceeded Margaritavville on this. >> Yeah. So, so for the record, uh Patrick Vaness, uh when it comes to uh benefits, uh and um compatibility issues, we have
documented this at length uh in our packet and we've also uh gone through it as part of the LPA presentation. I do have a slide. I can bring back the slide. We can go uh look at each of those points or we can just say that for the record, we've identified what those
benefits are. But we uh we do provide uh benefit again that we think is commensurate to the ask. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Is that it? >> That's it. >> So I I have uh two questions for you. Um
have you guys spoken to the neighbors about the parking issue? Have you reached out to any of the neighbors about especially on on Primo about about the project and and their concerns? So, so my understanding is it's it's one
neighbor um that that I at least there may be more John but um what I was forwarded what we got um it was one particular neighbor I'm not to be confused with one particular
harbor um but um but uh we we believe that the compromise we are presenting addresses that concern to the greatest extent we can. So we are aware of it. We
understand it. Um and we have modified things accordingly. Just to give you a a little uh personal opinion and color associated with that. I do not appreciate the personal attacks that that person has made in her in her
emails to me and to council members. Um, so no real desire to have a discussion with that person. We think we we have demonstrated our goodwill to try to address this. >> Okay. Thank you. Going with the
goodwill, is there a way that internally you guys can not use those parking spots until the very last four? >> Yeah. I I don't want to I don't want to codify or anything, but to be a good neighbor to understand that, you know,
there are some issues with with that street, is there a way that those spots aren't used until the very last? >> Yeah, Chris, I we had given that thought internally of if it's if it's out of season and you guys don't need as much parking, maybe you just have to put
barriers or planters in the way. So, basically, they're not in use, but peak peak times if you need them. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. We we'd be okay with that condition. Okay, that I I think that that would be showing some good faith toward the neighbors and you know, just
we let's let's be honest, there's there's a lot of trucks there, especially early in the morning with deliveries and everything else. So, um I think anything we can do to help the flow of of traffic would be be really nice.
>> We can do that. >> All right. Anyone else? Any other questions? Okay, public comment. Are there any members of the public who wish to comment on this matter? If so, please come forward to the podium and identify yourself, provide your address, and
whether you were sworn in. Okay, seeing none, we'll close public comment. Uh, obviously, are there any other additional comments, rebuttals, or closing statements from you? >> No. >> Okay. All right. All right. I will now I will
now close the public hearing and request discussion or motion from the town council to either approve, approve with conditions, deny with reasons, or a continuence to a time certain. >> John, >> uh, I've got nothing further at this
time, >> Rebecca. >> Nothing further. >> Nothing further. >> Okay. Nor do I do I do I have a motion? Um, I'll make a motion to approve
ordinance 26-10 CPD 2025 0286 1207 Astero Boulevard Silver Stands Resort now known as one particular harbor >> particular
>> uh with the changes as outlined for the parking and the reconfiguration >> and the second reading will The if approved, the second reading will be September 9th at 1 p.m. >> 1 p.m. >> Okay, >> I'll second it. >> Okay,
>> it's actually 1 p.m. or soon thereafter because it looks like we'll have a little log jam there with a couple projects. >> A little f >> at 1 p.m. or soon thereafter. >> Okay, we we have a motion and a second.
Any other discussion? >> Yes. Just for clarification, um there's a need an extra condition is needed from what was in the staff report to deal with the right ofway and the the offer. I think is was that what you intended to include >> to include just not just the parking but the also deviations
>> just for we'll prepare that condition for the second hearing to add that based on your direction. Thank you. >> Please. Thank you. >> And for the record, applicant has uh is in is in agreement. >> Okay. Thank you. Okay. We have a we have a motion and a second. John
>> I >> John >> I >> I >> and I'm I as well. Motion carries four to zero. >> Okay. Do you want to take a short break before we Oh, yeah. Yeah. We're We're
going to take a break for >> 40 time is it now? >> 45 minutes. We're going to uh come back at 100 p.m. >> Look at you. But until we can find out if you recognize
Okay, we're going to call this meeting back to order. It is 10:01 p.m. We are now on to our administrative agenda. Our first item is resolution 26-142, fiscal year 2027, proposed maximum millage rate. This is a resolution of
the town council of the town of Fort Myers Beach adopting a proposed maximum millage rate for the town of Fort Myers Beach, Florida of 1.34 for fiscal year 2027 commencing October 1st, 2026 and ending September 30th, 2027 for the
purpose of providing sufficient funds for the general government operating fund setting the date, time, and place of for the first and second public hearings as required by section 200.065 065 Florida statutes for adoption of a tenative and final millage rate and
proposed and final operating budget and providing an effective date. Will >> in the interest of time I'll just turn it over to Mr. Jeffrey Newman, our assistant finance director. >> Welcome Jeffrey. >> Thank you. Good afternoon. My name is Jeffrey Newman. Um I'm the assistant
director of finance. I've been with the town now for just about two months. So it's a pleasure to stand in front of you guys for the first time. So today I'll be presenting about the FY27 proposed millillage. During this presentation I'll be providing a lot of context
primarily to help inform, educate, and help people make the best decisions possible when it comes to taxes because every dollar that we use does come from the public. It's given to us as part of the public trust. We have responsibility
to maximize that. So with that, this meeting is required by Florida statute 200.0654B where we're required to set a proposed maximum millillage. The due date for us to submit it is at the latest tomorrow.
That is to the property appraisers office through the Oasis trim system. We have to submit it within 35 days. Now, you'll hear me echo this multiple times in this presentation. The millillage set
today is a not to exceed rate. It is not the final rate. We will have two additional meetings coming up to suggest whatever the final rate the town council decides upon. Those meetings are open to the public. They will be noticed through
the trim process that the citizens receive as part of the mailer from the property appraiser. We will also need to set public meetings on September 9th and September 23rd. Both of those meetings
will happen at 50:01 p.m. So, as part of the larger discussion today, I just wanted to um lay out a few numbers because they weave their way through this entire presentation. What is a mill? One mil is equal to $1 tax on
every$,000 of taxable value. 0.01 mills is what I've used as the budget bedrock. That's $50,299.77.01 mills because we budget at only 96% of the allotted mills is equal to
$48,287.78. So for taxing perspective, pulling information from the tax collector's office, a town resident pays 13.4329 mills in FY26,
of which the town is only making up 7.66 of their mills. So the town's millage in FY26 was 1.0294. 0294 and a town resident had a total millage of 13.4329. So breaking it down by what a town
resident is paying for, as everyone will see on this chart in blue, there are four taxing authorities that collect a higher millage rate than the town. And I have outlined the percentages up there so people can understand it in its
whole as the town makes up only a relatively small proportion of the average millillage bill. So putting it in a graph, the town's portion is equal to the blue sliver. That's 7.66%.
As you can see, the big purple um slice of the pie, that is going to be your Lee County millillage, followed by the two millages that public schools get. That is the orange and the green. You'll notice there's some diagonal lines indicating that they go together. And
you also have the uh fire control special district for Fort Myers Beach. That is the red millillage. uh mosquito control library South Florida, water, hyenthia, those all make up the small little slices at
the very top of the pie chart. So, dialing it back and trying to compare apples to oranges, the state charges a 6% sales tax if you converted the state sales tax into mills. Granted,
the state has limits and the state has certain items that are carved out, but the state is charging 60 mills upfront on many of the items people purchase on a day-to-day basis. The town at a flat mill is 1.0294 is
approved by this body for FY26. Another big difference currently between millage and the sales tax revenue is that mills are no longer reference or referencing any kind of inflationary pressures. However, if your price goes
up by $10 on a $100 order at a store, sales tax automat automatically adjusts to that new price. So, that's just some of the differences between mills and how sales tax is calculated. Now one thing I
wanted to go in brief discussion on was what about non-millage revenues? So a from throughout my career common sources that have been brought to me is why can't we charge a sales tax a room tax? Why can't we have a developer who's
coming to us for a piece of property pay a lump sum into the general fund? I would just urge everyone to understand that Florida statute governs all of those revenue streams and localities are largely excluded by what's the maximum
percentage they can charge, what taxing authority can impose them, how can those funds be used, how much can be assessed. For instance, Lee County collects a millillage for room rentals vac occupancy tax. that
millillage goes to the tourism development council who then vote on and can only supply money to tourism related sources. So the town does not unfortunately have the legal authority to put a 4% tax on rooms, a 3% tax on
alcohol. It's just not present in Florida statute. Many things like impact fees which a developer pays for schools and roads is specifically in statute prohibited from going into our general fund. So largely the town's biggest
source of funding it can control tax-wise is its millillage. We're just prohibited by Florida statute from going into too many other sources. Yes, we can do some a little bit of work with utilities. Yes, we can do some work with fees. By and large, the tax we control
is our mills. The town can charge up to 10 mills as any taxing authority can in Florida. So, the top three millage rates for a town resident are Lee County and the school district of Lee County. They make up roughly 2/3
of everyone's property tax bill. Our proportion, as I said earlier, is only 7.66%. Now, what makes our portion unique is that 100% of the tax dollars collected to support the town by a town property
owner go directly to town residents. So, this is a tax paid by our residents that goes directly to our residents, not anywhere else in the county or the state. This town unfortunately has no input on how the remaining 92% of mills being
assessed by other taxing authorities go. So today, just for perspective, we can only talk about that 7.66%. So what would the net outcome be on my tax bill if we made certain changes?
looking at a whole tax bill, ignoring what any other taxing authority may do this coming fiscal year. If we reverted to roll back, which is 9687, it would lower someone's millage by a
third of a percent as a whole. If we were to adopt the 1.34 as our maximum millage, that would only increase a resident's tax bill by 2.3% because it's
a proportion based on a small slice of the pie that a person pays. Real dollars very important, but just putting it into a little bit of perspective. Now, the three rates we'll be discussing today are the roll back
rate, the unchanged rate, and the maximum proposed millage rate. This meeting only sets the maximum. As I mentioned earlier, there's going to be subsequent meetings, and a lesser millage can be adopted or chosen at any point moving forward at a public
meeting. This is effectively a cap. So the rolled back rate in FY26, the town adopted a millillage of 4.628 million.
That is the part that we were allowed to budget at the 1.0294 rate for both last year and this year. We're budgeting at 96% which is in keeping with Florida statutes governing how much you should build budget of that in FY27. Our rolled
back will be 4.6. 677 million. As you can see, there is 42 $49,000 difference between the two. So, how is roll back set? Roll back is not based on what we adopted as
projected income. Roll back is based on what was actually received. And the town is only at about an 86% a little more than that receipt ratio year-over-year. that lowers what our roll back would be because it's based on dollars actually
received not the budget as set by the town. So effective for 27 something new for every taxing authority is that roll back rate is no longer going to be adjusted by the Florida per capita personal income. So,
how that worked in the past was that a rolled back would be looking at dollars to dollars year-to-year and then they would c multiply by whatever the percentage was for the Florida per capita personal income. I don't want to
say that was an inflationary adjustment because it was based on changes to income, but it tried to move it in real dollar buying terms, not flat dollars. That was removed this year.
If the 3.99% which the state has in its documents have been finalized, that means that the town's roll back would have been 1.00. 007 in that approximate area instead of the N687.
That lowered roughly the amount that the town would have collected and rolled back millillage by $187,000. It also means that to maintain 1.0294 mills, it will be an increase of 6.2%
over rolled back and not a 2.4% increase over rolled back. So, how much will rolled back save a property owner? Now, I didn't want to go with below average to minimize the tax impact because I think we have to just
do a good estimate. So, I went with a high median. Um, per realtor.com, the high median of houses in listed right now is about $750,000 on the island. So, if you used a $750,000 home and that home qualifies for the $50,000 homestead
exemption, a rolled back will save the average person $5651 a year, which breaks out to about 11 cents, 12 cents a day.
If we adopt a rolled back, that reduction of millage will further widen the differential we're looking to close by 293,000. That will climb our differential to about 1.8 8 million.
If we maintain our rate budgeting at 96% and you have a $750,000 home, you will pay $72058 a year and that works out to about $1.97
a day in total tax, which is that 11.5 cents higher than if we were to go to rolled back. I have both features on this slide. So 1.0294 mills is 6.2% above the roll back
rate. It generates $293,000. To go above the rolled back rate, legislative changes require a 2/3 majority. And looking at the numbers, 2/3 majority can only approve up to 1.0655
mills. Anything beyond that requires a unanimous vote. Now the maximum millage rate we set the maximum millage rate as per July July 15th when the preliminary early budget was submitted
to council. That rate assumed that we would close the millillage completely with Worldback. That is prior to proposed budget adjustments, whether that be cost containment, non-millillage-based fees for service,
things like that. The revenues at the moment at 1.0294 mills without adjustments are forecasted about 12.681 million. The proposed budgets roughly 14.181
million which left the difference of 1.499 million. So just to go through the math very quickly the amount of 1.4499 million when budgeted per mill at 96%
means that we would have to go 31.06 mills above the 1.0294 I built the budget on. When you add 1.0294 10294 with 3106. That is how we got to 1.34 mills. Once more, that's the maximum
before any kind of cost containment, fee changes, anything like that occur. If we set 1.34 today, we will not legally ex exceed that rate. That is a cap. Anything below that is at the
discretion of town council. So, if we were to go to 1.34 mills on a4 million, sorry, 3/4 of a million dollar home with a $50,000 homestead exemption, that works out to about $938 a year,
$257 a day. And I've broken out the math on this slide so you can see what it would be above the roll back rate. Now, one thing I wanted to do this year just for information is provide some millillage benchmarking to see where we are lining up with all of our peers because it's important that our
residents, I think, get the best the best value, the lowest taxes possible. Now, these results are based on the last year of published information by the Florida Department of Revenue. These were the millages that all these jurisdictions adopted in 25, not the 26
that we're currently in. For the purposes of the analysis, I predicted that we would stay at a 1.0294 mills because I had to choose a starting point and I finished the analysis in late June of 26 and I updated it on July 1st when
our new taxable values came out. So the residents are in the bottom 5% millage of municipalities in the state.
374 out of 393 Florida municipalities in 25 charged a higher millage than the town does. Only 19 municipalities in total and several of them are equal to one another. That's the difference between the two. But only 19 municipalities
charged less than 1.0294 mills. So we are in the bottom five percentile. So what does the average town charge? The statewide average mean is five. The median is 5.2.
We are less than one quarter of the average Florida municipality to maximize taxpayer value. of the 374 jurisdictions. I listed some peers in here such as Santael and 25 was 2.5 mills, Marco
Island 1.267, Naples 1.23, Dest 1.615, Key West, Longboat Key etc. We are geographically we are closest to our post Ian Pier Santael yet our rate
is 59% below theirs. Now there are some communities in our area that are applying less mills. Asterero which has an unincorporated style of limited services is 73 mills and Bonita Springs which is 847 mills
with a larger commercial tax base than we have on this island. So as you can see below that trying to find people who were close peers. It is a southwest Florida common theme where Southwest Florida communities typically
keep relatively low millages. So one thing that we have in common with our peers here is we have very high property values which allows us to generate sufficient revenues on lesser mills. We have a relatively limited and lean municipal service model.
We are still in hurricane recovery mode so we are able to rely on things such as the bridge loan in years past. And our low policy rate is policydriven not necessarily a function of a higher tax base. Now, I did want to look at some of our
Gulf Coast peer barrier islands. Um, we were lower than all of those that you see up on the board now. Um, significantly lower in many cases. And when I looked at the Florida Keys,
Southern Florida in general, we are lower than all of our peers there. Now, one thing to keep in mind is when I just look at coastal communities, coastal communities are average charging about 3.1 mills.
Now, why we're low is that we have been able to rely on a healthy charges for service model. We have been receiving um a number of grants such as from TDC to offset beach renourishment CDBG to help with some of
the construction projects around here. So we have not been raising mills to run a lot of these capital projects on the front end. And one unfortunate thing with our current model is posting recovery, as anyone who was devastated by a hurricane
will attest, does impact your taxable value and growth because things that are demolished, it's terrible, but they cannot pay into our tax base. So there is some rate headroom. And the only thing I mean by headroom is that
per Florida statute you can charge up to 10 mills. So we have if we had to go up there is upward room. There are many towns who are already maxed at 10 ms or close to 10 ms.
And if we were to adopt those I listed the three common averages and how that would impact our budget. Not suggesting we go to them, just saying if we took on someone else's taxation model, that's what the revenues would yield.
And at the time of this report, we had only collected about 4.46 million of our budgeted 4.628. So we are still as you can see in a bit
of a millillage underperformance based largely upon the hurricane. Now in conclusion once more to clarify if the rate is set at 1.34 today it is a cap on maximum
millillage. It will not exceed that. 100% of millage collected from town residents goes directly back to the town residents. We do need to set follow-up meetings for
September 9th and 23rd at 5:00 p.m. The reason we select those dates is our meetings must follow the counties and the school board's meetings. So, with that,
that concludes my presentation. >> Will, do you have anything to add to that before we go to questions or >> um I'll I'll go ahead and just open it up for questions at this time and I think some of your questions may get to some of what you want to hear from me or I can but >> councelor Mlan, how about we'll start
with you. >> Uh, thank you very much, Jeffrey. I was wondering if you could comment a little bit further on the 86.3% uh that had been recovered and or collected. Um you said the reason for that was post Ian recovery still but
that would have been year-over-year change right the budget from last year to what was collected this year >> that was this current fiscal year's budget so just it was FY26 budget if we looked at the millillage that was
adopted >> versus what was collected we're only at collecting at about 86% of mills >> but that doesn't have anything to do with a timing or months left in the fiscal year or anything. I'm trying to understand the cause for it.
