everybody ready good evening everyone uh Marty would you please call the role council member Steve Freriedman here council member Doug Gillis here council member Anna Richards here vice Mayor Don Horton all here and Mayor Sharon Mahoney
here we have a quorum okay mr philipsson would you lead us in the pledge please past council member oh pass council to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands
one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all thank you very much okay any requests for deletions or emergency additions deb the whole agenda the whole agenda okay i
don't know if I don't know if I can control that but okay don uh no ma'am i'm good steve yeah just uh something I' I've been forgetting to talk about before in March uh the Florida Keys Fishing Guides Association put on a great uh event it's become an annual
event it's called the Florida Keys Fishing uh kids fishing seminar and it's uh really just an incredible day where a a bunch of fishing guides volunteer their time the park staff comes out and helps a lot the police the fire department we had over a hundred children come out there from ages 4 to
16 learn how to cast a fly rod a spinning rod throw a cast net how to handle a fish how to tie flies it's just a a great event i just want to acknowledge them and the staff in the park for uh putting this on hopefully we can continue it and make it even bigger and better in the future thank you yeah
it is good anna nothing okay i want to have a brief uh conversation about the dog park under mayor council communication so put put me there okay public comment anything that anyone would like
to say yes we do have some speakers uh we'll start with Van Caden head followed by Joe Wishmire we'll start with Joe Wishmire i don't see Van at the moment so I'll disappeared on us i'll take his place here yes joe Wishmire Plantation Key
mayor and council as a concerned citizen and longtime resident of Marada having a group of people that are under investigation by the state attorney's office deciding who is going to run the village and control our finances is very troubling in the past there has been
sometimes over 50 applicants that had to be looked into and after many many discussions and months among council members was narrowed down narrowed down and eventually one was selected by a unanimous vote of five to
zero maybe because of our history of retaining managers we only had 16 applicants this time this council voted not unanimously to only interview six of the candidates only four showed up to be
interviewed then there was a meeting among the five of you with not one person from the public allowed to attend this action again seemed a little questionable since then one more candidate has withdrawn tonight you will vote among the three remaining
candidates while they all seem very qualified we should question how much administrative experience running a city or village on a day-to-day basis they have maybe you should also look into the 12 candidates that you didn't even look into before to make sure that we are
getting the best person for our village as a reminder in the past all managers have been elected by a unanimous vote single let's see all council members have to deal with the manager that's why that should be always a unanimous
decision good luck with that since there is a little dysfunction among the council members with one trying to belittle another one these actions are very unprofessional and should not be tolerated by the mayor and public our community is already divided and we need
a qualified manager to help heal us not just one who agrees with your individual agendas of prodevelopment lastly council procedure states that agenda items be placed on the agenda in advance of the
meeting by discussing an appeal that was not on the agenda and then taking a consensus to move forward costing the taxpayers even more money on this case was unacceptable especially since the judge was very critical of the planning
department and the village attorney in this case this of course was done without any public comment for a council that keeps talking about council procedures apparently following them is only when it is convenient for you let's
all follow the rules and try to build confidence unity and trust among council members and our community thank you morning next up is Van Caden Head good evening council i'm Van Caden Head
um I've been standing at this podium since 1998 in this room and other rooms uh since the incorporation of the village of Alam Marada and in those 26 years I have
tried my darnest to uh establish a program amongst the councils various councils that I've spoken before uh that was uh centered on providing
workforce housing for the people that make Alam Marada work now the the fire that we had and the traffic that we have uh undercuts and underlines the problem it is for to get
our workforce from Homestead on a bus and have these people drive back and forth every day an hour and a half from Dade County to come here to work so I'm hoping that with what uh you
heard from the sharet in the last sharet um that that you would uh concentrate your efforts in the upcoming uh months uh uh in uh providing for workforce housing by which I'm talking not uh
$2,500 a month three twos that you give the land to Habitat for Humanity to do i mean that makes money but it doesn't solve the problem the problem is is uh bus boys and waitresses and bartenders
and and people that work in the motel um would be much better off if they had a a a studio efficiency or some kind of a a 4 or 500 square foot room that they could spend $1,000 a month for and then
they would be able to be here they would be able to be here during Christmas season um we had a Christmas season not long ago where the they had all the they didn't have a second shift at Chica Lodge or the Islander and they had to give away rooms to the help so that they
would have somebody there to work the next day cuz the buses couldn't get down through the the traffic jam so I mean you're shooting yourselves in the foot I believe by not paying attention to this problem and you and it's been an ongoing problem like I say I've been trying to
push this for 26 years and it's a brick wall and all I've really gotten in 26 years is a bloody head but I'd really like to see um uh with the with the input that you get from Able Cities East and the input that you heard from the
people of this town that we need affordable housing and and I mean affordable workforce housing not affordable housing for for somebody to come in and uh buy up all the the property and then turn it into vacation rentals so thank you very much i
appreciate it thank you Marty thank you V next is Sue Miller representing the Alam Marada Community Alliance sue Miller representing the Alamada Community Alliance imagine a government where everybody agreed on everything
where no one ever questions authority and where the leaders followed without hesitation while it might sound peaceful such a government would lack the dynamic exchange of ideas that fuels progress dissent is the lifeblood of democracy
it's the voice that says "Wait a minute is this the best way?" Democracies generally tolerate disscent recognizing it as essential for healthy debate and accountability but apparently dissent is not well tolerated in Alamraada as
witnessed last Tuesday when Mr freeman was lectured on how democracies work and accused of using hyperbole and induendos instead of facts when he sends updates to his con constituents steve was criticized for voicing concern about the
council meeting on March 29th that was not noticed to the public and was therefore in violation of the sunshine law i agree with Steve council meetings have consistently been noticed on the village meeting calendar the calendar that has the date and time of the
meetings in large bright blue blocks on the left and the public notice and agenda links to the right the March 29th meeting was not there meeting notices are required in a particular format by
Florida law the the village seemed to have violated the sunshine law as to form and lack of ability for the public to find the notice public notice of candidate interviews that day was noticed though not on the village
council meeting calendar but no notice to the public that a council meeting would follow everyone should ask to be added to Steve's email distribution list other council members might want to follow Steve's lead and communicate
regularly with constituents mr freriedman was scolded for not understanding government processes what processes are more critical than the village charter section 58C of the village charter states and I
quote "All actions of the village council shall be by ordinance resolution or motion yet at the Tuesday meeting four members of the council asked the village attorney to an appeal an appellet court decision an issue not on the agenda no acknowledgement of likely
costs to taxpayers no motion made just basically four thumbs up so who needs a lesson on government rules the village should be doing everything possible to promote public participation it's sad to see the negative reaction of
council so often during public comment there's no one that cares more than Van Caden head and how many of you um listen to the wise uh comments made by Van tuesday's
consent agenda approved over a million dollars in taxpayers cost with not a word of explanation or discussion by the council maybe a rule should limit how much cost can be approved via the consent agenda today the selection of
our next village manager may be decided whoever manages the village must be able to work with all five of you not just the majority as a new village in 1998 five city managers from towns in South Dade came to Alamrada to offer their
assistance as the new village was formed all five emphasized the critical importance of a unanimous vote for manager every single vote for manager since 1998 was spec has specifically required a unanimous vote never have we
had a selection process quite like this one just 16 candidates applied and 12 were eliminated without being interviewed or ranked and one of the four interviewed withdrew this decision will be the most important decision you
make in your term as off in office you need to make it wisely publicly and unanimously let's face it I'm a dissenter but I bet I'm not alone you need to do far more to encourage public participation we have such smart people
in this community listen to all of them whether you agree with them or not you may get some fresh ideas and great advice and you may be the voice that said "Wait a minute is this the best way?" Thank you thank you Sue marne
there's no one else signed up okay public comment is now closed let's move on to uh the mayor council communication and um I would like to briefly talk about the dog park again i was sort of uh didn't express how
greatly I thought uh we should honor Mangrove Mike and I do and I was sort of the next day I got probably 3540 phone calls in favor of it a lot of people a lot and not a single other name was brought up for the park except for
Mangrove also um I was approached by um a group of people who want to form a committee and uh come up with some thoughts on what we should do so I guess Sheila what I'm looking for is um can we
move this along and how do we go about doing because I wasn't clear after the meeting where we were at so if you would please uh yes um my understanding was that we were going to bring back a resolution at the May meeting to rename the the dog park okay um the only
clarification we would need would be the exact naming would it be Mike Forester Mangrove Mike can we let the committee the people who came forward and said they would like to form a committee can we let them come back with some suggestions in that way how does that