>> So, typically when we do a millillage, we start receiving the majority of our payments. The first large payment we receive is normally in fiscal year starts October 1. First large payment, medium size comes in November. Then you typically have a big December payment
and then a smaller January payment. And then by the time you get to the spring, it really starts to taper off. And by the summer, you're really not collecting mills. This is often when people have to settle upon the sale of property. So, I don't think we'll move much off that
86%. >> I'm still not understanding why it's >> If Jeffrey, I think it it it's because there's default in there. There's other reasons why people aren't paying into people that are not paying the taxes that are
>> correct through the I was trying to get to. Right. >> Sorry. And that's remitted to us directly by the tax collector. We're not involved in those collections. >> Okay. >> And so what was the number you told us as well? You don't you don't ever use 100% because you know there's going to be
some defaulting taxpayers. What was it compared to what we are having? >> We set ours at 96%. >> 96. And so we're at >> age 10% cap. >> Yep. So that's folks who live here not paying their property taxes >> historically. What's a rolling average
or say that maybe you don't have that like five or 10 years? What is a of of that percentage? Is it that why it was at 96% or why it is at 96%. Or are we just doing it year-over-year and we're not adjusting that 96%. >> So
I have not worked in the past. I would have to run our past numbers budget to actuals which I can gladly do given a little bit of time. Um what I will say having worked for other municipalities um that were not damaged by the hurricane during that period many of
them are collecting right at 100%. >> I can say last year we also set it at about 96%. Right. But that's as far back as I can talk on. >> That makes sense. For budgeting purposes, we anticipate >> only bringing in about 90.
>> You cannot underbudget less than 95% collection. You can budget up to 100, >> but not less than 95 and that's per state statute. >> That's very, very helpful. Thank you. >> What else you got, John? Any >> I'm mulling that one over,
Rebecca? I want to understand the roll back rate a little more. Is that saying well I'll just let you explain because I'm thinking of it is that's if we wanted to have the same u numbers that that's what that roll back rate is. Can
you explain that to me and to anyone else listening? >> Sure. So the rolled back rate is designed to be with government effectively being bringing in the same amount of numbers plus new growth that has occurred during that year. So the
reason our numbers are so close to last year's and that we're not coming in with a number suffic you know 86% of that is we have seen significant new growth on the island that's just being factored in for the first time. Um the biggest the biggest change is
that they're no longer applying that Florida income. So normally they'd get to that final number. They'd multiply it by 1.0 whatever and that would be the rolled back. So this year we've seen a decent
amount of new growth that's paying taxes for the first time and that's what's bumped that number up. Thank you. >> Anything else? >> That's it, >> Scott. >> I appreciate your comparisons with other
coastal communities, but I I I've got a feeling we're comparing apples to oranges because a lot of these communities have fire, they have police. Have you looked at communities like ours that that don't have either and how we compare to them other than Astero?
>> So I have not gone on a community by community amenities list. I can gladly do that if that is the council's direction and report back to you on as close to a peer-to-peer as we can get. Um, yeah, because I I you know, just
with Santa, I I know they've got police, right? >> And and fire, >> fire. >> And fire. So, I I would imagine there's just would would be more just because of of all those other amenities that they provide
>> admittedly. So, and I will do my best to get that information pending the next meeting for you. >> Okay. Thank you. That's all I have. John. >> Well, I guess I'm not sure if if this is where we're going to start drilling down on all the numbers we've received in the
last couple weeks or not. So, I guess if somebody can help me understand that because I've got a lot of questions about the information we've been provided since the 15th. >> Yeah, go ahead. >> Okay. Where do we expect to end our fiscal year this year? I'd have to see what our taxes are
leaning to. Not tax, excuse me. A lot of our fees for service do come in stronger leading into September because we have the return of tourists to the season. Right now, I think we're tracking largely with our historicals. I will
tell you in a first pass that instead of needing roughly 2 million projected from the bridge fund as we would have done in prior years to close next year, we're only looking at about 680,000. So things like parking are coming in
much stronger than they have in recent past years. So I'd like to say we're on pretty good financial footing. I would just need to take a few minutes to go through and give you an exact number on that.
>> Okay. Because now I'm I'm I guess I'm confused about a lot of things, but that's normal for me. But um on the letter, the memo we got from the town manager on the 15th, the shortfall was going to be projected at 629,030.
You say that's going to be covered by the bridge loan. Correct. that for FY27. That's what we're planning on assessing against the bridge loan. Yes. >> Okay. How much is remaining of the bridge loan after that? >> Uh if we take that money out, off top of
my head, it'll be about $6.7 million somewhere in that approximate area. >> Okay. But now we have as of the 30th of July, we had a budget gap of almost 1.5 million. I I guess I'm confused. the the
the letter that I the letter that I sent councelor king on on the 15th uh the the total in that letter was 1.499 499. There were two numbers in the in the narrative of my letter. One was a short, you know, uh drawing from the bridge
loan which would draw us down by 600 some thousand and the other one was another >> I don't have in front of me right now, but they were there were two large kind of reasons identifying for that shortfall. But then the total at if you
went down to the end of the uh of the tables that identified the the 1.49. So, one thing with the bridge loan is the bridge loan can only be used to balance based on the historicals for the last year prior to the hurricane and we cannot pull additional revenues or
offset re increased expenses beyond that out of the bridge loan. So, the bridge loan is just a revenue offset in just the categories of what they were the year before the hurricane. >> Yes. So, I guess what I'm saying is it it it hasn't changed since the July 15th
uh proposed budget. Uh it's we're still basing our forecasting and our our budgeting off of that same number. I just want to jump in before we move on from the I you're fairly new Jeff. I don't know
that I 100% agree with the number that you said that's still available on the bridge loan simply from what the discussions have happened in the past on what's available of that original 11.9. you you seem pretty conf are you confident that it's 6 million that's still left. I believe it's I believe
it's less than that based on previous years but I just want to give you an opportunity to get that information so that you have it available accurate numbers when we and maybe that one is accurate but I my recollection is that there's less than that available. >> I can get the most up-to-date
information here momentarily if you'd like it. >> Well, I I just don't want people coming after you saying that you you gave out a wrong number. I want to give you the opportunity to give out the exact number so that to answer councelor King's question >> everybody knows exactly what it is. >> We'll have it before the end of the meeting.
>> Okay. For sure. >> Go ahead council. >> Thank you. Okay. Uh drilling down a little further. I see we had a a council category, a town council category and the SP and it was an increase of $105,330. What's included in that category of town
council? Just one moment, please. I can pull it up in just a minute. I do know that there are around $10,000 of consulting fees that go into that um for a study. There is also um a lot of
that goes to an increase in the amount of money that has been paid to a lobbyist that is just mirroring what we are currently spending this fiscal year. So that's what is driving council. >> Okay. We have books, publications, and uh subscriptions of $2,600. What are we
getting for that? >> Well, I do believe that those also include uh some of the membership fees off the top of my head. And I know some membership fees have gone up. I would need to get access to my laptop to answer it at a greater granularity. >> Okay. And our executive salaries went up
about $1,400. That's just town council pay. Or what else is included in that? >> Um that I believe would be the the pay portion of it. I would have to look a little closer. >> Okay. Um,
our life and health went up about um $42,000. That that's just for covering counselors. >> And I would need to look if I may get access to my laptop real quick. I can provide you >> the granularity you're seeking.
Then we have something else that just says insurance at $26,600. I guess I'm not sure what life and health and what other insurance would there be. >> I believe that's I believe the insurance part is actual physical insurance for
many of our buildings. Insurance. >> Well, this is under the town council category. >> I'll pull that up for you. Just give me Second. Well, maybe while Jeff's looking at that, you can sure you can fill in some of the the issues that you had related
to us for areas that you're looking to use proposed money that would be included in that 1.5 million that we're discussing, what it is your initiatives would be for that funding should it be approved. >> Yeah, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
top priorities I identified I've identified to date um for budgeting purposes. You know, first would be uh to continue to replenish our emergency reserves. Um we've we've been efforting to do that since I got here and even
before. Um and at times uh we've had to transfer money out out of that uh for different emergency reasons uh to fund things in anticipation of reimbursements. It's pretty common to do that in practice, but we try not to do it unless we have to. So, I'd like to further replenish that fund uh to have
it truly be an emergency reserve uh when needed. Uh others is for the another priority there and these are in no particular order just of course because that'll be the order of these will be determined as I continue to go through the budgeting and as directed by council. Uh but the we'll be for the new
positions we've identified in the next budget spec mostly uh with bringing the new pool online staff for the new pool. Uh we're going to require supervisor lifeguards and etc for that. So we've had those positions kind of unpaid you
know un uh um resourced on the books for a while but we're going to need to resource them not until about halfway through the year is what we're ant Jeff is anticipating at this point but we still need to plan for that. Uh next would be uh matching funds for appropriations. Uh last year we didn't
have a whole lot that we could allocate to that. So in return we did receive thankfully to our legislators a couple of good uh state appropriations. But uh in conversations with uh with Ron Ron Book and associates, you know, they're confident they could have gotten us more
if we would have been able to match more. >> So I' I'd like to be able to increase those matching funds if we can. And then uh something that's been a priority I know for a long time is is canal dredging here on the island uh to get us in a position where we could actually um
apply for grants or um maybe go through a different special taxing um type of um proposal in the future to pay for that. we first have to do a study, do a findings of necessity type study uh to determine what the actual scope and cost of that and that you know roughly we
antic we estimate around a couple hundred,000 for that type of a study to be done uh appropriately. Those right now are my four priorities uh for using that and and that uh but again as we go through I started uh couple of weeks ago if I can continue a little bit Mr. Man,
we started a couple of weeks ago with the uh >> with the staff like I did last year with twice a week budget workshops. The staff uh gets together and crunches the numbers, goes through every line item as Mr. King is asking now. We're going through every line item and uh making
sure that we're appropriately uh forecasting what we need in there and what we can, you know, rightfully make efficiencies on. Either move to another uh another revenue to fund it or uh you know, freeze positions or or hold off on
certain projects uh in order to try and bring that number, you know, down of of what we need. and then uh also adjusting fees as we go through this whole thing that we'll propose to council during the budget hearings to try and clo bring that revenue gap up. So to try to close
that gap and uh so they first the staff will go through that in early part of the week and then they brief me towards the end of the week um items for decisions and they'll make those decisions and we'll move on. We've already made significant progress in this in this effort. My my goal is that
we you know we don't have to uh go to our residents and ask them for for more uh than we absolutely need. That's always my goal. So uh if we last year we were able to close that gap with uh with what the council approved and that'll be we'll do the same thing this year with whatever the council does approve. Uh it
just based on what that number is going to be might uh change some of those priorities a little bit. >> Thank you. Will I have a question for you if I may? If we have emergency reserves, if I can understand this qu uh
correctly. We will use that emergency reserve fund to house money that we will have to outlay for a grant that we may wait for years
or a year to get refunded. Is is that a correct understanding? There have been times when you know we the finance director has had to you know move move funds um you know within our general fund uh to cover some expenses
when we know there's a reimbursement coming um and Jeffrey can talk we help me talk through this issue a little bit about how we manage that the general fund with the additional funds there Jeffrey >> because what what I'm aware of is um in
my practice with other federal funds is it is very difficult for entities like ourselves or I work with school districts to put out the money upfront because they have to they have to pay for it first and then they get reimbursed. So it's basically you better
already have the money if you want our money >> because you're going to spend it and we give it back to you. That is >> so we need to have some money to spend in order to get it back. It's so when we're getting funds, they don't just come out of the sky. We have to pay for
them first and then get them back. Do we sometimes use that emergency fund as a place to say we're holding these because we know we're going to have to pay for these things that eventually the grant will reimburse us for? >> Yes, that is correct. >> Okay. So if we don't have those funds in
there, we will not be able to use the free money that would eventually come to us in some cases. >> That is correct. But some of those funds are leveraged currently on a variety of outstanding grants pending reimbursement at completion of work. >> Right. Thank you. >> Well, I think a perfect example of that,
we're all familiar with Helen and Milton >> wasn't what we weren't expecting to have to clean those roads again twice. funding had to be spent that we hopefully get back from those two storms versus what we did after Hurricane Ian. So, that's an example of money that has
to be expended from a town through potentially emergency funds to be able to get the island back open >> and then submit those funds for mitigation later. >> Just wanted to give that as an example because people >> I think it's a perfect example twice. Yeah. >> So then when those funds come back to
us, >> do we then decide what we want to do with them? they stay in the emergency fund or some of them can go to the general fund or some of them can be you know put in a portfolio that can gain us interest. Are we required to take those reimbursements and direct them to
certain places once they are they are uh received by the town? >> Um reimbursements once we receive them back if we typically return them to whichever fund they originated from. So, for instance, if we use the water fund to help offset the construction costs by
fronting the money for a major water project, if that water project is like CDBG, where we do get the money back, we would then use that grant to reimburse the fund balance for that. So, I mean, we're not I don't
want to say we're not making a profit off these funds, but it's one of those where we use the money where it's available >> where it's available >> where we're allowed to statutoily use it to allow us to leverage those grant funds. But, you know, you hit the nail on the head. It's waiting to get the
money back from >> It is waiting. Yes. >> And as well with the the matching, if we don't have the matching, we don't get the money. if we can't prove we have the matching funds. So, it's a it's a big risk.
Thank you. >> And I guess just moving forward, it looks like you've got your computer up and councelor King has got some questions. I I don't know if this is the And I know Scott's got more questions, too. I don't know if this is the form to go line by line because you're still working on the actual budget that you're
going to present in September. So, I don't know that it's fair to staff to be able to give ask a specific line by line item of what each thing is. That's what we'll cover in September. Um, but overall, I think it's important some of your questions, John.
>> But I I don't know that this is the place. If this what you choose to do, I'm certainly okay with it. I just if we go line by line item of of one specific category, we're going to be doing it again in September because it's going to change. Yeah, mayor. I understand what
you're saying, mayor, but these were laid out in a category. I think there should have been explanations with them when the information was provided and now you're asking for an increase in something. I think it needs to be in my mind justified and or at least understood.
>> 100% agree. I'm not disagreeing with that point. All I'm trying to say is this is this is to set it a ceiling budget number, not not this is what the number is going to be, but >> I understand that too, but to me that needs to be justified if we're going to
raise a ceiling. >> Ask away. >> Can I ask a question? >> Certainly. same question that the mayor asked because I I remember almost vividly in our audit committee
meetings that we hit I know for sure we drew over $3 million in fiscal year 23. I thought in 24 and 25 we drew close to three million all all three of those years. So, I I have always been running
of of the bridge loan and you had said there's $6 million. I I think it's $2 million. Can you verify that for us, please? >> Sure. Just give me one second to pull up the bank. >> Okay. >> Will said he was working on that. They get that he could get that to >> We'll get that. Definitely. No, I think I I I believe you're all right, too. I
just want to give him a chance. He can pull up the actual loan. >> No, this is good. This is good. >> This is great discussion. >> Yeah, that's that's a big number there. It's really important. >> I think that one of the differences is although we were budgeted 2 million in excess of 2 million to pull from the
bridge loan during this fiscal year, we have not yet had to pull that money out. So my number I'm being optimistic and hoping we don't have to draw on our bridge loan necessarily this year. >> Well, I hope so. I mean, I think we all hope that, right? >> So, let me get you the exact dollar
amount. It'll take me just a few moments. >> Okay. Thank you. >> That's a good point you just said there, Jeeoff. I guess I'd missed that on you of what was budgeted to come out of the bridge loan last year. You have not the town has not pulled that number out yet is basically what you're said >> for FY2. Correct. >> Okay.
>> And that's you know >> that will that will skew a number >> what I sent >> sorry what I sent on July 15th as I discussed is what we're proposing for our FY27 budget. Absolutely fair you know ask ask all the questions about why we are projecting certain things and
proposing you know certain things in the budget. uh it helps give us some, you know, um kind of direction on where I think you're you're wanting us to go. So, I'm all for it. >> Will, do you mind if I ask you? >> Not at all. >> Um
>> to understand the emergency fund where that is. I don't the land item that's one of the priorities is the matching funds and I think we've shown that where we have capacity to make the matches to every all the discussion that's been having we're successfully gating those
and those are opportunities that we would not have. I'm not sure where that where is that account or line item in the budget. Is it in in what area is it or is it spread throughout
the various >> departments? Okay. I I see >> emergency fund. >> I see where you're >> separate from the emergency fund, right? The emergency fund and the matching funds were two of the priorities that you made. That's two different >> It's it would be spread out through
different funds. is our water fund, storm water, uh well water fund and others as well. But I'll I'll give you a better answer on on kind of where we're projecting in the needs for those where we would have proposed them and where the different departments would have proposed them on. >> Okay. So they are but they're not a line item. They're spread within the
different departments. >> That is correct. Now I understand. Thank you. >> John, continue. I tell you, um, in the interest of time, I guess what I'm willing to do is sit down in my weekly meetings with, uh, staff, go over the
questions I have to get the answers that I would like to see, and then, uh, we don't have to go back and forth and back and forth and then different questions coming in. So, I'm willing to do that um, in the interest of time. But um I I
will just say this that next year the state is going to require us to conduct a budget reduction exercise to identify strategies to reduce proposed spending by 10%. I would hope we're going to look at that before September and include that in the exercise because I think
that would be healthy because it's going to be mandated next year >> if I can. Yeah. So I I appreciate that councelor King and you're exactly right and that's the the exercise that I did last year that I'm doing this year. We will replicate that next year in a but
we will hold it you know at least one or more of those maybe even all of them in public as directed by the thing. So it's I think it's a terrific exercise to have. I think them setting a a 10% goal is good because then it forces you to to go for a specific target. Um, so we're
doing that, rest assured. And every week, yeah, absolutely. In our one-on- ones, um, I'm we're going to be going through those all those lines that we're looking at to, uh, make reduct make efficiencies, reductions, or or whichever. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thanks.
>> Yeah, John, I want to I I don't want you to think this my comments were about in the essence of time, I'll stay here till midnight if we have to. That's >> No, no, I did. >> My I I'm just trying to be fair to staff. I I don't know that Jeff was equipped to answer every single line item in in the budget at this point. And
then I'm just trying to be fair to staff to allow them to be able to answer your questions in front of everybody so that he at least has the answers ready or is prepared. And I'm not I don't want to speak for you, Jeff, but the look on your face was like, I wasn't really expecting to answer a specific specific line items as we went.
>> And I'm and I'm I understand that and I'm not trying to embarrass anybody, but I didn't come up with these categories. I didn't fill in these amounts. Somebody did. They should be able to justify it in my opinion. >> Fair enough. Yes. >> All right. So, uh, let me answer answer several different questions that have
been asked. >> You can you don't have to answer mine right now. We'll do it >> oneonone. Hopefully, maybe you can be brought in on those as well. >> Sure. >> All right. >> And then we can air it publicly when we need to. >> Okay. >> Thank you.