work i think the council would need to authorize the creation of a committee and then um uh we would need to come up with some uh qualifications or or some consensus at least as to who would be uh a member
of that committee i can tell you who approached me was Paul Mining who was a very good friend of mangroves and uh he would be willing so I don't know if you want to get with him or if anybody has any other thoughts but I'd like to move this forward it's been a while so and
since we're redoing the park it's a perfect timing so how do we do this clearly they don't know i have a suggestion oh go ahead Deb um so that we can move it along because I was under the impression that we'd have a
resolution come May okay um maybe those people can get together it's not a formal committee and just submit names for the them to present to for them to present to us
um in our council communication for the next meeting and we can kind of leave the blank in the resolution i'm asking for the official name yeah because the the title we can just call it you know the normally we put the name but I I can adjust the title so it's more generic
and then that way you all can uh approve whatever the name is for the dog park and the only thing I was trying to uh get across on Tuesday night was I didn't know whether we've we've named things before and I was just trying to figure out if we had a procedure already in
place okay so I guess I'll have Paul reach out to you Sheila and then yes they want to they Do you want the resolution to come back without a specific name first and then reach out to the committee or do you want to have
a resolution that adopts a committee and then we can move forward with that committee whatever my my suggestion would be that we come back with a resolution with the name blank if you can figure out how to do the title and those people that want
to gather it's not a formal committee uh they call the village and submit what they think would be appropriate names to choose from is that okay does that work it works for me i'm looking at Sheila well can I Yeah
of course go ahead i don't think it should be limited just to just those people maybe anybody who wants to well they can reach out a public if anybody wants to submit something paul said reach out to him because it's not a formal committee you know anybody but I'm saying let
anybody I didn't wasn't trying to limit it no I'm just making sure it's very clear to everybody that has Paul said reach out to him so it's for anybody who's so anybody can call the village or anybody can call talk to Paul is that
agreeable okay yeah we can put that we can put that on on the website and then once we once we'll bring back the resolution with a generic name and then once the committee decides we'll clarify that maybe it can go in the newsletter too absolutely newsletter newslash okay uh social media all of those things i
think we owe it to him he did a lot for this community so thank you everybody okay moving on village attorney nope nothing from me okay then I guess we're moving on john yep we are on tab A
tab A is a resolution of the village council of Alam Mara village of Islands Florida considering administrative appeal number PLA 2024251 filed by Barton W smith agent for 81641 Islam Marada LLC appellant relating to an administrative decision
and interpretation by the director of planning denial of a vacation rental license for property located at 81641 Old Highway having real estate number 0041-660-000000 on Upper Madakumbi Ki as legally described herein providing for the transmitt of this resolution to the state department of commerce and
providing for an effective date upon approval of this resolution from the state department of commerce okay Jennifer good evening jennifer Deau planning director i'm here this evening for the administrative appeal that was filed relating to the denial of a vacation rental license for the property
located at 81641 Old Highway this property is within the village center zoning district and is within the mixeduse flum which is allowed to have a vacation rental license however it is a commercial property that houses a
residential space above it our zoning code uh defines a vacation rental uh unit as one that is within a single family dwelling unit or a multif family dwelling unit or a mobile home part mobile home so we interpret that to not
include residential properties above commercial facilities because those would be considered mixed use our code does not defined single family dwelling unit or multif family dwelling unit neither does the building code so we have to rely on uh de dictionary
definitions i brought with me two uh typical dictionaries that planners use in the course of doing business uh the planners dictionary and the latest illustrated book of development definitions which both describe um the types of single family multif family
dwelling units as standalone structures not above a commercial building um so that is why we denied the vacation rental license we have been consistent with this practice um I will note that
uh the original denial uh identified the property as solely commercial and not mixeduse and that was why a corrected denial was sent to the applicant um and we stand by our position that the vacation rental license is not allowed at this time at this property we're not
arguing that he does not have a residential property above the commercial it's just not eligible for a vacation rental license at this time okay um open public comment now or I think the applicant has a presentation
okay planning just like you're reading something a definition that wasn't brought up before okay do we wait or do we move on yeah it'll be about one minute okay yeah i mean I
think it would be probably best to have the applicant go first or the appellent in that way and then public comment can happen after that but um we should get moving okay yeah really the music [Music]
sorry my limpingness but I will pull this up in one second here oh yeah she wants the Jeopardy music i mean well there's there was the response was
that uh originally was that as they stated one that it was a commercial structure and that there was no uh residential use then they filed an amended denial based on a mixeduse
combination now at the hearing we're being brought definitions of single family dwelling unit that had not been provided prior to the hearing so I can state unequivocally that the definition of a dwelling unit is defined as a single family uh a single family
dwelling unit is a a dwelling unit utilized for for the use by a single family you here you have a structure that has a single family dwelling unit located upstairs they have applied for a single family dwelling for a vacation rental use of a single family dwelling
unit no one can contest that it is a dwelling unit no one can contest that it's a single family because it is not a multifamily which would be multiple units for multiple families they're now trying to state because somehow downstairs there's a structure it
changes what the upstairs is that is being utilized for the single family unit says a new argument and so I have to I can pull the state statute on it but normally when the this the local ordinance does not define it you refer to state statute and the definition
under the state statute of the dwelling unit is a unit that is utilized by a single family for residential purposes and in this case the upstairs is a single family dwelling unit the application is for the uh vacation rental use of the single family dwelling
unit so going into the appeal uh I my client is 81614 641 Island LLC this is an application for a vacation rental license uh the address is 81641 Old Highway right along the
highway uh agreed that it's uh vacation uh sorry village center and that it's mixed use mixed use is permits vacation rental use and the denial was vacation rental
unit means a single family or multifamily residential unit or mobile home that operates for vacation rental use nowhere in the definition of a vacation rental use does it provide that it is the structure it is the unit the
unit in this case is the upstairs your code does define several things it defines family as an individual or two or more people related to each other by blood marriage or adoption or nor more than six unrelated individuals living together as a single housekeeping unit
this definition does not apply to group occupying boarding house or hotel or motel there is no dispute that the upstairs is utilized as a single family dwelling unit it's not a multif family there's not two units up there it's a single
family dwelling unit downstairs or commercial use residential use is also defined as applied to any lot plot parcel tract area or building means used or intended for use exclusively for residential dwelling purposes for the purposes of the building permit
allocation system and transfer development rights only hotel and hotel units are included vacation rental defined a single family or multifamily residential dwelling unit doesn't say single family or multif family dwelling
structure it says unit the unit is the upstairs or mobile home that operates for vacation rental use they're applying for the vacation rental use of the unit the upstairs additionally a vacation rental use is defined as a use of a
single family or multif family residential dwelling unit or mobile home that is rented leased or exchanged for a period of less than 28 days right now the dwelling unit is being utilized for terms longer than 28 days the application is for the vacation rental
use which reduces the time the dwelling unit can be utilized to less than 28 days otherwise the unit doesn't exist it's either a single family dwelling unit multifamily dwelling unit or it's not a dwelling unit it would be either a
hotel room motel room mobile home or it doesn't exist no one is contesting the residential use doesn't exist in fact in 2019 this property was subject to a letter of understanding specifically identifying the existing residential
use moreover they inquired about using the second floor for vacation rental use and of course they stated hey you have to comply with the value of the property and you have to comply with with the application process nowhere in the LOU does it say hey this is a structure that
has commercial downstairs uh uh residential upstairs you either have to abandon the commercial use downstairs or it cannot be utilized because the reason is in 2019 correctly interprets they can obtain a vacation rental use if they meet the criteria in
fact they even talk under paragraph 4 about the commercial use downstairs and using it and the single residential use upstairs but again the vacation rental use was never talked about that it could
not occur because the structure had commercial downstairs and a single family dwelling unit upstairs now at that time this is a little less applicable because now it's being agreed to that there is a residential unit
upstairs it's just somehow being claimed that the residential unit is a single family residential unit i've never heard of something that's not either multif family single family or some a mobile home but here's the here's the floor plan shows the two bedrooms shows a
kitchen complies with the requirements for a single family to reside in the dwelling unit wholly contained single family residential dwelling unit with a staircase that's its own entrance not part of a commercial unit plans were
approved it's been in place this is the history that we just went through originally the denial was it was commercial structure then after we filed the notice of appeal evidencing that it was a residential use the change was now it's because it is has a commercial use
downstairs that it's because it has multiple uses it's no longer applicable the fact of the matter is the upstairs is a single family dwelling unit there's no other definition otherwise you would not be able to call it a residential use you have single