>> Would you like the answer for the bridge loan or >> No, that's not my question. Yeah. So, I'd sure like to know >> the bridge loan current balance is uh 7.574 million. Um we earn approximately 21
$22,000 of interest on that per month. That's one reason it's a moving target of which we were allowed to take out just a little bit more than $2 million this year, but we have yet to do the transfer. Um it's a loan, so you don't want to draw on it, I don't think, unless you
absolutely have to draw on it. to meet operating. A lot will depend on as we get closer to the end of the fiscal year if we have sufficient liquidity to do it, but it is there as an option. Um, so that number does sit at 7.5
million. And >> I would anticipate why you might be, you know, scratching your head is because in pre I'm I'm imagining what I'm thinking back to and I wasn't here before or last year as you all know, but um Joe or the other previous finance directors and town managers might have asked for
certain levels of withdrawal and like this past year or this year FY26 didn't have to draw that entire amount. Would that be a fair prime assumption, Jeffrey? You think? >> Yes. That's good. That's actually really good news cuz I I know >> at $3 million
>> first year I know we took that >> a little over 3 million. >> Yes, that was taken. There have been two significant withdrawals. I want to say off the top of my head it was a little more than 3 million and then like 2.6 million the next year. Okay. >> And then for this fiscal year you approved another 2 million, a little bit more than that. That draw hasn't
happened yet. >> Okay. Well, that's that's good to know. I I appreciate that. That'll that's great. >> Well, and and since we're on the bridge alone, just for clarity, and you I don't I don't expect you to know this number, but >> maybe you do know the number of what you
said 7 whatever has been expended. >> 74 >> 74 >> 5 >> is the balance. >> Is the balance or what's been drawn down? I think the balance is less than 7 million. I think it was said wrong. I think we've drawn down 7.5 million. You're right. But the balance would be
>> No, no, no. You're right. as as today we have seven and a half million >> available of the bridge to use available the bridge loan >> not ignoring LA last this current fiscal year's commitment of 2 million
>> we have a current bank balance of 7.574 million in the bank as of this moment >> but in the bank or the bridge loan there's two different things because we use we use revenue replacement money to go into the bank to replace the revenue venue or the bridge loan. Are you
referring to that number or are you referring to the actual bridge loan itself? >> I'm referring to when revenue replacement has been used to alleviate the bridge loan. The the bank account titled bridge loan
with the revenue replacement monies that have flowed around sets at 7.5 million as of right now. Now, I'm looking at the books. I believe revenue replacement is largely exhausted because that was a lesser amount.
But right now on our bridge loan account as of itself, we have that's 7.5 million. >> Doesn't seem right. >> And I I apologize. I wasn't here for any of those other meetings or presentations. >> No, no, no. That's
>> that's why we're having this discussion because >> we're having a discussion. We got to be on the same page. >> Yeah. What has been drawn down from the 11.9 and what is actually sitting in the bank, at least my understanding over the last two years have been two separate things. The loan is if you need to bring
it down, but there was money, at least my recollection of the last couple meetings is there was money. >> Yeah, but it's revenue replacement. >> Yeah, but revenue replacement came as an appropriation from the state that went into an account. And I'm just trying to recollect what I remember from the past budget meetings over the last four
years. >> Yeah. the 7 whatever million it was that we had gotten revenue replacement from the state went into an account to be repaid for the bridge loan should we have to draw down on the bridge loan and I'm trying to remember what Joe said last year but what we were roughly going to be with this 2 million which it
sounds like we haven't drawn down about 9 whatever million but of which we had the close to the number you said in an account to pay back that 9 million that we had drawn down on so that's where into September I'd like some clarification so that the public understands because if I'm not understanding it,
then certainly the public's not understanding it. And I want to make sure that those two numbers, as I remember them being discussed, are accurate. What what we've actually drawn down from the bridge loan, what we actually have sitting in the bank to pay back that bridge loan, and what what's
that difference? And this the first I've heard that we had drawn down on the 2 million that we budgeted last year, which is to your point great news. Um, but it goes into I think the further discussion that councelor King is trying to to trying to nail down is where can
we make some efficiencies so that >> our taxpayers aren't paying more than they have to. >> Absolutely. >> Hopefully I said it well enough. >> Anything else, John? >> No, thank you. >> Okay. Anybody else? John?
>> No, I'm fine. >> Rebecca, >> I'm fine. Thank you. >> Yeah, you're good. Thanks, Jeff. Sorry your first meeting. You >> welcome. >> Welcome. >> Um Dick Skin. >> Yeah. >> I would prefer to always work for a council that's very involved and is
looking to save the taxpayers money than one that just doesn't chew on anything. And thank you for giving me clarification and I will do my best to have those lineby line answers for you as we come into the first and second September budget meetings. So, thank you for your attention to detail and your
time. >> Thank you, John. Thank you. >> Will, do you have anything else you'd like to add? >> No, nothing further uh to add at this time. Thank you. >> Okay. If there's no further discussion, is there a motion on res >> public comment? >> Uh it's administrative agenda. We don't
need public comment. >> You should still have public comment >> on all of the administrative >> on Yes. >> Okay. Then we'll open it up for public comment. Anybody like to speak on agenda item A for the proposed maximum millage rate?
Seeing none, we'll close public comment. Any more discussion? If no discussion, is there a motion? Anyone? All right. I will make a motion to approve the 1.34 maximum allowable millage rate
requested by town staff to be turned over to the state for tomorrow. uh with the hopes that we can uh get that number significantly lower. Okay, we got a motion. Is there a second?
>> I'll second that motion, Mr. Mayor, just to keep the process rolling with the full understanding that we'll be looking for cost reductions and balance budgets that are supported. >> Okay, got a motion and a second. Any further discussion?
Uh I'm an I. Councelor Mlan >> I. >> Councelor Link >> I. >> Vice Mayor Saffford. >> I. >> Councelor King. >> No. >> The motion carries 4 to one. >> Brings us to our next item which is resolution 26-167 establishment of six ad hoc committees
to assist in the preparation of a charter school application. This is a resolution of the town council of the town of Fort Myers Beach, Florida, establishing six ad hoc committees to assist in the preparation of a charter school application pursuant to section 10002.33
Florida statutes and rule 6A-6.0786 Florida administrative code providing for committee duties membership and duration providing an effective date. Will >> thank you Mr. Mayor. Yeah, really excited about this one. Um myself and and the deputy town manager have
listened a lot to our community and our counselors on uh definitely the the interest and the motivation for bringing the school back, but but really a lot of the hard questions about how are we going to do that and what is it going to cost and how are we going to staff it
and run it and just all those very good and uh uh important questions and uh Tracy and the staff have come up with a novel and I think great solution for us to uh move forward in that direction. So, I'll turn it over to Tracy.
>> Thank you. Will council, today we are asking you to consider the creation of six ad hoc committees. Um these would be voluntary nonpaid uh committee members who are willing to serve on these committees as advisors to
the town council as we helped write the charter school application. It is quite extensive. It is quite detailed. Everything from governance to the education curriculum, the operations, community engagement, facilities, human
resources and of course finance. So we are looking for those experts in their fields who are local residents and other interested parties to come forth and apply to be on one of these six committees. And committees will go on as long as they need to go on. I don't
anticipate anything longer than 6 months, but as you know, the charter application goes through council for approval to move forward. Should it move forward, the school district would then review, come back with questions and answers. So those committees would last until the application has been accepted
by Lee County School District or until the time the council has decommissioned the ad hoc committees. So we are again looking forward to your direction on how to move forward with the charter school application, the creation of the six ad hoc committees and should that be
approved, we will move forward with advertising immediately and look forward to the applications coming in for your appointment um September 23rd at your next meeting and we'll accept applications through September 10th. Those two committees would also be
subject to sunshine law. Um, so their meetings would be held in public. >> Um, and as well as the public records law, uh, they would not be required to file a form one. >> Thank you, Nancy. In addition to that, we will be having a sunshine law training the beginning of October for
all those members who are appointed by you and we will send out the links to those members who are not able to attend the inperson meeting. >> Councelor Qu King, questions for >> I'm sorry, what? you.
>> No, I just got demoted to queen. It sounded like >> Steve >> from King. >> Yeah. >> Um I think this is an an excellent opportunity to to utilize the talent on this island to help in this long drawn
out process. I know how just talking with you how intense this is. Um, my only suggestion would be, and I think I've made this to you before, is uh, look for help for facilitating these groups. Um, maybe FGCU, FSW
folks, uh, kind of like the folks we had for the strategic plan to help us keep us on task. Those kind of things that uh, will be very important for for mixed group. >> Thank you for that suggestion, Councelor King. Scott,
>> you did a fantastic job with this. Two two questions. Well, maybe two comments. Well, one question, one comment. I think John's right on point. I think you might want to call FGCU. We had discussed this with u you doing the charter review.
Perhaps getting a professor or or maybe a grad student or you know, some type of intern to get younger eyes on on this. So that that's a suggestion. One question I have, when do we decide who's
going to be the liaison for for these six committees? >> We can have that discussion at any time that Nancy thinks it's appropriate. Once we establish the six committees, then we can determine which one of the counselors may want to recommend. Right
now the the makeup is three um appointed members from the town council, a town clerk office member as well as a town staff. So if you would like to be a member of each one of these ad hoc committees, it's certainly something that's in your purview to discuss but is
not required at this time. I also think to your point about having some facilitators. I also think we have some really great community members who might be good facilitators as well when they come to be chairs. So I think that will be evident quickly whether we need some
additional help to help guide those individual ad hoc committees. >> Yeah. I mean when when you first came out with this list I was like oh I know somebody perfect for this for this for this. So, you know, I I think it's going to be great from a community perspective if we can get as as many people involved
and and, you know, use our beaches talent. There's a lot of talented people out there. So, I commend you. This is a job well done. Thank you, >> Rebecca. >> I do love this idea, Tracy, about having the community involved in helping us
decide. If it was just a yes or no, I think we all know where we'd come down. Um, but it's looking at and figuring out um, can we do it? Do we have the community support? Would we, you know, what would it cost? What I'd like to see
is some framework within the committees that we say, we're looking to you to provide us a range. I know different times when I say to Tracy, what do you think a school would cost us? You know, well, that's like saying, what do you think a car is going to cost you? Do you
want a Volkswagen or do you want a, you know, a Ferrari? So, I think it would be great if these committees looked at it with a range in mind. Here is a low end of the range. We could get by on this money or we could if we were best in
breed of everything, it would cost us this. That way, again, when we come to deciding if we can do it, maybe our school, if we're able to, it grows and gets better in time. Maybe we use different strategies in the first five years than we do as things go on. But if
they're also looking at not just best in breed, but how can we save money as we bootstrap ourselves for a few years? So I'd be looking for a range from their deliverable as well. But nice work, Tracy. I love it. >> Thank you. Um that's an excellent point
uh counselor link. When I've worked with Jeffrey, we kind of started at a baseline of what the beach school had basically when I was there as the principal at the time, having combined grade levels, ensuring that with growing student numbers, we start with the most
conservative outlook, right, >> financially and then grow from there. So we do have some baseline that uh Jeffrey has been working on as a starting point so you can get that range of a fully staffed school versus perhaps when you just start off what the minimum >> right
>> staffing numbers may be >> or if you're looking at different curriculum types maybe new books every year cost this or digital that >> thank you exciting >> council m >> yeah no I'm also I think there's a
couple of things number one we do have so much talent in this town that and so much spirit in the town that wants to actually apply that talent. It's one thing to have the talents. It's another thing to actually step up and and participate. So I think that's just
that's on its own is fantastic. It fulfills two goals which is one completing an application which is something that's necessary to determine whether or not it is feasible and we can go forward. It
also sets the various operational education all of the areas that you've outlined of to your point the what do we start with and how do we grow into it. Um I guess I I see the workflow as it
each of the committee meetings come in, they flow through you, they flow through the consultant. Um, I'm I'm wondering if there is an opportunity to once these committees
are all staffed to to have some sort of kickoff to give them like a common vision and a goal of what we're really trying to get accomplished here. and because I think we'll get leadership in each of these different areas
and I think that the operational model will grow out of that but I think we we need to almost come together in what is the starting point we know what the goal is we know what the end point the deliverable is but kind of what's the
model to bring it all together is what I'm saying >> totally get what you're saying for example I know that this community is very focused on a marine and a STEM focus, right? And so understanding water quality that that might be the
educational turn that we go, which we as a as a beach community had started previously with a water-wise program, understanding that that might be our focus marine-wise that will help then generate the curriculum and it kind of rolls on from there with our partnerships. We had a great partnership
with the Moundhouse. There were just all these other connections we could make. >> Yeah, it's areas that we can differentiate our charter school versus any other competing school in the area. Right. That's from that perspective >> what can make us unique. >> It's wonderful. Yeah.
>> Thank you. >> I guess it's a couple things. I'm I'm hoping we won't just We keep talking about the community, but the goal of trying to get the school back was to bring people from outside the community that work within the community to be part of the school. I I would hope we
don't close it off to say there's a human resource person that has kids that works at Diamond Head who, you know, is a human resource director but would love to be part of this but doesn't live on the island but wants to bring their kids here. I would I would hope we'd at least leave it open to the possibility of someone outside the community that maybe
works within the community that can bring kids in to be part of this that may be, you know, experts in each one of these categories that you have here. So, I'd hope we keep an open mind on that. And then the discussion that you brought up, Scott, about having council liaison for each one of these. Do you feel as a
staff that that's necessary? Do you think would it be more beneficial to have a council member as a liaison to each one of these or would it be more beneficial to not have us involved? >> Gosh, that's a good question. I feel like there's a lot of expertise and because this will be a out in the open
sunshine kind of committee, a counselor certainly could be present. We could advertise if more than one counselor is present at any one of these meetings. Um I know you all are very busy as well. So flexible to open it up. Do I think it's
necessary? No. We can always give reports and updates if needed like other committees do. We're happy to do that. >> Well, I guess I'll just rely on fellow council to decide if it's something that we feel it's important >> to to have a member at each one of
these. I mean, there's an odd, you know, there's there's more committees than there are council members. So, someone would have to be >> multiple. Yeah. >> I I just my personal I guess my instinct is to say let the the assist let the experts that are going to be on these
committees and the staff work through the information, providing updates, you know, but if my fellow counselors think it's important, I'll certainly be involved any way I can to >> I think I'm with you, mayor. Um I think maybe at times we could probably be intimidating to those committees because
we all are liaison to committees as well. Uh you talk about staff committee reports but we all sit on those committees as liaison. Um so I I think um let's let the experts run with it and then report back is where I'm
comfortable. >> Scott, what are your two cents? >> I'm fine either way. Rebecca, >> I I I see your point though, you know, maybe we let these guys run and they flow the information up to us. >> I'm okay with that,
>> Rebecca. >> Yeah. Or even allow for the flexibility. Let's say if at one point they feel they needed them or needed someone in a particular group. Maybe it's not all of them. >> Okay. >> I don't know if that's a possibility. Um, and would we have the time in the
calendar? There aren't very many free days in the week that six meetings could be held. Amy, I can't imagine. >> We will find time for >> We'll figure it out. Yeah, we we looked closely at the calendar even to get our sunshine turned. >> And then the other thing I would say would be that it would have to be I'm
assuming during the day even though some of our committee members may not be able to join people we'd like to because they were and so >> yeah, we'll have to set the schedule based. For example, thinking off the top of my head, if we had an educator join the education portion, come October,
they perhaps may be teaching in the classroom. So, it might be that >> five:00 time frame >> before anyone could get here. So, I I think it's really flexible on each committee, >> but that would require you to have to have staff here. >> I would be here. I'm not not a problem. >> We'll make the right adjustments.
>> All righty. Thank you for that. >> Thank you. >> All right. I'm in agreement. I think that the committees should run autonomously and then come back and report and if there's a desire to change course then we can always do that but okay
>> just so I can get a clarification you said you make the adjustments so that would not necess excuse me necessitate overtime then correct >> because I most likely no >> okay >> but uh I >> I would hope we would look forward to
that >> absolutely I would want to follow the same. >> I get you. Thank you. >> All right. Public comment. Anybody want to say anything about No. All right. We'll close public comment. Is there a motion or if there's
no more discussion? Is there a motion for resolution 26-167 to establish six ad hoc committees to assist the preparation of school charter charter school application? >> So moved. >> Motion by councelor Kang. >> Second. Seconded by Vice Mayor Safford.
Any further discussion? Councelor King. >> I. >> Vice Mayor Safford. >> Hi. >> Councelor Link. >> I. >> Councelor Mlan. >> Hi. >> And I'm an eye as well. That motion carries unanimously. Next is resolution 26-1 155 for the 2027 FRACK participation.
This is a resolution of the town council of the town of Fort Myers Beach, Florida, authorizing the town manager to participate in the Florida Recovery Obligation Calculation FROCK program. authorizing the town manager or designate to execute and submit related documents needed to implement and administer the program including the
disaster readiness assessment and any post- disaster questionnaires and abatement activities providing for an effective date. Will >> thank you Mr. Mayor. The frack uh is by the Florida Division of Emergency Management FDM and standardizes, streamlines and simplifies the public
assistance process. uh it provides us with an opportunity for faster funding including uh you know category A debris removal, category B emergency protective measures and so on. Uh we participated in the beginning years of this and uh this is for a renewal for us to continue participation
into the next fiscal year uh and looking for council approval to do so. >> Okay, Council Mlean, any questions for Will? Uh, no. I think this is an example of where we lead in uh building resiliency
in in in the state of Florida. So, commend the town for doing this. >> Council Link. >> Yeah, I agree. I think this is um kudos to the folks in the town who have worked on this. This means that um the high score that we have means that we are the first to get money when we have a
disaster because of that high score. So, thank you for those who have worked really hard. Vice Mayor Safford, >> do we know what our our score was? >> If we don't, then >> Yeah, that was going to be my question. Have have Jeff >> Erock, come on. >> Jason, come on.
>> Jason, come on up. Jason Frock. >> Jason may have may have heard a story or two >> about what our score is. >> Uh, good afternoon, council. Jason Freeman for the record. Uh, yeah, so we we did get our final scores. I did want to say that we started uh so the first
part of the process is you fill out what they refer to as the uh disaster readiness assessment the DRRA and that's just when you submit all of your initial documentation and then FEM goes through and uh provides some suggestions to you on any ways that you might be able to improve or um you know strengthen your
policies and procedures. Uh we started it uh for category A at a 47 last year uh and category B which is emergency protective measures at a 45. Um, with the help of everybody this past year, we did get that score uh for category A
debris removal from a 47 to a 55. And we did get our category B emergency protective measure score uh from a 45 to a 56 and that's at a 60. So um we're we're almost there. Uh this year from what we heard was uh they added a lot
more questions into there. Uh so scores I don't think went up as much as in the previous years but uh through our abatement activities we did go up like I said from a 47 to a 55 and from a 45 to a 56 and I think we still rank it's very hard to find other uh municipality
scores. They don't really release those too much. Um but for what we can tell uh we're we're pretty high up there and we're already planning on addressing the couple things uh that we need to uh address moving forward. So I think we did uh we did pretty well at least from our vaping activities. got those scores
up and uh just as a reminder too for that uh those scores do translate to uh money upfront for us upon obligation. Uh so when an event is declared uh this is just from the FROCK website for everybody but uh once a storm is declared uh you know the event is
declared we request money um or so the town would submit a request for public assistance and then once that's approved uh we would submit through large non-expedited CAT A or CAT B projects uh our money would be paid out through that percentage. So, us having at that score
of a 55 and a 56 uh would equate to that 55% or 56% of money. Uh so, just as a um example for a large project cost, if we're talking a $10 million project, uh the town could get upon obligation more than $5.5 million um up front. So, I
think it's a pretty significant thing for us and it's a fun program. I think we've heard some changes already coming this year. Uh we'll get to dive into insurance a lot more this year um to help strengthen all that. So, look forward to participating hopefully if uh this resolution is approved for next year. So, for if anybody has any
questions, >> Jason, that has to be the first time I ever saw somebody get excited about the word insurance. >> Yeah, it's uh I'm I'm locked into the program now, but it's it's exciting with everybody's help and with Will and Tracy helping helping lead it and it's kind of those one of those things that every department has a little uh say in it.
So, it's really great working with everybody and I look forward to seeing how we can strengthen it. So, >> it's it's really great to have had, you know, to have the high score. great job by the whole team definitely to have the high score and what could result from that high score but there's also knock-on benefits of just improving our
overall systems and processes and policies you know by having to go through this >> you know to get that high score we've just we've improved things all across the organization so >> thanks Jason >> yeah thank you >> thank you Jason >> anything else Scott
>> no sir >> John >> uh no I just thanks Jason for all your hard work on this. It's um been great to see over the years the continual improvement that the town has done. Mr. Manager, Mr. Deputy Manager, thank you for your town staff's hard efforts on
this. Thank you. >> I have nothing else to add. I've beat this thing enough to death enough over the years. It's a it's a great program and and I'm glad to see the town is continuing to increase. So, is there public comment?
All right. Seeing no public comment, bring it back for discussion or a motion for resolution 26-155 for the 2027 FRACK participation. >> So moved. >> Second. >> And a motion by councelor Mlan. Seconded by councelor Link. Any further
discussion? Councelor Mlan. >> I. >> Councelor Link. >> I. >> Vice Mayor Safford. >> I councelor King. >> Hi. >> And I'm an I as well. That motion carries unanimously. Next brings us to resolution 26-168, the first amendment to the non-exclusive right-of-way agreement with the Fort
Myers Beach Chamber of Commerce. This is a resolution of the town council, the town of Fort Myers Beach, approving a first amendment to the non-exclusive right-of-way license agreement with the Fort Myers Beach Chamber of Commerce relocating the licensed property from 1046 Eststero Boulevard to property
located within the public rideway near 1035 Eststerero Boulevard, Fort Myers Beach, Florida. authorizing the mayor or town manager to execute the first amendment providing for severability providing for an effective date. Will >> thank you sir. Uh the town of Fort Myers
Beach uh Chamber of Commerce entered into a non-exclusive rideaway license agreement dated February 22nd, 2024 approved by council granting the chamber a license to locate an information trailer on town owned property within the rideway at 1046 Boulevard in the
downtown Times Square area. The town has since determined that it is in the best interest of the town to relocate the information trailer to a nearby town-owned property within the public rightway near 1035 Eststerero Boulevard because the original agreement specifically identified 1046
Eto Boulevard as the licensed property. A first amendment to the agreement is required to reflect new the new location. The chamber has agreed to the relocation and all other terms and conditions of the original agreement remain unchanged. Jackie, anything you want to add?
>> Good afternoon, Jackie, president. >> There it goes. Yep. Good afternoon, Jackie Leisac, president, Fort Myers Beach, Chamber of Commerce. Um, thank you very much for bringing this forward and adjusting the address for us. As you know, the Roxy 2, the new Roxy is out on
Time Square, open operating 7 days a week from approximately 10:00 a.m. till sunset and uh greeting visitors, passing out information and sharing information about our businesses, what's going on in the town, helping out residents, guests, locals, workers, anybody else who needs
some assistance. Um, do you have any questions on it? >> Councelor King, any questions? >> So, now we know where Roxy's going to be. >> Well, she's right there. She's not moving. So, as long as it's okay with you guys. >> Uh, Councelor Link, >> no questions. Jackie, just thank you for
everything you're doing. >> Thank you, Tom. >> Councelor Mlan, >> no questions for me. Thanks again. >> Scott, you're filling out a form, so I'm guessing I'm not asking you if you have any questions. >> No, sir. >> All right. >> Uh, I do not have any. Thanks, Jackie. >> Okay. And we will be announcing a ribbon
cutting for her. We're working on getting her some skirting on there, some lattice to kind of pretty her up a little bit, and some stairs for the front and a sun sail. So, as soon as we get those up, we'll do a ribbon cutting and invite the entire community out. >> Very good. >> Love it. >> Thank you.
>> Thanks. >> Public comment. Is there any public comment on this agenda item? >> Seeing none, bring it back to the council for a discussion or a motion. >> Mayor, I'll move 26-168. Is that right? Yeah,
>> that's correct. >> Got a motion by councelor King. >> I'll second it, mayor. >> Seconded by councelor Link. Any further discussion? >> None. >> For Scott, I'm assuming you're abstaining from this. >> I'm abstaining. Yes. >> Okay. Um, got a motion by councelor King, seconded by Councelor Link.
Councelor King. >> I. >> Councelor Link. >> I. >> Councelor Mlan. >> I. >> And I'm an I as well. That motion carries four to zero with Vice Mayor Safford abstaining. Brings us to item E. This is acceptance of grant TDC fiscal year 25-26
attractions marketing funding for the MountainHouse. This is an acceptance of the Lee County Tourist Development Council TDC attractions marketing funding awarded to the town of Fort Myers Beach for the Moundhouse for the 2025 2026 funding cycle in the amount of $20,000 and authorize the culture,
parks, and recreations director and/or the museum manager to execute all documents necessary to administer the award. Will Thank you, sir. The Moundhouse was awarded $20,000 through Lee County Tourist Development Council attractions marketing program for the 2526 funding
cycle. The original project, Moundhouse Stories in the Shells, was approved for funding effective October 1st, 2025, and provides reimbursement for eligible marketing and promotional initiatives conducted during the funding period.
Although the award was approved at the beginning of the funding cycle, implementation was delayed due to the transition in moundhouse management. The Moundhouse is now moving forward with the project and upon approval will utilize the awarded funds for eligible marketing initiatives in accordance with the grant requirements.
If you have any additional questions, Jeff can answer some, you know, on behalf of Karina. >> Councelor Mlan. >> Uh, no, I don't have any questions. I'm just glad that it's coming in under the wire. be exact. Councelor Link, >> no questions. >> Vice Mayor Safford,
>> I do know. >> Councelor King, >> sit back down, Jeff. >> Thank you. >> Wait a minute. No, I'm just kidding. No, I have no questions. Public comment. Is there any public comment on this agenda item? Seeing none, we'll close public
comment. Is there a discussion or motion to accept the Moundhouse grant funding? I will make a motion to accept the grant TDC FY2526 attractions marketing funding for the townhouse. >> All right. Got a motion by councelor M. >> A second. >> Seconded by councelor link.
>> Any further discussion? >> Councelor Mlan. >> Hi. >> Councelor Link. >> I. >> Uh Vice Mayor Safford. Hi. >> Councelor King. Hi. >> And I'm an I as well. That motion carries unanimously. >> Next is item F, special event for Matanza pass in Labor Day bash. to
approval of a special event permit for the Matanza's innay Labor Day bash hosted by FMB Bayside LLC, including waiverss of the town noise ordinance and open container regulations and approval of a temporary closure of portions of the public rideway to facilitate event
setup on September 4th, 2026 and the Labor Day festival on September 5th through the 6th, 2026, subject to all applicable staff conditions and final approvals from the Lee County Sheriff's Office and the Fort Myers Beach Fire Control District. Hi counselors, my name
is Nora Skipper, special events coordinator for the town of Fort Myers Beach. Thank you so much. It's been a long meeting so far, so let's have some fun with a party. Uh there is the Matanza in Labor Day bash and I have a representative from Matanza in his gentleman named Sean who is happy to
answer any questions. Uh yes. So largely they are looking to do a concert series um with some headliners right near the south end of the or the north end right there near the Matanza's in uh they are
also looking um we have gotten some or at least I received some communication from the Lee County Sheriff's Office with some concerns as well as from the town manager regarding the closing of the road. So the gentleman is happy to present that there is another option
that they've designed and redid their site plan without any road closures included in that uh that should have been sent to presentations at FnB so it could be on the TV. Uh we also have printed copies available if technology is technology.
>> There we go. >> So they redid the site plan and that wasn't uh placed uh recently in your uh packets. So they are looking to do this entirely within their property. They have a fence line so pedestrians do not
cross into the roadway itself. And if you have any questions, I'm sure Sean is more than happy to answer them. They are looking to get private security as well to assist with their concert and the logistics of it. >> Okay.
>> I have one question for you, Nora. >> Of course. Does the vice mayor have to fill out any kind of special waiver for the belly flap contest? >> I might get a concussion. I might not let me. >> Yeah. >> All right. You want to anything else, Nora?
>> Uh that'll be all I have. Uh I did hear one recommendation that compared to their first idea for the site plan uh that unfortunately the only thing that was cut compared to the first version presented in her packet and this was
they had to get rid of a child area um a place for children to gather. Uh Sean and Matanzisen were curious if there would be some conditions or maybe an opportunity to use the parking lot that did have the Moringsfield office and use
that parking lot as an area designated for children as well as families to just have some kind of separate area for that. He was inquiring that that wasn't included in the site plan, but I just wanted to bring that to you today for consideration.
>> Okay. There have been a lot of adjustments, so I appreciate you following along. Um, if you have any questions, I'm more than happy to or Sean as well. >> Councelor King, any questions for Norah? >> No, I don't think so. >> Vice Mayor Stafford, >> I do not. >> Councelor Link, >> not at this point. Nor
>> counc of the revised plans. >> Okay. >> Who's here? >> If I can before we go to vote, if I can, Mr. Mayor, I'd like to say thank you to the Matanis pass in and Sean and the team because a big concern of mine and of uh our other emergency services
partners was the closure, the road closure. Um it just would have caused a lot of problems for the whole part of the island there. Um so I appreciate the concessions of doing that. I would, as the town manager, although, you know, I would be okay absolutely with granting
him his request of uh of using that that parking our parking lot as a as a trade-off for them making this concessions for us uh in their request. Um would not have much of an impact on us in the town itself. There' still be plenty of parking available underneath the bridge and on Old San Carlos. Uh so
I just offer that to the council on on their behalf that I' I'd be willing to make that deal. >> Okay. Sean, you want to come up and just tell everybody a little bit that may not know what this event is or what they can expect. >> In the words of former Vice Mayor
Safert, we're giving you time to hype your hype your event. >> What did I say? >> Free advertising time right here. >> We are talking about Labor Day weekend, the 5th, 6th. Um it is the 7th. That's was amended as well in the on the
application. Um it's primarily uh allowing us to to show off some of our the foods we're doing. We're bringing in two headliners. Um the Ben Allen band and another one uh Jackie War from Oregon. These were some board chair turners on the Voice. So they're going
to their their social presence is going to bring a lot of people to the island is what we're hoping. Um with the parking, we also have lots that we own to the left. So, I was going to offer to the Morings that any of the Morings residents could park in our
parking lots if that would also be a trade-off as well. >> That would be a great trade-off because I was just thinking too, we'd have to >> we'd have to notify our Moing residents and everything of all the changes and >> given that we lease to that >> office there. We're in communication with them every day. >> Absolutely. Thanks, Sean. >> We can talk with them.
>> Um, I mean, it's going in line with the concert series and some of the things we want to do with entertainment. We just thought it was a good way to end the summer and and start a new season. Okay, >> I'm just looking at the events that I'm signing up for. That's all contest.
>> So, we're putting you down for the bikini contest then or >> I might have a better shot at the Oreo and key lime pie eating contest. >> Oo. >> Oo, Oreo. I could do that. >> Oreo key lime pie eating. We've got watermelon. Um, there's going to be a comedy kind of they'll go against each
other. And then with the bikini, the belly flop. Belly flop was not my idea. Um, and then we're also doing cornhole and some other there's hopefully some some fishing involved and canoe kayak races. Uh, Naples the cardboard boat race is always popular. So bring that to
to Fort Mars Beach as well. >> It's fun. >> Yeah. >> So it's going to be a lot of fun. >> Any questions, Council MLAN for Sean? >> No. Thank you for doing this. >> I have a quick question though about um the children's area. So, um, >> yes.
>> Are we to blockade that off or is that something that you will do? Just if it's a parking lot now, we want to make sure people aren't driving in there thinking it's still a parking lot and there's children. >> It's the parking lot to the to the left facing the restaurant of us, which is where the Moring's residents park. There
is a a bush line there, but what we're going to do is then extend the fence line across down to the water and that way it's not accessible to anyone but those that are in in the event. >> Great. And you'll take care of that. I just wanted to make sure those kids were safe. Phil, do you have anything you
would like to add? >> I don't any concern I had was addressed >> was addressed. >> Just because the microphones don't always pick up everything you said. You said bush line, not bush light, right? For the kids zone. We will have Bush Light, but there is also a bush line. So,
>> all right. >> Uh, place Mayor Staffford, anything for Sean? >> No, I don't. Good. Good luck. Sounds like a good time. >> Councelor King, >> I'll just echo what the vice mayor said. Good luck. >> Thank you, sir. >> All right. Thank you.
>> Thanks, Nora. Public comment. Anybody like to speak on the public on this agenda item? Seeing none, bring it back to council for a discussion or motion for the special events for the Matanza pass and Labor Day bash.
Where is it? Here. >> I'll make a motion to approve it. >> Second. >> Second by councelor King. Any further discussion? I'm an I. Councelor King. >> I. >> Vice Mayor Safford. >> Hi. >> Councelor Link. >> I. >> And councelor Mlan. >> Hi. >> All right. That passes unanimously. Next
is the special event Hopper Songwriter Festival. This is an approval of a special event for the Island Hopper Songwriter Festival to be held September 25th through September 27th, 2026 at Bayside Veterans Park for Fort Myers Beach from 400 p.m. to 10 p.m. on
September 25th, 3 p.m. to 10 p.m. on September 26th and 1 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. on September 27th as requested by President Jackie Leisac of the Fort Myers Beach Chamber of Commerce in partnership with iHeart Media, including setup beginning at 12:00 p.m. on
September 25th, amplified live music on the permanent stage and a waiver of the town's open container restriction within Bayside Veterans Park subject to the compliance of with all applicable town requirements for and final for final approval by the Fort Myers Beach Fire Control District and the Lee County
Sheriff's Office. Nora, >> hi. Thank you again. Long time no see. I am happy to bring the wonderful Jackie here to your council chambers. Uh yeah, the Island Hopper Festival is in collaboration with iHeart Media, a big name. I grew up near the area, so just
hearing them on Cat Country and stuff has always been big. So they are hosting a wonderful event and I'll have Jackie explain those specifics because they're really exciting. >> Yep. >> So as Yep. Jackie Leisac, president of Fort Myers Beach Chamber. Uh as in years past, I work with the VCB, Lee County
VCB, iHeart Media, to bring this amazing event back to the island each year. Uh it is uh we're speaking specifically about Bayside Park. So the amplified music within the Bayside Park area. iHeart Media and the VCB coordinate and
manage all of that event across the island for the final weekend. And then of course the chamber helps with the permitting aspect of it uh as far as the Bayside Park uh area is concerned. Uh it's a great event. If you've never been, you need to come. It's amazing.
The music spills out of every single doorway in town. We have amazing acts that come, singers and songwriters. You get a chance to be up close and intimate with these individuals, the folks who wrote the songs that you sing to every day in your car and at home. And it's a
chance to kind of hear the stories of the songs, how they got to be and uh you know, how the artists came up with them and recorded them and who they worked with. It's intimate. It's really a great event for the whole island for our southwest community as a whole because
as we know it starts out in Captiva, moves to Cape Coral, then to downtown Fort Myers and of course concludes with us and the big pool party at Pink Shell. So, uh, this specifically is just for the Bayside Park aspect of it. It's required to be permitted. So, as an assist, the chamber does help the VCB
and I heart with that. Any questions? >> Council King. None. >> Link. >> None. >> Council MLAN. >> Love this event. >> The only question I have just for Scott's is this uh application under the chamber or is it under >> when we pull the permit? We have no
financial benefit. >> Okay. >> For this event. >> I just want to make sure you don't have to. >> Yeah. There's no financial. >> Yeah. >> All right. I don't have any other questions. >> Thanks, J. >> All right. Thank you. >> Any public comment?