family dwelling units multif family dwelling units mobile homes those are the three types of residential use you have it is a single family dwelling unit it can be currently rented for periods of more than 28 days they've applied through the procedure required for
vacation rental use permit which allows you to rent less than 28 days and they meet the requirements which which nobody stated the construction isn't worth more than 600% they're in the mixeduse flume which is required and so therefore the permit
should be granted thank you i just would like to rev one thing we didn't even get to the point of determining whether or not the structure met the requirements because we denied it immediately and the determination of valuation would be difficult in this situation because the property appraiser
doesn't distinguish floors in valuation they just they value the entire property and so you can't value a commercial piece of property for a vacation rental i I I one this is outside the scope of the denial i would object to to going into you open
the door so Okay well let's let's go ready let's go into this can I get some clarification Madam Mayor from the appellent certainly please um is it my understanding that you're not contesting that this is a mixeduse residential property you're
just saying that the parcel on the upper portion is single family dwelling unit and the portion on the lower half of this building is a commercial yeah and and the LOU from 2019 even identifies that okay so this So but I'm just saying we're in agreement that this is a
mixeduse residential property yeah but you're carving out the two different single family dwelling and upstairs there's commercial downstairs tomorrow I can file a a declaration of condominium the upstairs residential dwelling unit would be a single family
residential dwelling unit separate if you would like that to be the solution to how you value the upstairs I'm happy to do that no the the reason why I asked for that clarification is I just under section 30-1293 which talks about vacation rental uses of residential properties
and it says the vacation rental use of a single family and multifamily residential property within the village shall be allowed it doesn't talk about a vacation rental use within a mixeduse property so that's why I was asking for that clarification that and and I think it's it's important
to to and so there's there's vacation rental units being utilized right now by a property down the block that is both commercial and residential there's uh a hotel that has five vacation rentals permits issued for inside the hotel this
is not the only circumstance where these have been approved and utilized annually the fact of the matter is you have a single family residential dwelling unit in an upstairs which is the specific requirement of the code your application is to rent within 7 days if what they wanted was well we we need a mechanism
to value just this that's that would be a different situation that we may not be even having this appeal what they're stating what the appeal originally was there's no residential unit file the appeal we get they pass that and then it's well it's it's a multi-use there's
no single family residential dwelling unit so that's what we're here to under and so we believe your code provides this is there's no other types there's single family dwelling units multif family dwelling units mobile homes those are your residential uses then you have transient uses which are hotels and
motel i don't think you have you have RV parks too those are transient units too those are your two different types of residential use in Island Marada otherwise it's not residential and so we have a residential unit it meets the criteria for vacation
rental use and so with that we'd request that you overrule the determination of the denial if what we need to do then is go back and work with them on evaluation that's fine but that was never the the the impetus of the denial and so we
can't address things that aren't in denials thank you anybody have any questions for Mr smith right now okay thank you yep all right um I believe we should open
public comment for infor yes ma'am four is first this one's not quasi judicial so you can do we can go in any way morning does anybody Yes we do um Vancet followed by Similar miss Miller will go first he's tall
um I was glad to hear him differentiate between whether this vacation rental license is for a structure or for a unit i agree completely that it's for a unit
and effect of January 1st 2023 no new vacation rental units in mixeduse future land use map categories can be registered unless it's assessed at a value in excess of 600% of the current median which would mean that the rental
unit not the structure has to be assessed at over $700,000 in order to get a license the entire property in question is assessed at $847,995 so to
subtract 100 or 700 from that that would mean that um the downstairs would only be worth less than 150,000 and the upstairs 700 in order to to be eligible
for a vacation rental license the council and the community continually talk about the critical need for workforce housing ideal location is above retail space in our downtown area certainly denying the vacation rental
license would not guarantee long-term use of the residential space but issuing a vacation rental license would guarantee the dwelling will not be available long term i think that you need to accept the word of your planning
department thank you Marne thank you S next is Ban Caden Head i complet this this Vancaden head I completely concur with Mrs miller and uh the discussion that we had with our sharet was about building uh workforce
housing above commercial establishments and this this property has been there since I was in high school and and somebody's lived upstairs red's Barber Shop or whatever was downstairs but