Seeing none, public close public comment of bring it back to the council for discussion or a motion. >> I'll make a motion to approve a special event permit for Island Hopper Songwriter Festival. >> Got a motion by councelor Mlan. >> I'll second. >> Seconded by councelor Link. Any further
discussion? >> Councelor Mlan. >> I. >> Councelor Link. >> I. >> Vice Mayor Safford. >> Hi. >> Councelor King. >> I. >> And I'm an I as well. That motion carries unanimously. Uh, next is resolution 26-160, special event FMB Chamber of Commerce
Bayside Concert Series. This is a resolution of the town council of the town of Fort Myers Beach, Florida, approving a reoccurring special event permit for the Bayside Concert Series hosted by the Town of Fort Myers Beach and the Greater Fort Myers Beach Area's Chamber of Commerce at Bayside Veterans Park. granting waiverss of the town's
noise ordinance and open container regulations to allow amplified live music on designated Sundays from 4 pm to 8:00 pm establishing a one-year permit term subject to applicable staff conditions and final approvals from the Lee County Sheriff's Office in the Fort Myers Beach Fire Control District
providing an effective date. >> Nora, >> thank you so much, Mr. Mayor. So, I did notice the last time council approved the Bayside concert series was over three years ago. So I thought it would just give us the wonderful opportunity while Jackie is here to share some support, have a discussion, give town
resources if needed, but just give the reapproval for the Bayside concert series that has been such a wonderful staple. >> Okay, councelor King, any questions for Nora? >> None. Thank you. >> Thanks, Mary Sanford. >> I think I'm going to recuse myself on this one. >> Do it.
>> Yeah, there's there's sponsors and everything else. So best interest of the council and >> and the chamber accuse myself of this too. >> Transparency. >> Council link. >> I have no questions. Jackie >> council Mlan. >> No, I'm good. Thank you. Nor
>> Nora, you just I guess I didn't you talked about town resources. Are we are we charging to use Bayside Park when we're talking about increasing millage rate on people? Are we now at a point where we're charging for the use of Bayside Park because there are fees
required? I mean, electricity cleanup, things like that. Are we on any of these special? >> Yes, >> we we will >> Yeah, as we go through the fee uh schedules and stuff this uh this coming September. Um along with anything, we're
going to be assessing all of our fees uh for different and and there there has been a a fee associated with use of of all town property. So, uh we will be recommending that going forward. There have been times when we haven't charged for that but but uh given the conditions uh the current state of of our budget
and funding as we look at offsetting you know different things like the millillage and everything like that. Yeah, we will be uh reinstituting a lot of those fees to our fee schedule. >> Okay, thank you. Well, >> pending council pending council approval. >> Jackie. >> Okay, Jackie Leak, Fort Myers Beach
Chamber. Couple of points. So the Bayside Park Concert Series is hosted obviously by the town of Fort Myers Beach and the Fort Myers Beach Chamber Water Foundation. That is the 501c3 arm of the chamber. Uh not the C6 arm. So it
is in conjunction with the three business entities that are located down there. Uh Snug Harbor, Wahoo Willies, and Nervous Nelly's. They've been great supporters of the event since the very beginning. They do also participate monetarily to make that concert series
go every week. It's not a uh money-making opportunity for us. It's simply to cover the expense of having the bands down there. Uh also, Nervous Nelly's has been providing electricity for the event the entire time. So, there's been no cost to the town and the
businesses have been cleaning the area and removing the trash. Wow. >> Each week down there. So, for the most part, I think it's been uh a really successful win-win for everybody, showcasing how government and businesses and nonprofit can all work together uh
to host an event on the island. It has become a weekly tradition now, and we've also, thanks to groups like the Alex King Foundation, has given some additional sponsorships, we do highlight different entities. We provide nonprofit space down there. any of our island
nonprofits can set up any of the Sundays and put a table out and talk to the guests and uh be there to showcase their information. We do not charge for that. And I I just I think the whole thing has just been a total slam dunk. It's activated that space on an evening where
normally it wouldn't be active. And I believe that the businesses had asked and maybe coming forward to uh try to do a Friday night. We were doing Friday and Sunday for a while. Then we stopped during season because it was pretty busy. So they may come back and ask for maybe every other Friday or one Friday a
month in addition to the Sunday uh through the rest of the slower season here. So I'll I'll come back to you should that change. But please do know it's the water foundation's um entity. It's it's their event that they are putting on and I think it's really been incredible to see the amount of people
that have come down for it. anywhere from a couple hundred people to, you know, four, five, six hundred people in this space of the evening. And um I I just I want to see more things like this on the island. I think I think we're really at the tip of what we can do with with events like this and and
partnerships. >> Questions, any questions for Jackie? >> I have no questions. Thank you, >> Rebecca. >> No. Thanks again, >> Council King. >> Nothing. >> Okay, >> good. Thank you. Thanks, Nora. >> Thank you. >> Public comment. Is there anyone in public comment? Seeing none, we'll close
public comment. Bring it back for a discussion or motion for resolution 26-160 for the special event for the FMB Chamber of Commerce Bayside Concert Series. >> So moved. >> So moved. Motion by councelor King. >> Second.
>> Seconded by councelor Mlan. Discussion. I guess the only discussion I'd have, Jackie, is is there a reason why it's listed under the Chamber of Commerce then and not as the 501c3 >> water foundation? >> Water foundation. Just for clerical
purposes, is there a reason why it's under the chamber and not under the nonprofit? >> Let me off. There we go. Hi. Um, I am not sure why it was put that way because we had changed it to the water foundation and all of the ads and all of the information. It's a simple clerical
change. We can >> we can make that adjustment. >> Yeah, that would be a clerical error. I was just basing it off of the previous application that was in 2023. It was very slimmed down and there wasn't much of a resolution record for that. So, that's what I'm happy to provide and try to make today. >> I think just for transparency.
>> Yeah, I can work with I can work with Nora to make that change. I think we started as the chamber and then switched over to the water foundation when we were trying to partner with um the you know the elementary school for water stuff and for the mouthouse and all of the water things we were doing. So >> perfect. >> Happy to make that change.
>> All right. Thanks. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. >> So, we got a motion by councelor King, seconded by councelor Mlan. If there's no other discussion, councelor King, >> I. >> Councelor Mlean, >> I. >> Councelor Link, >> I. >> I'm an I as well. Motion carries four to zero with Vice Mayor Safford abstaining. Brings us to item I, which is resolution
26-166, FO memorandum memorandum of agreement maintenance services. This is a resolution of the town council of the town of Fort Myers Beach, Florida, approving and authorizing the mayor to execute maintenance agreement number BEK14,
FM number 43279 729-1-78--9 between the town of Fort Myers Beach and the Florida Department of Transportation, FDOT, for mowing, litter removal, and mechanical sweeping maintenance services along State Road 685. authorizing the mayor to execute
any further documents including renewals necessary to ex effectuate the agreement providing for severability and providing for an effective date. Will >> Yes sir. Services uh will include large and small machine mowing manual weed control litter removal mechanical
sweeping as detailed in attachment A. Uh locations and prices in attachment B. specifications. The agreement provides FDOT compensation to the town of $7,990.35 annually for a total of $23,9715
over the three-year initial term with no matching funds required by the town. Any questions? >> Councelor Mlan, any questions for Will? >> No, I have no questions. >> Councelor Link, >> no questions. >> Vice Mayor Safford, >> are we going to make any money on this
or lose any money or break even or What are we thinking here? >> Jeff says we may make a little bit of money, but uh I'll wait and see. >> Jeff, come on up. Jeff. >> Yes, sir.
>> That was my question. Is this is the goal to break even, goal to make money? >> Yeah, it's pretty minimal. Um when it comes to what we have to do, it's nothing major. Uh it's if you know there's litter on there, we'll go sweep it early morning uh once in a while if it looks like it needs it to get the
sand and the debris off. Um and then we just cut that that corner which actually they made it smaller now with the bus lane on the other side of the bridge on Main Street there. Um if you're if you're going out off the bridge, it's on the left hand side where that bench is and the stoplight. We just we trim that.
That's about all that that's involved. So, it takes very minimal staff time to do. >> Okay. Would >> I want that, too? >> I hate to say the H word, but if there was an weather event that we responsible for cleaning up afterwards as well. >> I think any major event, we'd probably
have a declaration. Um, that would probably be to an emergency fund. But yeah, I mean, it'd be very I mean, on the bridge, it doesn't get terrible. I mean, we probably clean it up as best we can anyway for traffic coming on and off. Um, just for emergency services, too. >> Okay. Thank you,
>> Jeff. Before you run off, you didn't say your name. Just say your name for the record. So, >> Jeff Hogby, community services director for the record. >> Okay. >> No questions. Thanks, Jeff. >> Thanks, Jeff. >> Public comment. >> Is there any public comment? Seeing none, we'll close public comment. Is
there discussion or a motion for resolution 26-166 F memorandum of agreement for maintenance services? >> So moved. >> Got a motion by councelor Mlan. Second. >> Seconded by councelor King. Any further
discussion? Councelor Mlan. >> I. >> Councelor King. >> Hi. >> Vice Mayor Safford. >> I. >> And councelor Link. >> I. >> And I'm an I as well. That motion carries unanimously. Next is item J. Resolution 26-169 CHNEP ILA grant approval engineering for
storm water projects. This is a resolution of the town council of the town of Fort Myers Beach, Florida, approving and authorizing the mayor to execute an interlocal agreement between Charlotte County on behalf of the coastal and heartland national estuary partnership s and the town of Fort Myers
Beach for services supporting chap's comprehensive conservation and management plan, including the association associated work assigned for the storm water evaluation and improvement project for focus area 15 Indian Bayou and focus area 16 Ibis
street for an estimated project cost of $200,000 and providing an effective date. Will >> thank you sir. The town is seeking professional engineering services to evaluate performance of existing storm water management in the areas you identified Indian Bayou and Ibis Street
as identified in the town's 2025 vulnerability assessment and adaptation plan and to develop engineering solutions to reduce flooding and improve water quality and minimize pollutant transport into coastal waters and enhance
resilience. uh at an estimated project cost of $200,000. Um what will you know the services performed under this work are funded through the CHIP grant funds administered by Charlotte County. Pursuant to section three of this agreement, Charlotte County shall pay
all invoices on behalf of Chinnip from Chinnip funds such that the town of Fort Myers Beach will incur no cost to the town under this agreement on the associated work assignment. And I do have Chad here to talk more details if necessary. >> Councelor King, any questions?
>> I was just mesmerized by Chad's bright shirt. Um, no, I have no questions. I sit on uh the Chan board as the council leaison. I was proud to approve it earlier this year. >> Vice Mayor Safford.
>> No, so this is a passer. It's kind of a win-win for both of us, right? >> That is correct. >> Okay, >> councelor Link. No questions, >> Counc. >> No questions. >> I do not have any either. Pretty straightforward. >> Public comment.
Seeing no public comment, we will close public comment. Uh back to the council for discussion or a motion for resolution 26-169 for Janet ILA grant approval engineering for storm water projects. >> So moved. >> Second.
>> Motion by councelor King, seconded by councelor Mlan. Any further discussion? >> Councelor King. Hi. >> Councelor Mlan. Hi, >> Councelor Link. >> Hi, >> Vice Mayor Safford. Hi. >> And I'm an I as well. >> Thanks for coming, Chad. >> Next is item K, resolution 26-159,
change order number 2, ITB-23-18-UT for Andrew Sitework LLC. This is a resolution of the town council of the town of Fort Myers Beach, Florida, approving and authorizing the town manager to execute change order number two to contract ITB-23-18-UT
between the town of Fort Myers Beach and Andrew Sitework LLC to add additional water and storm water improvements needed to Carlos Drive and Se View Street, inclusing including increasing the contract amount by 1,ion47 $1,47,4657
and providing for an effective date. Will >> thank you, Mr. Mayor. The town is continuing it our commitment to make necessary water and storm water improvements for the benefit of all island residents, businesses, and visitors. Andrew site work has been engaged to construct the tier 1 water
and storm water projects. To ensure cost effectiveness, this proposed change order will address roadway flooding and relocate existing water manes to accommodate the new storm piping on Carlos Circle and provide potable water distribution to the adjacent property
owners and include storm water improvements intended to help alleviate flooding on Seue Street. The tier 1 water and storm water improvements project is currently being funded with a combination of state revolving loan funds, hazard mitigation grant program funds and state legislative
appropriation, Lee County funds, and town funds. Staff has secured secured additional SRF funding for the change order number two expenses. Penny your questions. >> Councelor King, any questions? >> I'm sorry. The funding is coming from where?
>> Funding is coming from multiple sources. a combination of state revolving loan funds, hazard mitigation grant program funds, state legislation appropriation, Lee County funds, and town funds. >> Thank you. >> Uh, Mayor Staff,
>> that was my question. Thank you, >> Councelor Link. >> What was the last one you said, Will? After Lee County funds, >> town funds. >> Thank you. That's all. >> Uh, councelor Link or I'm sorry, MLAN. um
>> rough approximate approximate um percentage that the town is actually responsible for the 200 rough rough order. >> Um Jeffrey, he might have that off in his notes. If not, we'll follow up. Go
ahead. So the funds will be coming out of the storm water account first and foremost of the town funds and there's that is a self-contained fund. So that does not connect with the general fund at all. Uh town funds would only be used
if for whatever we had to do something outside of the original project cost that we could not apply back to storm water. So the general fund town funds would sort of be like a contingency to a contingency. There's other main sources we would pull first. Thank you, Jeffrey.
>> Okay, I don't have any questions. Public comment. Seeing no public comment, we'll close public comment, bring it back to the council for discussion or a motion for resolution 26-159, change order number two for ITB-23-18-UT
for Andrew site work. >> Is there a motion? >> So moved. >> I got a motion by councelor King. >> I'll second. Seconded by councelor Mlan. Any further discussion? Councelor King. >> I. >> Councelor Mlan. >> Hi. >> Councelor Link. >> I.
>> Vice Mayor Safford. >> I. >> And I'm an I as well. That motion carries unanimously. Next is item L. This is resolution 26-171, Earth Balance Change Order number three for Dune Plantings. This is a resolution
of the town council of the town of Fort Myers Beach, Florida, approving and authorizing the town manager to execute change order number three to contract ITB-25-02-EN between the town of Fort Myers Beach and Earth Balance Corporation to add 274 days to the deadline for completion of
the contract extending the completion date to December 31st, 2026 to align with the extended Florida Division of Emergency Management Femal Agency Program Grant Agreement D15. 502 and providing for an effective date.
>> Will, >> while Chad is coming up, uh, the funding necessary to complete, this funding is necessary to complete a stereo island dune planning project under the extended contract term and is available through FDM local agency program grant delta
1502 and has already been appropriated by the town council and this change order does not increase the total contract price. uh FDM local agency program grant agreement D1502 has been extended with a new grant period of an end date of December 31st 2026.
Uh for specifics on the dune planting project if you have any questions Chad can answer those. >> Councelor Mlan any questions? >> No questions. >> Councelor Link, >> none. >> Vice Mayor Safford, >> none. >> Councelor King, >> I'm good. >> I do not have any either. Chad, you got
an easy day today. Look at that. Public comment. Seeing no public comment, we'll close it. Come back to the council. Is there a motion or discussion for resolution 26-171, earth balance change order number three for dune plantings?
>> So moved. Mayor >> got a motion by councelor Link. >> I'll second. >> Second by councelor Mlan. Any further discussion? >> Councelor Link. >> I. >> Councelor Mlan. >> I. >> Vice Mayor Safford. >> Hi. >> Councelor King. >> Hi. >> And I'm an I as well. That motion carries unanimously. Next is item M, the
resolution 26-164, first amendment amendment CUSI agreement. A resolution of the town of Fort Myers Beach, approving a first amendment to an agreement between the town of Fort Myers Beach and Continental Utility Solutions, Inc. to increase the
yearly total by $768 and to incorporate the town's contract addendum to the agreement authorizing the town manager to sign the addendum amendment providing for severability and providing for an effective date. Will >> thank you sir. or the town's utilities department has identified a continued
need to enhance the CUSI, sometimes referred to by staff as Koozie, uh UB4 utility billing software as a service platform following its successful implementation. Two additional components have been identified for addition to the existing agreement, the
CWP third-party usage analytics in the Neptune module and additional service location licenses. The total for adding these two is $7668 and the funding source is the water fund. All right, councelor King. Any
questions? >> Answered mine. Thank you. >> Vice Mayor Safford >> answered mine. >> Councelor Link. >> Um I'm going to ask the question. Um what are the enhancements you're expecting to get? Does anyone able to speak to that? >> Come on up, Jeff.
Jeff Hogy, community services director for the record. Um, the enhancements are just more data data analytics. Um, the it ranged a little farther than what we were thinking as far as the getting the the information back. So, we got to add a couple more data data locations and
that comes with licensing licensing. >> Great. Anything that the uh residents can benefit from? >> No, it'll be the same. It'll just be a stronger signal and and more data. >> Stronger signal. Okay. Great. Thank you. Appreciate it. >> Council Mlean, >> no questions.
>> Thanks, Chef. Public comment. Seeing no public comment, we'll close council. Is there a motion or discussion for resolution 26-164 for the first amendment CUSI agreement? >> So moved. >> Second. >> Motion by councelor King, second by Vice
Mayor Safford. >> Any further discussion? Councelor King. >> Hi. >> Vice Mayor Safford. Hi. >> Councelor Link. >> I. >> Councelor Mlan. Hi. and I'm an I as well. That motion carries unanimously. Next is item N, resolution 26-165, Title Basin Second Amendment. This is a
resolution of the town of Fort Myers Beach, Florida. Approving the second amendment to the agreement between the town of Fort Myers Beach and Titlebas Government Consulting LLC amending the agreement to incorporate additional Florida statutory references for contract compliance and community development block grant disaster
recovery CDBG DR supplemental terms and conditions to ensure compliance with applicable law, state law and US Department of Housing and Urban Development. HUD requirements providing for severability and providing for an effective date. Well, >> this second amendment adds required
federal and state compliance provisions that were missing in the original agreement. Following the first amendment of February 19th, 2026, which exercised a renewal option and added the town's standard addendum, the town determined that services supporting its CDBGDR
award not yet in place at the time of original solicitation fall within the agreement's existing disaster recovery and mitigation scope because the agreement lacked the contract provisions required by Lee County as the granting agency and HUD as the funding agency for
CDBG BGDR. are funded funded work. The amendment incorporates those provisions. There's no financial impact. This amendment adds required compliance provisions only and does not alter the agreement's scope of services, term, or compensation. >> Councelor Mlan, any questions?
>> I have none. >> Councelor Link, >> none. >> Vice Mayor Safford, >> none. >> Councelor King, >> nothing. >> I do not either. Public comment. Seeing no public comment is uh any further discussion or a motion for resolution 26-165
title bas and second amendment >> so moved >> second a motion by councelor Mlan seconded by councelor king >> any further discussion councelor mlan >> hi >> councelor king I >> vice mayor safford >> councelor link >> I and I'm an I as well that motion carries unanimously next is item O this
is resolution 26-158 access infrastructure LLC STA number two this is is a resolution of the town council of the town of Fort Myers Beach, Florida, approving supplemental task authorization STA number two with Access Infrastructure, Inc. in the amount not to exceed $220,000 retroactive to April
1st, 2026 for a circum accumulative total of payment for services under RFQ 24-26- to close out this fiscal year 2026 for the continuation of planning services authorizing the town manager to sign STA number two and providing for an
effective date. Will, >> thank you, sir. The STA is a continuation of the original contract for the services for the remainder of fiscal year 2026 retroactive to April 1st 2026 such as technical support GIS and special project management. The
action is necessary for the continuation of services with the total expenditure of $195,000 retroactive to May 1st 2025 added to the RFQ 20-24-26-
A. The total expenditure will be funded through the general fund. Any of your questions? >> Councelor King >> answered. Thank you. >> Vice Mayor Safford. >> That answered it. Thank you. >> Councelor Link, >> no questions. >> Uh, councelor Mlan,
>> no questions. >> I have none either. Public comment. Seeing none, we'll bring it back to the council for discussion or a motion for resolution 26-158 for Access Infrastructure LLC STA number two.
I'll move it. >> Got a motion for councelor Mlan >> and I'll second >> and a second from councelor link. Any further discussion? Councelor Mlan. >> I. >> Councelor Link. >> I. >> Vice Mayor Safford. >> Hi. >> Councelor King. >> Hi. >> And I'm an I as well. That motion
carries unanimously. Next is item B or P. That's resolution 26-170. Coastal engineering consultants STA number five beach project permit required activities. This is a resolution of the town council of the town of Fort Myers Beach, Florida, approving and authorizing the town
manager to execute supplemental task authorization number five of contract RFQ-24-06- A between the town and Coastal Engineering Consultants, Inc. for permit required shorebird monitoring and tilling coordination services associated
with the Astero Island 2026 Truck Hall project for a cost of $7,10 and providing for an effective date. Will. >> Yes, Mr. Mayor. The town applied for and is receiving state funding for hurricane Ian recovery for the purchase, transport, and placement of sand to offset impacts by filling scour holes
and rebuilding emergency BMS on Eststerero Island uh through the Eststerero Island 2026 truck hall project. Permits from the department, Florida Department of Environmental Protection and the United States Army Corps of Engineers require shore bird monitoring. Agency coordination and
compaction testing throughout the beach tilling associated with the stero island 2026 truck hall project. Permit required activities are eligible for grant reimbursement from FD Lee County and FDM grants. The town would be responsible
for up to approximately 15, that's 15% of a special tax uh or sorry, of a STA number five cost which equals $1,51.50 from the general fund. >> Councelor King, >> no questions.
>> Vice Mayor Safford, >> this is required by the F by FWC. Is that >> uh FWC wasn't listed in here, but Chad, please go ahead. Hey everyone, Chad Shootes, environmental staff. Uh, yes sir. So FWC
via FDM or sorry via FD who's the regulatory agency. So FWC gives some comments and then FD tells us what to do. >> That's what I thought. Okay. Thank you, >> Councelor Link. >> No, no questions. >> Councelor Mlan, >> no questions. >> I have nothing either. Thanks, Chad.
Public comment. All right, seeing none, is there any discussion or a motion for resolution 26-170 for coastal engineering consultants STA number five, beach project permit required activities? >> So moved. >> All right, second. Councelor Link has
made the motion. Councelor Mlan is seconded. Any further discussion? >> Uh, councelor Link >> I. >> Councelor Mlan, >> hi. >> Vice Mayor Safford, >> hi. >> Councelor King, >> I am an I as well. That motion carries unanimously. Mayor, the next item is a is a hearing
and um there's going to be presentations by both parties as well as myself. Could we take a 5m minute break? >> I'd be happy to. Yes, we'll take a break and we'll come back at 3:15. Is that enough time? >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> Got it. >> Was quite a stretch.
>> We're on a roll. >> We need We need a stretch. >> Yeah. >> Seventh inning stretch. >> I need a fan. I said, "Can we sing?" >> Sure. >> Too, but thank you.
>> You got it. How about I sign them right now? >> Oh, okay. All right, we're going to call this meeting back to order. It is now 3:17. Our next agenda item is uh item Q, a
motion to dismiss second renewed building appeal. This is a resolution of the town council of the town of Fort Myers Beach approving or denying a motion to dismiss filed by Zachary W. Lombardo Esquire on behalf of Todd R.
Plaststead as trustee for the Todd R. placed dead trust of a second renewed administrative appeal building permit number 242333 slash and number 234477 for 21391
Wijon Terrace filed by Himstein Associates LLC Robert Himlstein and Stephanie Himlstein providing for an effective date Nancy >> thank you mayor um this is an administrative appeal um that has been
filed um by um Mr. uh Hemlstein Associates LLC, Robert Hemlstein and Stephanie Hemlstein collectively. Um they are represented today by Shai Oserie and um there is a pending motion
to dismiss that has been filed by Zach Lombardo. I just wanted to give you a little bit of an overview of kind of what the arguments are going to be and what they're not going to be. Um this is an administrative appeal that has been pending since roughly 2023.
Um it has gone through a lot of reviews and a lot of discussions. Um in the effort to be efficient and try to resolve this matter. We have actually split the appeal into two sections. The
first part of the first section which we would like to present to you today is the procedural components of this appeal. Um based on your decision in the on the procedural issues, we may or may not proceed to the actual merits of the
appeal itself. Um, I do want to direct your attention to page 726 of your agenda materials. And there you'll find actually on 725 is the beginning of the staff staff report,
but on 726 is a listing of all the attachments and I have conferred with both attorneys. Um there does not appear to be any objection to including um specifically on the record that all of
these items these attachments are part of the record of this um this appeal that is before you. So before we get started on the actual arguments I would be asking if there would be a motion to um accept the attachments to the agenda
into the record. So moved. >> Second. >> We have a motion by Mayor Nyler, seconded by councelor Mlan. Any discussion? I'm an I. Councelor Mlan. Hi. >> Councelor Link. Hi. >> Vice Mayor Saffford. >> Hi. >> Councelor King. >> Hi.
>> Motion carries unanimously. >> Thank you. And at this point, I'll just defer to Mr. Lombardo. >> Thank you very much again. Zach Lombardo for the record here on behalf of the property owner Todd Placed of the Placeed Trust. The property owner here. We filed a motion to dismiss this building permit appeal for lack of
standing. This is part of what I'll call a larger saga of disputes between these neighbors, but today we're focused on the building permits for the pool that has since been constructed. The building permit appeal should be dismissed because they filed the wrong process. They've appi appealed to the wrong
tribunal. As a result, it's untimely. But at the head here, it's all about standing. And I keep emphasizing it's a building permit appeal because there seems to be an unnecessary amount of confusion in this record about what kind of thing this is. But if we look at the appeal, it's in your record. You've
moved to include it into the record. It asks for these building permits to be revoked. I have a hard time understanding how this could be anything other than a building permit appeal because the end of the day question that you're being asked is to revoke building permits, which reminds me of a fake Florida apherism. You can paint a
pelican pink, but it's not a flamingo. So, we have to be aware of what kind of thing we're doing here because when we are aware of that, your code provides all of the answers. If you have a building permanent appeal, your code in 680 states that if you would like to
appeal it, you follow that process. That was not the process followed by appellants. Appellants didn't follow this process by their own response to my motion because they acknowledge they are not one of the parties with standing to follow that process. Only the building
owner can file an appeal under 680. So what appellants are here before you today saying is because we couldn't follow that process, you should allow us to use this other process, the process in 3486 of your code. That's a general appellet standard for zoning
administrative actions. That can't possibly be the result here. And I'm going to walk you through why that can't be the result in this case. 3486 applies to a very specific set of appeals including impact fees, including concurrency determinations, including
historic preservation. So, it's doing a lot of work in your code. What it's not doing is addressing building permit issues. And the reason why this matters and the reason why appellants interpretation is somewhat dangerous is what they're saying is if someone doesn't have an appelllet remedy, they
can use this section to appeal anyway. So, let's shift shift gears for a second. If this were a code enforcement case, according to your code and according to Florida statute, who can appeal to that? Agreved parties. If you're not an agrieved party under appellence argument, you could say,
"Well, we don't have a process. So that means we can use 3486 and we can appeal it anyway." And so what I'm suggesting is that there's no way to read appellants argument without concluding that all sorts of things in your code are appealable by frankly anyone. There's no standing requirements. If
there's a building permit on the other end of the island and you want to appeal it, 3486. If there's a code enforcement case and you're not really the defendant or you're not really a property neighboring property owner, but you just don't feel this was handled right, you can appeal it under 3486. Respectfully, I don't think your code says that
anywhere in it. And so I I was somewhat surprised to see the response to the motion to dismiss say that they agreed with me that they don't have standing under 680 and that's why they're going under 34.86. In my motion, in my reply, I've provided case law to give you what
you need to see that your ordinances should be read by their plain meaning. Their plain meaning is very simple. 3486 states that if any ordinance or other regulation or provision in your code provides a different appellet procedure, 3486 doesn't apply. 680 does that. So I
know this is a lot of code siting and and this is probably a more technical appeal uh than than is is typical but it's important because at the end of the day the question is when do disputes stop? What are the points at and who are
the parties to these various disputes here as you know and as identified in your executive summary there was a variance associated with this pool was heavily challenged by appellants. It went to LPA twice. It went to you all twice. It went to the circuit court. It
went to the district court of appeal. The variant stands today and it has been challenged as far as anything can possibly be challenged. Now we're shifting to the building permit and we're going to go through the same process except what I would suggest is that there was an appelllet remedy for
the variance that the appellants used. Here there is no appellet remedy. And I want to just put into the record even though you've accepted it what 680 says specifically. In 680C, it states that the appellant can be the
owner of such building or structure or his duly authorized agent. That's who may file the appeal. Appellant does not argue with that. Their position is that's correct. We're not any of those people. And that's why we'd like to appeal under 3486. And so what I want to close with and I want to reserve a right
to respond to any arguments that come up that are separate from what I've raised here. But what I want to point out is there's a difference between process and standing. And it matters whether or not a party has standing here. And it matters for all kinds of reasons. Property rights,
certainty in the town, understanding who can do what, understanding when disputes can end. And so here, your code's clear. If you interpret 3486 to mean that anybody who doesn't have standing can show up and just file a new appeal and come to you all, you're talking about
flood plane appeals, code enforcement appeals, building permanent appeals, all kinds of interesting things that have not been thought of yet. Because I would suggest that to date, I don't think anyone's argued to you before that 3486 applies when someone doesn't have standing. So, I would appreciate your review of this. I'd appreciate you
dismissing this appeal. And I want to assure you that there are plenty of ways for this process to work through. In fact, as we're standing here today, appellants have sued my clients in circuit civil court as to this project in a way that is unrelated to this. So, I assure you and I am confident that
this dispute is going to be fought to the bitter end, but this is not part of that. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Good afternoon, Shiozeri. Hartella PA on behalf of the Himlines. Um I want to just before I get into the argument make
a few quick corrections because in the placed it reply um the reply twice states that we have conceded standing. Um we have not conceded standing. Uh what we argue and I think what the parties agree on is that section 680 by
its plain text applies only to the owner of a property. That's part of our argument. That's not a concession. However, 36, excuse me, 3486 does apply and Himlimans have a right to file this appeal. Um, I do want to note as well
that the first time the word standing is mentioned in the briefing by the place is in their reply brief. It's actually not even found in the initial motion to dismiss because this is not about standing. This is about whether Himlstein can file uh this appeal.
standing is to be presented as reflected by the town attorney's memorandum when the appeal is presented on the merits. So again, the town attorney's memorandum has now confirmed the point stating that the him that Himlstein has a right to
file an appeal uh and further standing is an issue for the town council or special magistrate to determine when an appeal is presented. Not today, not on the motion to dismiss. And and I want to also quickly address the way that this is being framed. The
two competing code provisions um as it's being argued 680 3486. We don't go to 680 first and then try to squeeze it into 3486. 3486 is the default procedure for appellet procedures. That's where you go. And
then 34.86 determines or provides rather that if there's a specific procedure for a specific type of appeal elsewhere, you can't get around that. Right? So there has to be a specific procedure. Now both
parties agree that 680 does not apply is not a specific procedure for the Himlines. They could not invoke that thereby. Therefore, they're not going around that to get to 3486. They're going to 3486 first and that's where they stay. That's where this appeal
lies. So to to jump into the argument now, 680 doesn't apply. It applies when a building official shall reject or refuse to approve the the mode or manner of construction, materials to be used, things of that nature. These are
technical construction code determinations that are adverse to an owner or the builder. Um this is the classic dispute between a permanent applicant and the building official over the methods, materials, code interpretation uh for which the code provides an owner initiated appeal.
That's the situation for 680. That's the substance of 680. This appeal is entirely different. The Himlstein's appeal alleges that a town administrative official aired in issuing a permit in reliance upon a survey that misrepresents the unit boundaries established by the recorded condominium
plat thereby understating the impervious surface coverage in violation of section 614 the code 67% impervious surface limitation to the direct detriment of the adjoining property owners Himlines 680 has no language that applies that
appeal Section 3486 does um that is again the general rule. The town attorney's memorandum describes it as the default procedure. We agree. It's broad by design and it provides that this council will heal will will hear and decide
appeals where it is alleged that there is an error in any order, requirement, decision interpretation determination or action of any administrative official charged with the administration and enforcement of the provisions of this code. Any error, any administrative
official and importantly, there's no limitation on who may bring that appeal. Again, subsection A1B which is being argued by the places is the exception not the general rule. It removes the appeal from this council only where there's a specific code provision which
provides a different appellet procedure. As explained 680 does not apply to this appeal. No different appellet procedure exists for this appeal. Certainly an ordinance that provides these appellants the Himlines no procedure at all cannot be the different appellet procedure. um
thereby removing it from 3486. And if we examine the place's arguments, the case law they cite in support um actually supports the Himlstein's position. For example, the city of Miami versus Gabella, uh the quote is if the plain language of the ordinance is
unambiguous, we are required to apply its plain meaning and are without power to construe it in a way which would modify, limit or extend those expressed terms. So with that in mind, the place are asking that this council do two
prohibited things at once. Number one, and permissibly limit section 3486 by writing in a restriction on who may appeal that the drafters never put there. And second, to impermissibly extend section 680 to reach a dispute it plainly does not describe.
The res this result would be that an an erroneously issued building permit could never be appealed by anyone in any forum in the town. Uh Florida law does not permit a reading that produces an absurd result um nor permit nullifying an entire section of the town code.
Finally, this appeal was filed properly um and on the town's instructions. The second renewed appeal was filed on December 13th, 2024, the 24th day of the 30-day window. It was emailed directly to the town clerk and to the town attorney. The clerk's office
acknowledged it uh with an auto reply that same day, acknowledged receipt. It was reserved in February of 2025 at the town's request. We followed the code and the town's instructions. And on November 15th, 2024, one of the correspondents from the town uh which is actually
attached to the the uh appeal itself states, "If you would like to continue with the appeal, we will work on scheduling the appeal before the town's special magistrate." That's exactly what we did. We continued the appeal. We filed it with the town. We relied on the town's instruction on how to proceed. The bottom line is that the Himlines
followed the code here. They filed it properly. They filed it timely. Um the place position is that under no circumstances can an adjacent property owner ever appeal a building permit in this town and that's plainly not the case. Or no matter how egregious the
error is, the neighboring property, no matter how affected they would be from this erroneous permit, they could never appeal it. The plain language of section 3486 provides for this appeal. The town memorandum corroborates that. Again, it states that the Himlines have a right to
file the appeal and redirects the inquiry to whether the Himlines can demonstrate a special injury sufficient for standing, which again is to be determined when the full appeal the merits are presented. Um, as such, we ask that you deny the motion and set this appeal on the merits
for hearing on the merits. And should this council um desire or be inclined to refer this to the special magistrate, we would happily agree and stipulate to transfer this to the special magistrate without conceding any of the points that we've made uh today. >> Thank you. >> If I may briefly respond since it
mischaracterized a portion of my argument. >> Yes. >> The appellants are stating that the place that you're asking to engage in some sort of prohibited action um by extending these interpretations. We're simply reading the code 34.86 86
doesn't apply if there's another section that applies. 680 applies. It It's very simple. And and and and I think that what is making this sound less simple is the town has no obligation to create administrative remedies for this particular sort of concept. And so does
this mean that a property owner has no recourse at all? No. We have a court system for that. We have an entire process for this. And so the town today by granting this motion to dismiss is not saying that these property owners have nothing they can do. What they're saying is 680 which is the controlling
appellet section does not provide this remedy to these property owners. And if it if that's not the case, my suggestion to you is you have a serious interpretive issue with the rest of your appeals, including code enforcement and floodplane appeals, which I think can be addressed. And as to the magistrate
part, and I'll and I'll I'll stop after this. 3486 is an appeal to town council. It is not an appeal to the magistrate. That's the whole point here. 680 is to the magistrate. So I don't understand how you could deny the motion of the dismiss and then send us to the magistrate. I if
we're going to town council, then we're going to town council and we will have this appeal here about whether or not this building permit should be revoked because again that's the request based on the arguments of of the appellants. But my suggestion is we don't have to get into all of this legal gymnastics
because your code's very clear. 680 is what deals with building permits and and I want to and I'm gonna go on a limb here and disagree a little bit with your town attorney here because when we talk about what's the general catchall for appeals your land development code is organized into chapters and at the very top there's the administration section
in that section there is no reference to how general appeals work and I point this out because in some of these subsections like impact fees and historic preservation and concurrency those are not they when they get to the appellet section they point down to 3486
in zoning and say use that procedure, but building and floodplane have their own appelllet procedures. And so to suggest that somehow there's a catch-all provision at the bottom of the code and it doesn't make sense as to why you have these specific provisions in impact
fees, concurrency, and historic preservation. And so we believe in the written documents we provide a clear understanding of your code and that of the two interpretations, this one leads to less absurd results because this section does a lot of work in the rest of your code. There are plenty of things that can be appealed under this. Um, but
at the end of the day, you're not taking a remedy from anybody. It's just you're not expressly providing an administrative remedy and you don't have to do that. >> If I may briefly, yes, just clarify something. Um, there's no interpretation
needed. Our argument is that the the ordinance itself is very clear. Section 3486 says any administr any error any administrative official. It is you don't have to interpret anything. You don't have to add anything to that. It is plain unambiguous. Secondly, the
jurisdiction is with the town council and I just want to be clear that by offering to stipulate the transfer to the special magistrate, we're not conceding anything other than that. This jurisdiction is here. However, if the town council is inclined to then transfer that to the magistrate, we would agree to that. Um, and finally, in
terms of the way that this permit is being characterized as solely a building permit, um, the town attorney's memo actually describes it as both, uh, horizontal and vertical view. Horizontal being more land use and zoning and vertical being more specifics of the
construction, more of the what you would think of of a building permit. So, the permit that's being issued here is actually not so clear in one uh in one pot or the other. It's actually sort of a hybrid because of the reviews that are necessary including zoning for setbacks
for pvious space uh impervious surface area. So I I would I would argue um and I would uh push back a little bit on this being just some simple building permit. There's a lot more to that which is why zoning has to conduct a review prior to its issuance as well. >> Thank you.