uh when uh Hopalong U Smith I He got he's got some bone spurs i guess he caught them from Donald but uh the the problem with with this is
it's going to take away a a piece of Isa Marada that could be workforce housing and and when Mr smith put up his his uh diagram of the second floor of the property there are two bedrooms and there are also two bathrooms which which
means that it doesn't have to sing be a single family dwelling unit it could be a duplex workforce housing uh unit up there you could have two people two separate people rent a bedroom and a
bathroom upstairs i mean the the possibility is uh up to the planning department it's up to somebody smarter than me but uh just to take this off the market uh when it's been recommended uh by uh able cities east and by people
over over the years sitting up at the dis that we have uh workforce housing over the commercial housing and then to try to change this i think that the the what's in the what's in the uh charter
what's in the the uh u law that we're following that's just been read uh that Mrs miller just underlined uh it it definitely excludes making this a vacation rental
because it's it's right on it's it fits every all the the prerequisites for uh workforce affordable housing and uh I think instead of just having one we could actually have two if you look at the fact that there's two bedrooms two
bathrooms and a large common area for a kitchen so thank you very much thank you Van marne there's no one else signed up okay public comment is closed council discussion um go ahead
so when I look at section uh 31291 talks about the intent and purpose and it says the intent and purpose of this division is to protect single family homes and then residential neighborhoods from adverse impacts on vacation rail uses
at uh I I you know I I remember all of these older buildings that were kind of live work and play buildings they were built they were built as the owner's unit or the manager's unit above the business
part and um the people back then were a lot smarter than we've been in the past years because that's what we should have been encouraging for a long time mhm i I think that uh um I think that the intent of the code
when it talks about to protect single family homes is not talking about protecting multi-use buildings and I think that uh it's a slippery slope to start turning these things into vacation
rentals so that's how I feel about this any Steve Anna Dab anything good so this the back when these buildings were built we didn't have the category
of affordable workforce we built um that that mom pop bedroom above the business there was there was lots of them mhm um and the intent was for it to be an apartment
uh for somebody as time grew um mom pop moved away but it was still an apartment for somebody um I the mixeduse idea uh it's it seems fairly clear in the code to me and I
think the interpretation was right that we need to protect we need to protect where these where these belong where they go um this the intent of everything was for
those to be and I don't I don't necessarily want to classify it affordable workforce but an apartment for somebody to rent whatever category that is um hopefully it would be affordable
workforce but whatever category it would be not to be a vacation rental [Music] um so I'm inclined to also um not think it's a a vacation rental
property anna Steve anything well you know it's a shame that everything comes down to money it it just is we know we need workforce housing and I have a building commercial downstairs and I looked into putting two
units upstairs and to make them affordable we have to figure out something because I'd be 135 before I got my money back by doing affordable so we do have a serious problem with vacation rentals let's just be honest
bring in much more money and uh so that is more attractive than renting but we have to be smart enough to realize that if we continue to go the path we're going we're not going to have anybody down here to do anything so I'm leaning towards the same thing that these two
have that I feel bad because and this is why we need to redo this comp plan because that slippery slope is needs to be defined better so that's my feeling don I I also want to touch on what Sue Miller said that the the latest number
out says that the median income in Monroe County is 118,000 you multiply that uh times 6 and you get 708,000 you're not going to get uh an upstairs that's that's valued at the
amount that the code would require on an $847,000 building uh on 708 so uh I'm sure that Bart wants to say something in closing but I don't I think this is a loser well even even if you
don't consider because that wasn't part of the originals um Jennifer said that they didn't even get to the evaluation side of it mhm um that's what it was we have been pushing for upstairs
apartments since I got here mhm uh and encouraging it and figuring out how to change the code so you could do more density if you did something like that um this is this is one of those perfect places that fall into that category
um Bart didn't make the argument but but the math says that it probably wouldn't evaluate out anyway but you guys want to say that's not what the appeal was about you don't want to say anything okay all right all right bart do you want to say
anything before we Look every every community talks about affordable housing especially in the Florida Keys but someone's property rights for a nonrestricted uh dwelling unit does not mean because you desire more affordable housing that
you can say "Hey we wish this this was used for workforce housing." I but that's and I I understand that sentiment but it's property rights and you have a person that if you deny it it's because you're saying that it's not a single family dwelling unit in it
because that's a single family dwelling unit that's that's what this appeal is about and so these discussions about the bigger picture of affordable housing are not supposed to be about what is at stake right here you have a vacation