>> Okay, Nancy. Well, I would just add that this is the first time that um your ordinance is coming before you um on these two particular sections of your code, which apparently there is a gray
area as to how to car characterize which appeal is appropriate. the amendment that was made to the review of the building official decisions that was made at a time where initially the uh
appeals of our building officials went to the Lee County Board of Adjustment and Appeals. Um and that was during the time where the town was moving forward with its building official identifying properties in the town that needed to be
demolished um because of the unsafe character of the structures as a result of Hurricane Ian. We were not aware that um the contract the interlocal agreement between the
town and Lee County had expired back in 2018. Um there had been no build appeals of building officials. So there was no reason to suspect that that agreement had expired. yet it had. And so town
council moved very quickly with an emergency ordinance uh directing all building official appeals, which at that time it looked like they would primarily be demolition permits or requests
um to the special magistrate to allow that process to proceed. Uh thereafter we did adopt the ordinance with a first reading um and a second reading and shortly thereafter in December is I
believe when this appeal was filed um which meant that the ordinance itself had changed and um I believe it was the intent of the town council to direct appeals of the administr of the building
official to the special magistrate and for that reason there was correspondence um regarding that process at that time. So, fast forward um this one kind of got
filed at the very last minute when the change had occurred. So, I think that that contributes to some of the um perhaps um confusion or um disagreement as to which process applies. If you
recall, those of you that were present at the time, there was a lot of debate from some of our residents concerning who can file an appeal of a building official uh decision. And um for that
reason, um Becky and myself, we did provide you with a short memorandum on the issue of standing. It is our position that anybody can file, but that doesn't mean that they have standing. and standing is what would be the basis
for the denial because of um the lack of of standing. But if someone wants to file an appeal, they could file an appeal procedurally, but they're not going to really get their day in court because of the of the standing issue,
which you have to show special injury um and and whatnot. Um so today I think that we're really looking for um a decision from you so we can try to move this matter forward. Um I think you have
basically three options. Um the first is to approve the motion to dismiss. and as your council um the reason that you've heard argument from both councils as well as the material in the agenda that
this is not the correct forum for it that it should be directed to the special magistrate rather than to you as town council in the form of an administrative appeal. that the issue of standing
um that is also a reason at this point I believe to um to approve the motion to dismiss and also briefly there was reference made to a variance. Um and in my materials I or my response I provided
my thoughts that it appears that this is somewhat of a collateral attack on the variance which was approved by you which was approved by a circuit court judge which was then approved by a appellet
court judge as being properly granted. the survey being based on I'm sorry the variance being based on a survey which was then subject to other challenges and attacks which is all set forth um in
your agenda materials. So I think if you want to approve the motion to dismiss um I think you could um based on those three reasons um you could also deny the motion to dismiss for the reasons set forth by
Sheay Mr. Useri um and set the date for a hearing on the motion itself uh excuse me on the merits of the appeal. And your third option would again to be to um to grant the
motion to dismiss and they could then go to the special magistrate. They could quote transfer it to the special magistrate at which point he would make a determination as to whether or not he had jurisdiction and whether or not the parties had standing. So that's kind of
how I see the issue going forward. Um my request would be that um we come to some kind of decision so that um the parties can uh review their their rights and discuss with their clients and take
whatever next step is necessary. >> If I may just ask a brief question. Uh Nancy, I believe you said if they would grant the motion and then transfer. I think you meant denial. >> Yes. I'm sorry. Okay. Make sure it's clear. But you would they would deny the
motion. Um whether or not they have the authority to actually quote transfer is a subject that is debatable. Um but nevertheless anyone can file and whether or not you have the ability to have
standing before the magistrate whether he believes he has jurisdiction or not that's another another day. So Nancy, just quick question. So if say we were to dismiss this, then that
would bypass the special magistrate part of it. Then they could choose to take it on to higher courts. >> Yes, I believe that there would be probably an appeal of your decision. Um quite candidly, I think that the parties
are at odds with each other. um and whatever you were to decide and most most likely there would be an appeal. Um which is fine. They they're entitled to their day in court. They do have other remedies available to them to try to resolve this.
>> Well, before I'll save my comments, see if there's any questions. John, do you have any questions? We're allowed to ask questions, correct? Yeah. Okay. John, do you have any questions for either of the counselors? Well, Sorry.
>> So, what I'm hearing is that this is basically the dispute is based on a believed error by a building official that has come through LPA and council multiple times and then
has also been moved to a court of law and then further appealed from that. Is is that a fair characterization? That is the variance that has gone through that procedural route. >> Right. >> However, when the building a permit was applied for that building permit was
dependent on the variance having been approved and the variance is dependent on a survey which is primarily the the substantive part of the the appeal. If I just something relevant to your question,
>> the survey that is intended to have errors. Now the other side will say that the survey does not have errors. >> Understood, right? >> The error that arose and the disciplinary action from the state survey that information was not
available at the time in which the petition for file. So, it's not that the issue we're bringing up now has already been ruled upon because it has not. That information is new and that's part of the basis here.
>> Let me take it. >> As long as the green light turns on. If it's not >> dead, >> it probably dead now. >> Can only take much. >> Was mine on that? >> Yeah, I think you were. Just to go over the full paniply of
disputes here. I agree with that characterization that at the time of the variance that information was not known. But there's one more dispute beyond this one. After that information was learned, and this thing's really hot. I don't know if you want to turn it down a little bit, but after the that
information was learned, they submitted another request for reconsideration that isn't this appeal at all. And so that I assume is going to have to come to you too. That's not this. And so there are three challenges before you. There's the variance which was litigated to the end.
There's this the building permit appeal. And then there's a third reconsideration that has not even hit your desk yet. It's hit your staff's desk, but it hasn't hit your desk yet. And so this information um I would not characterize
as being uh I I just want to make that distinction because I there's we're going to have to do that too. And so what we're asking for and I know it sounds like what my client is doing is asking for a very parsimmonious read on this. But because there are so many disputes here as to this one issue, I
think it is critical that the code be very carefully applied in each case here. And so to that question of where are we in this dispute, we're in what I would call trunch two of four because as I mentioned in my argument, there's a
civil lawsuit that's already been filed in circuit court about this pool that is in addition to all of this. So there are four disputes going on about this. Three of them are before you. One of them we can call resolved and that's the variance. this one the request for
reconsideration based on that survey issue. But what I want to note and you have this in your records is after that was done my client surveyor redid the survey it was submitted to the town and you all issued a screen cage permit based on
that variance and that was not appealed by the other side here. And so I I you know when we talk about what where are we in this dispute it's getting so intershed that at a certain point what would be helpful is just to draw a line
in the sand here and that's what we're asking for here is your code provides two options here. Um they didn't follow the correct option and that's not amazingly that's not going to stop this dispute at all. We are going to litigate this thing for the foreseeable future.
Um, but that doesn't mean that we need to here have another appeal about this building permit. And I would agree with the characterization that this is a collateral attack. I I just want to be very careful that we're not lumping in lots of different factual and legal disputes across different actions into
this. That's not what we're here about. Yes, the parties may be the same. Yes, there might be an issue that's common, but they're not the same legal issue. They're not even the same factual issues in some cases. What's before the council today is whether or not 3486 applies.
And I would I would note that it states specifically in plain the language is plain and and clear. The town council will hear and decide appeals where it is alleged there is an error in any order, requirement decision interpretation
determination, or action of any administrative official charged with the administration uh and enforcement of the provisions of this code. That's what we're here for. So, there's a lot of I understand that there's a lot of talk about the variance and things of that nature. Right now, it's simply whether
we can file the appeal. The town memo uh corroborates our position. we can file the appeal. Standing is the proper inquiry. I think standing is what we're all kind of um you know looking at here. That's that's for another day. Whether my clients can show that they have a
special injury above that of the general public, that's for another day. But here, the language of the code is clear. It's unambiguous. Florida law requires that you apply that code without extending it, without limiting it. And it's also clear that you need to use the
entire code. That code section has an exception and the exception states that it does not apply if there's any ordinance or other regulation or provision of this code which provides a different appellet procedure. 680 does that and so I I don't understand how we can ignore that exception. I am asking
for the same thing. Read the code as written so we can move forward here. I only addressed those other cases because there was a contention that somehow it matters that the surveyor was found to be in in violation of some regulations post the variance appeal.
>> So I would be remiss if I did not point out to council that um your staff did review um the initial survey and its mistakes. We did attempt to get a um
surveyor um hired by the town to review it. Uh we were unable to um obtain one in a timely manner and thereafter the placids uh through uh Mr. Lombardo filed a new survey and I believe staff
reviewed it and found that there were u no issues that would impact the decision. So, I I would like to go ahead on the record if I could ask one of our planners just to make sure that I stated that correctly. >> Just for the record, I would object to
that. I think we're going into the merits of the appeal now. And I think that's problematic and the way that this was noticed and had been discussed prior was that we're not going into the merits of the appeal because I could also provide my position on why I believe that the survey is wrong, but then we're going down the merits, right? That's not
the decision for today. That's what the town memo says that that's not the decision for today. >> So, That is a that is a true statement, but it's it's very difficult to keep the issues separated. Um, as you can see, they're all somewhat inter intertwined.
And the intent today was to simply focus on the um procedural components, but I didn't want you to leave thinking that um staff did not do an adequate review because they did. >> You know, I guess I would tend to agree
with you to the point of this is what we're here task to do. I agree with you, Nancy, as well. There's a lot of things intertwined. I think there's other jurisdictions that are going to hear all this stuff. It sounds like you're going to you're going to take this as far as you can take it, but I agree with you
that the code is the code. And if you're going to apply the code, you have to apply the entire code. Often times we we see plans up here where people that want something apply just a section of the code because it meets their narrative, but they don't look at the entirety of the code. So, I agree with you. I tend
to side on on your side when it comes to the entirety of the code and how it reads, at least my interpretation of the code. Um, so I would be on your side to dismiss this appeal. Um, but I'm looking to my fellow counselors for their input. That's my two cents on because I do want to keep it separate because I agree with
you that all that other stuff, surveys and hearings and appeals that people that have gone to school for a long time to be able to work through that, judges will solve that. We're here to talk about the code and I agree with you that
I think the code in its entirety um supports your argument today. >> Mayor, I would Oh, sorry. >> Oh, go ahead. >> I would have to say I'm leaning in your direction as well. Um I I'm leaning to u
make a motion to approve that the motion be dismissed. Um to dismiss, I should say. Yeah, I think as well that the code needs to be looked at in its entirety. >> Um, >> that is you're making that as a motion.
>> Well, I I support that. >> Oh. >> So, um, >> if anyone else has discussion, I can make it as a motion and then we will discuss it. >> It >> I I will make the motion. I would like to make a motion to approve the motion to dismiss
because of the the wrong body and uh I think standing comes into that as well whether that's debatable at this point or not. I think it's the standing issue. >> I will second for discussion. >> Council MLAN, you want to I guess I kind of jumped over you were quite you were
quite finished or not. >> Uh no, it's it's fine. Um, I agree with the characterization that you put as what we're being asked to do. Um, but I do believe that the entire code needs to be taken into account. Uh, and
I would support a motion to dismiss and I would not support moving that towards um our special magistrate. Vice Mayor Saffford. >> So if we do
with this this motion, what's next for? >> This goes away. >> This goes away and all of the other remedies still are in play. >> That is correct because the motion to dismiss would dismiss the appeal on procedural grounds before this body. So
there would be no reason to hear the merits which would go into the survey issues. There's a reason I didn't go to law school. Um, >> but there are no offense. There are there are other mechanisms, right? And they're being pursued.
>> I want to make sure that he has other avenues. >> He does. >> I believe so. >> Is that cor Nancy? That's a direct question to you. >> Well, I I can't give legal advice to to them as far as what their appeal rights
are but >> the Right. I think that the town attorney is saying, I mean, she can't tell you whether we're going to appeal or tell me whether we should appeal. I think she's implying that an appeal would take place. I would just note that a decision based upon whether or not the
council thinks there are other remedies would be inappropriate. >> No, fair enough. >> Good question. >> I'm I'm basing my decision >> though. It still goes down to whether or not the entire entirety of
the land development code is being that's the thought process that we have. >> Councelor King, >> I guess I would like a little clarity around 34-86 because it says the town council will hear and decide appeals where is alleged there is an error, but
I haven't heard where the error was. Yeah, the error uh which is contained in the appeal itself is that the building permit was issued upon a faulty uh an incorrect survey. So for example, the issue of how much impervious surface is
allowed if the lot size is now bigger, right? You can say that there's more pvious surface and therefore your percentage your 67 required percentage is you're meeting that when you might not be meeting that if you had a smaller lot, right? Depending on the survey or even the setbacks for that matter. But
if, sorry to interrupt, but you're arguing with yourself. You you essentially just said that we have to take this matter specifically about the appeal and not talk about this. But now you're saying that you're using something you don't want us to discuss as a reason why 3486 applies.
>> I was just providing examples cuz the council member asked for what the error was. If if I'm going to answer that question, I have to some even if it's generally, I have to answer the question. John, go ahead. >> No, that's right. Um, I guess now I'm confused as if there actually was an
error. If the survey was provided to us, we made a ruling based on that. Then we got another survey. >> Well, that that is I'm not hearing an error. That's going back to the merits. >> That would be the merits of their appeal. >> I understand. But that's what the appeal is based on. >> That is correct. But >> so there's no error in my mind.
>> That today they were not arguing um whether or not there was an error on the survey. They're only attempting >> to narrow the issue. I'm just trying to understand 34-86 and that's what it says. >> I'm not hearing an error. >> Okay. >> Is what I'm saying. >> Understood.
>> Thank you. >> Okay. We've got a motion and a second. Do you want us to restate the motion? Nancy, >> if you could because I think council member McClean said that he did not want to transfer it, that he simply wanted to a motion to approve the motion to deny.
>> Okay. Council Link, do you want to restate your motion? Yes. I will make a motion to approve the motion to deny. >> Dismiss. >> To dismiss. I'm sorry. To dismiss. I said to deny. Yeah. To dismiss.
>> And I will second my I will renew my second to say I will second the motion to dismiss without the Well, I can't really add to the motion, can I? >> No, but I think earlier you said that for the reasons set forth in the motion. C.
>> Yes, I did. All right. Motion and a second. Was that sufficient answer? Sufficient. Okay. Yes. >> Got a motion and a second if there's any further discussion. >> So, just to clear since we've changed some language, it sounds like we're voting on a motion to dismiss.
>> Correct. >> Thank you. >> All right. Councelor M. Uh, Councelor Link >> approved. >> I >> I'm an I. Councelor Mlan. >> Hi. >> Uh, Vice Mayor Safford. >> I. >> And Councelor King.
>> Hi. That motion carries unanimously. >> Okay. >> Um, item R has been removed. >> So, that brings us to final public comment. >> Um, >> yes, >> Mayor. We added the discussion of the proposed settlement. >> I thought we were going to do that under
your items, but we can do that here. >> I'm sorry, >> you're correct. Okay, that's right. That goes under town attorney items. >> Town attorney. Yeah. Okay. Um, then final public comment. Anyone? >> Anyone still here? All right. No public
>> no public comment. We'll close public comment. Town manager items. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Uh first, I'd like to talk about the uh draft uh or the feedback that I received from the the school district of Lee County on the
draft ILA. My comments to them, well, our comments, I should say, staff and uh and council's comments on the draft ILA. uh they reviewed those incorporated many of our suggestions and uh and are are uh
uh providing some feedback on others. Uh basically what comes comes down to the bottom line is what we received is um they um agreed to immediate property access to the property upon signing of the ILA.
So that would give us a little bit more uh time to work on this from when it's signed. The only stipulation they added is uh some insurance documents, some insurance I guess proof. >> Um which is totally fine and we would we would ask for that anyway. Um they also
uh approved or acknowledged our request and integrated into the draft expanding the time to work on the application from 120 days to our request of 12 months. So much uh much more time for us on the ex
extension there. Um and then uh the for them to give us records uh for the school uh they asked for 60 days as opposed to 30 uh that was in the original ILA. Um there couple of areas where I think we still have some work to
do with them. It's um between you know staff negotiations back and forth. Uh one is uh they push back on any changes or any additions to the usage of the property beyond that for educational purposes. uh majority of that I think we
can agree to, but we'd still like to discuss some uh of that with them. But more importantly, um it's going to take a little bit more time. Uh and thankfully uh Becky Becky Vos uh also reviewed this for us and uh wants to
have some internal discussions again with us on um she's warning that there's several provisions especially in the force majour uh section here which uh you know are are make would be very difficult for the town when it comes to
the one-year reopening deadline doesn't clearly account for all measures especially hurricane recovery and it could let the school board reclaim the valuable property if the uh project hits the foreseeable delays, any foreseeable delays. Uh she lists seven risky
provisions total and you know really wants us to get together to work through those before agreeing to this draft ILA. I say all that just to say that we're still making progress in negotiating with the with the school district. I still feel uh strongly that we'll come to an agreement. Uh and as we get ready
to move into the um the at the committees to help us start working on the application. Um we we still have a little bit of time to work through these details with the school district. Um so I feel comfortable uh with where we're at right now in the process. There's still some work to do, but uh uh we've
got the right experts in place to do that. Uh the I'd like to talk about two more uh really the Bay Oaks irrigation and sod um thanks to the community services department Jeff and hard work of the team they were able to uh negotiate with
our our contractor you know that uh for for doing our landscaping in the town and got the the cost of that down to uh an amount you know around $230,000 which is what we have in the fund uh to fund that work and I believe we'll be able to move forward with the irrigation and
soding of Bay Oaks Field in the very near future. I don't want to promise a specific timeline because there's still some details to work out, but just wanted to update the council that we're moving forward aggressively on that. Uh, two good things coming up that uh for the town here is uh Roar Offshore was uh
purchased by a new owner, a gentleman by the name of Sean Trene. He approached myself uh the uh and the chamber uh with interest of bringing back the roar offshore to Fort Myers Beach and uh specifically for this year he'd like to
hold a single day single class event this fall. Um and is uh wanted to meet with us to uh see if what issues we might have. Uh but also at the meeting were uh Lee County Sheriff's Office, fire district uh off uh officials as
well as uh some business uh business leads from the town. Uh I believe that it's very doable what he wants to do. There'll be very little impact to town when it comes to a uh traffic disruption uh or any physical security concerns. Uh
I I believe we worked through all of those during the meeting with our partners from uh the sheriff's office and from fire district. And I believe even though we don't have a special event permit ready for approval at this time, what uh the owners of the Roar Offshore are looking for is, you know,
tenative consent, if you will, that that uh if they meet all of the, you know, requirements of ourselves and the uh and this the sheriff's office and the fire district specifically, uh that that that they'll be able to move forward with that. What they're looking for is just some kind of acknowledgement, which I
gave them, that uh I think they meet all the requirements for an event. They want to start advertising uh without the the risk of it being denied. I know I can't offer them that 100%. Because we don't know what uh the final special event permit was, but I just
wanted to brief it here, make all of you aware so that uh they're comfortable. >> Okay. Yeah, I'll come back to that. Yeah, thanks. And then uh finally, we also had a meeting not long after that one. We had a meeting with Tom O' Rearden from Cars on Fifth and What's Up
FM and our emergency services partners. Had a couple of meetings. One here uh at town hall to talk through just some general ideas of what it is that if if they were to agree to do an event here on the beach, what that might look like. The next week we did a walkaround with
the sheriff's office, the fire district, and the cars on fifth people through downtown Fort Myers Beach. So I that I'm updating the council to let you know that those discussions are ongoing, still moving forward. Um and uh you know, we're we're just hoping to keep
Fort Myers Beach on their radar screen as a potential location as they're looking for other locations to do alternate events for cars on Fifth. back to the Bay Oaks irrigation and sod. Uh Jeff reminded me really what I needed to
do was walk that on for approval since it's over my um my approval threshold of uh um and and I want I'd like to ask to do that today. Uh so we can get moving with that uh that project. Um it is uh
who's our landscaping uh folks again? Sorry. >> Tidewater. >> Tidewater. >> My name is Jeff Hogy, community service director. Our contractor is Tidewater. >> Tidewater. So, it is underneath our Tidewater contract that we already have >> and it's What's the What's the exact amount?
>> STA. Is it a um just a work order? >> Yes. And the amount is >> 2325, I think. >> Okay. And the description you've already provided. >> Yeah. And we went through the bid process. I'm sorry to interrupt, but we went through the bid process already
with the townwide landscaping and irrigation contract that was bidded out. Um they they won the bid and so we're going with with that contract and those pricing. So we already have vetted this out. It went through the whole bid process. Anybody could have bid on it um
on the townwide um landscaping and sod. So we did our due diligence on that end um as well. So, >> uh, go ahead, John. >> I'm sorry. What was the total cost again? >> 232,000, I believe. 500.
>> Yeah, we need >> Okay. Coming from the general fund or >> uh park impact fees. >> Park impacts. Thank you. So to keep the recordkeeping straight, um you may want to authorize the town manager to go ahead and sign it and
bring it back for ratification so you can actually see the terms and conditions and we can get it into the town clerk's records. >> I concur with I will make a motion. >> Wait, wait, budgeted. >> We'll discuss it. Yeah, I will make a
motion to approve the town manager to execute the contract with Tidewater for $232,500 for the irrigation and soding of Bay Oaks to be brought back to council for ratification at a future meeting.
>> Yes. And when it does come back to you, I will have the ability to give it a legal review. >> Okay, there's a motion. So my question is was I have a little bit for >> Well, we have to have a second then discussion because there's a motion. So
either someone can second it and we can have discussion or nobody can second it and it dies. >> I'll second it and then Scott can have. We got a motion a second for Go ahead, Scott. >> Okay. So thank you. My question was this budgeted? Did we we knew this was coming? We have funds already available.
>> Yeah, the park impact fees we have funds in there right now. Um, the reason we did it this way is cuz >> That's not my question. My question was, was this budgeted? Did do we was this in our our fiscal year budget that we knew it was coming
that we had funds ready for? >> Well, it would be in impact fees, which is a separate fund outside of the general fund. My understanding is that they have multiple project budgets that are going on in there simultaneously. >> Okay. >> So, the funds are there.
>> Yes, sir. Okay. That's the only question I had. >> Good question. Any other discussion? >> Not for me. >> Got a motion and a second. There's no further discussion. Uh I'm an I. Councelor I. >> Councelor McLean. >> I. >> Vice Mayor Safford.
>> I. >> Councelor King. >> Hi. >> Motion carries unanimously. >> That's all I have, Mr. Mayor. >> Okay. Town attorney items. >> Okay. Um, so this morning we added um to
the agenda a discussion of a proposed settlement agreement from White Sand of Whitand Properties of Fort Myers Beach LLC um and the town of Fort Myers Beach. I have a copy of that agreement and I will
pass uh give each of you a copy and I will go through the entire agreement with you. It's very short. >> Thank you. Thank you, Madam Attorney. >> Thank you. >> And you can
actual vote. You can see it. >> No, let's keep him in the dark. public records. >> So the terms of the um proposed settlement agreement, they're very straightforward. um that basically uh eliminated the re
the need to have a uh close session where we would have focused more on strategy for the litigation itself and what uh costs would be to the town. Um so the draft agreement basically we start with um paragraph one which is
incorporating all the recitals which just sets forth the background. Um, paragraph two is the actual settlement amount. The amount that's being offered is 150,000. Um, bearing in mind that there has
already been $50,000 paid for releases of various leans and that is one of the issues in dispute in the uh the litigation that has continued to drag on since 2022. So that would be a release of all the
leans, pending fines, dismissal of the litigation, the agreement not to impose any further leans to the extent such as available remedy uh including attorney fees and other costs by the parties both sides in pursuing the litigation.
So the compliance is if White Sand were failing fails to comply with the obligations of the payment of 150,000 and I'm sorry I I omitted that that money would be paid by February 1st.
Paragraph three provides that um they would submit to the immediate filing of an agreed upon final judgment in the lawsuit and dismissal of the appeal because right now there are two cases that are pending. Um, what that
boils down to is either White Sand would be providing you the money directly by February 1st of 2027 or we would proceed directly to the judge um with an agreement that the lean amount that is
due is 150,000 and we would continue to go through the court process um with a sale of the property. the first 150,000 that was bid on the property would then be paid to the town. So, it's somewhat
of a pretty good guarantee that you would get your 150,000 um on February 1st of 2027 or somewhere shortly thereafter. Following payment, we would actually record um a copy of the satisfaction and
release of the leans. Uh we're going to wave um defenses. They will wave defenses. Uh we will release them from any liability. They will release us from any liability. And that is pretty much the rest of the
agreement is is just boilerplate um settlement agreement language. Um but that is the primary terms. And if you agree to this, we'll go ahead and move forward with the settlement. If you feel like you would like to discuss
um strategy or potential uh liability to the town, then my request would be that um you allow me to announce a executive session to be held on Thursday. So,
>> well, I I guess I'll I'll defer to the council members that may not know a lot about what this is because they haven't been here. Um, this has been going on for years as as to whether they feel it's necessary for them to have a a shade
meeting to discuss all the things that Nancy just talked about. I honestly don't even remember who's been I know John has been on the council and I've been on the council. I think >> I think it was us and I >> I can recall the meeting when John actually u put forward a settlement
number and it was higher than this but not Not all that. Maybe 80,000 I think more >> something. I think I recall. >> So Nancy, can I clarify? We'll get the 150,000 in addition to the 50,000 that's already been paid. Correct. >> Yes.
>> Yes. The the 50,000 has is a credit. Um but we will get 150,000 in cash >> and having >> so technically the release or the satisfaction is 200,000 >> and so that's not far off what I
originally proposed as a settlement. Uh and as I recall um our end was very shaky as far as proof of what um so I think this is a good all allaround settlement for the town. So if do you guys feel that you need to
>> I was in on the uh these meetings. So I'm up to speak. So um I I'm leaning in this direction. It would be up to John or you if you need more information on >> as I said I was I was present and I remember them. >> Okay. >> Yeah. I'm kind of leaning towards the
you know this has been going a long time. I know I'm sure this person wants to be out of be done with this. You know, it's holding up the development of that property potentially of something happening um in a very popular spot of the beach. So, I'm inclined to to move
forward with accepting this to just to to to be done with it at this point. How many years have we been in been in going after this over a dispute that neither side has really in my opinion neither side really has a lot of leg to stand
on? >> Well, there's not a lot of paperwork left. >> Yeah. I think you would have been the only person on the council now that would have been here when it originally occurred right? >> Uh >> or is it even preced you? >> God. >> No. Yeah, it was it was it was I think I just came on council, but I think the
initially started before I was on console. Yes. So I think this precedes 2018. It's been going on for and and there was a lot of for the public maybe that doesn't know. We can discuss it, right? So we're not shading. >> Sure, you can you can discuss it.
>> Um this is it went to the the acquisition of property from a gentleman that was working with another person on the island that it that supposedly paid a payment, didn't pay a payment, couldn't find a payment. It's it's been a it it's it's gone back to I think
2016. 16 or 17. So, I mean, this has been going on. >> That was the original code enforce that was that was the original code enforcement case in this in this matter. Yes. >> Yeah. >> So, do you want to I'm sorry. >> Go ahead. No. >> Do you want a motion on this or do you want consensus or >> I would be looking for a motion to
authorize the mayor to sign the um settlement agreement subject to legal signoff just in the event that there's any type of last minute um cleanup that we need to do, anything of a substantive nature, we would bring back to you. But but the bottom line, the substance of it
is the settlement amount and the payment date as well as the filing of an agreed final judgment. >> I would go ahead and move that the mayor sign the Fort Myers Beach code enforcement settlement agreement. Is that good enough or
>> Yes, that that would be fine. >> And I would >> subject to legal sign off. >> So if I have to correct a typo or something? >> You bet. >> Thank you. So, you got a motion by councelor King, seconded by councelor Link. Yes. The only extra discussion I'd like to add is
not that I have to tell you, Nancy, but please make sure that every eye is dotted, every te's crossed, every so that this finally is is taken care of and we don't have to ever worry about either side having to talk about this again. >> Thank you.
>> Um, Councelor Kink, >> I councelor Link, hi. >> Councelor Mlan, hi. >> And I'm an I as well. Motion carries four to zero with Vice Mayor Safford abstaining. >> Thank you. >> I guess I should have asked, but I assume >> just rubber stamping. >> Yeah. Anything else?
>> Another >> Y. >> No, I'm good. Thank you. >> Okay. Um, council members, agenda items and reports. Councelor Mlan, >> uh, I think now it's appropriate to talk about some of the ribbon cutings and the opening of the park, etc., etc. just
want to say that it's wonderful to participate in those. I love seeing the progress. Uh I could also say that I know that we have upcoming uh discussion that uh Chris King and I have worked on with town staff that's that is forthcoming
at the MP >> at the MMP. So look forward to having feedback on that. >> Okay. Councelor Link. >> I have nothing. >> All right. Vice Mayor Safford. >> I have nothing. Councelor King. >> Well, since uh we had to discuss this
today with the increase in the mil millage rates maximum, I'd like to move that the town begin the formal process selling 2525 Herea Boulevard by securing an updated independent certified commercial appraisal to establish the current fair market value with the
intent to return a prime parcel to the local tax roles and provide capital funds for other pressing town needs. Okay, there's a motion by councelor King. Is there a second >> hearing? No second. That motion is
denied. >> And I'm good now. Thank you. >> Okay. Uh I just have one thing. The So we were approached I'm sorry. Let me pull up his name. Um from a gentleman who's a council member in um in let's
see if I can get it right. He's Yara Bakoa Dominican Republic. >> So he has reached out to us. Dimmitri, I believe his name was Dimmitri >> Deo. >> Demo. That's right. Thank you. Demo. >> Uh who's a council member in Yaraakoa
who has reached out to us about the possibility of being a sister city to them. Um similarly similarly in Fort Meyers, they have a sister city sister city program with uh Santa Domingo Dominican Republic. um where they kind of share
>> Santiago >> Santiago I'm sorry thank you Santiago >> um obviously it's two different countries it's two different things but it's but we share a lot of the same things we rely heavily on tourism we're beachfront right we're golf water property they're mountainous but there's
very much about uh tourism it's about resilience it's about um e you know the economy >> environmental environmental so it's a lot of different things and they had asked if we wanted to be they actually came And I don't know if we have what they brought us. They brought us a little >> I forgot to bring it down, but
>> they brought us a a a very nice little piece of art that from from Yarabico that is a place where you can stand and take pictures in front of their town. They've got some really neat features. They showed the town manager and I we showed them around the building. Um he had an interpreter with him. Maybe we
should have had Scott speak some Spanish. I see. There you go. Um but we thought it was a very interesting idea. Um, it would obviously promote tourism for both our cities. It would have some culture for both cities to be able to do it. I think it's a really neat idea. They've asked us or
invited us down um >> to no to the Dominican Republic. >> Oh. um to to formally accept. Uh but we told them we have to go through the council to get um approval to see if uh the council is okay with putting to forward a resolution to be able to
officially make it official that we would like to be a uh a a sister city with them. They invited both the town manager and myself down in December at no cost to the town. We would be paying for our own travel. Anything that we go down there to do would not be a cost to
the town. Uh, I I I think it would be a a great way to promote. They really found what he thought was one of the most interesting things. Obviously, they're they're rich in culture and history much like like much like we are. And when he saw the picture of the arches, >> I he couldn't get enough pictures of it.
He he stood there and just took pictures. So, I told him about you can actually go see still see some of the arches on the other side of the bridge. And he just thought that was the coolest thing ever. He just that's exactly what they had. and showing us some of the pictures. They have really neat things that I think gave the town manager some
ideas as to what we could do like maybe in the Times Square area of incorporating a little bit of their city into our city and vice versa. I think it'd be a really unique opportunity to be able to to partner with a sister city that shares a lot of our values. But town manager, do you want to add to it? I know that you were you had some really
cool ideas, too, when you were talking with him. I think it's important to note too that what the mayor did that this this doesn't cost you know the the town or our taxpayers anything. It's just a good opportunity. Uh we looked into the sister city program uh sister city uh
sorry uh international it's SSI is actually a program that was established by President Eisenhower during his term to promote international goodwill and peace you know amongst the uh international community uh and that this was they were connected with us through
our as the mayor mentioned the mayor of Fort Meyers who Fort Myers has a similar relationship with a sister a town of theirs. So, uh it was recommended that they reach out to us. I think yes, the mayor points out several things that we
discussed in the short time that we met with them. Uh that how they've set up some things in their town that could really look nice here and vice versa. Uh ideas on how how we, you know, different governance ideas, different uh community
engagement ideas. Uh there's lots of great things that could be shared between the communities. Um, this is what the mayor was talking about that uh it is a a basically it's a replication of a uh
what they have in their downtown of Harabakoa. Uh basically it spells out this the Harabakoa. Then it's got artwork throughout all the letters there of the different cultural and environmental uh things that make their city unique.
Um so I agree with the mayor. great opportunity. Um, and >> that's all. >> Mayor, I I don't want to be the bearer of bad news. It's not bad news, but we just need to um proceed slowly and
cautiously. Um, apparently the Florida legislature um enacted some legislation effective July 1st of this year um terminating specific sister city and sister state agreements
um primarily with countries of foreign countries of concern um and hopefully and I don't think so but I have to double check that the Dominican is not a country of concern that the governor is not allowing us to
go forward. So, we'll make sure that we don't have any snafuss there. >> Okay. Well, based on that, can I still seek >> approval for a resolution should it not violate any state statute? >> Yes. And the go Yes.
>> Okay. So, I guess I'm just seeking support or input if if my fellow counselors think this is a good idea. >> If there's no violation, I think it'd be a good public relations move. That's a counc. >> I I agree. I just point out it's spelled
J A R A B A C O A for anybody that's out there that wants to do some search and some education on what the town looks like. >> It's a if you do some research, it's a beautiful looking city. It's down in a valley surrounded by mountains. They're very out very outdoorsy there. Um but
yeah, look, it took me a while to learn how to say harapoa. >> Harapaka. come soon. Thank you. >> I don't have enough enough information, but um for now I don't have any reason to say no. >> Yeah, I would still have to come back before us with a resolution if if it
meets state statute. >> There's a whole agreement. >> You got it all. Okay. Do you just need consensus, Nancy, or do you need an actual vote? >> Um yes, but I think this is something Will's staff could start. Um
Okay. >> Yes, we could we can start drafting the uh for for ratification. >> Okay. To bring back. Well, just let me know, I guess, if it's something if you find out, Nancy, that it's something that can't happen because of the new state statute. >> Yes. Yes. I will let all the council
members >> so that I could let them know that because they won't move forward until they know that we will. >> We will try very hard. Um I would like to go to the Dominican and say this is my sister city, but Yeah, just if you look it up, it's a really it's a really cool city with a
lot of cool cool history. >> All right, that's all I have. If there's nothing else, John, >> to quote the great Groucho Marks, "Hello, I must be going. I cannot stay. I came to say I must be going. I'm glad I came, but just the same, I must be going." And with that, I'll move to adjourn.
>> We are adjourned at 4:31.