rental application for a single family dwelling unit that is the decision that's before you if you look at the code it meets the definition of a single family dwelling unit up that upstairs and that was the basis of denial there was no other basis that was
provided the basis of denial the way I understood it was the fact that it was a mixed use and mixed use is with commercial isn't that and and the code specifically provides that vacation rentals permitted
of single family dwelling units multif family dwelling units and more mobile homes and so it's but it doesn't say mixed use and it does say it does say it has to meet all the other qualifications along with it that was not the basis of the denial
okay okay john do you want to say something i was just going to say there there is a uh a a provision in the law it's called the tipsy coachman doctrine uh it's I knew I knew that i was I was just going
to say that yeah so I just sometimes there um I just I bring this up because of the point that that I think um uh Mr smith is making is is saying that you're limited to either um granting
the appeal because of a uh what what he views as a more limited interpretation of the code i don't I don't think I agree with that i I I agree tend to agree more with with Councilwoman Gillis that it's a broader uh um interpretation but there is a a a thing in the Florida
law that says even if the lower just tribunal got it wrong got it right but for the wrong reasons it can still be supported i'm not saying that's what happened here but since this is being brought up and it seems like it might be brought up for appellet purposes i do want to put that on the record as well i
love the tipsy I love the tipsy coachman doctrine just because of the name he I'm not going to disagree with that that's what that's what it states uh I I just fundamentally believe that there's a due process requirement that that denial provide the basis of denial the basis of
denial that was that it is not it does not meet the vacation rental definition which is a single family dwelling unit well let me ask you a question yep miss Miller and Don both did the math i mean if they're saying the size is not going to work why I even continue on this i
disagree i think I think that that if we created a condominium out of it because assessed value would have to be reset to market value what do you mean create so So you can Florida law allows you to Florida law allows you to condo anything
you know so you can condo this bu building condo the parcel upstairs would be then a single property with the yard and I know the weird thing about your code is is for some reason you guys wrote it and whoever wrote it and I agree that it needs to be updated
because the idea of utilizing assessed value where assessed value is based on whatever exemptions and and caps on increases in value occur whereas fair market value is the value of the market where an willing buy what a willing uh
seller would pay a willing buyer in an armslength transaction which is what the property appraiser actually values things at and so when you when the difference between assessed value and fair market value is cap because of the statutory of 10% so you actually have a cap so anytime you have a transaction
even a transaction to create a condo it resets value to fair market value what happens if you reset this property to fair market value the fair market value of the upstairs will easily exceed the requirement for a unit and so if we were sitting here and the argument was about
that I certainly would come in here with a value the fair market the the assessed value and fair market value being equal because of the creation of the condominium and we would be we would satisfy that condition but that was not what the basis of the appeal was and so we we would we would assert to you it's
a single family dwelling unit it meets the requirements and we request that you find it in favor thank you okay Deb is there anything else so we can move on no um well he he alluded to the the the
craziness of our vacation rental code which it is but we're not changing it because we want to keep it holy got that part so well we don't need to go there on that but I I still I still think that
the the definition that or the determination that Jennifer did is is proper in the the mixeduse idea of and the commercial and the single family the
the it was supposed to be a freestanding it was supposed to be in a cond condominium maybe or something like that but not in this context okay and just as a side note I think that John may agree understand this you
guys are allowed to loosen your vacation rental ordinance without losing it i'm just throwing out there that for this the discussion today because that assessed value is is just as I Yeah there was a case that actually decided that you good okay all right
well then Okay go ahead no I was just Okay i'm looking closing i was just going to make a motion go ahead thank you very much or I was going to Good yes we're good okay based on the testimony and the evidence presented tonight I want to uphold the denial i'll second it
marty would you please call the role vice Mayor Don Horton yes council member De Gillis yes council member Steve Freriedman yes council member Anna Richards yes and Mayor Sharon Mahoney yes the motion passes 5 to zero
okay John moving on to tab B yep tab B is a resolution of the village council of Alamara Village of Islands Florida approving residential BPASS rankings and awarding residential building permit allocations for quarter 1 of 2025 and providing an effective date jennifer
thank you uh I'm here this evening with our first quarter 2025 residential market rate building permit allocation system allocate allocation award uh pursuant to section 30-475 of the code of ordinances
the village council is required to take action after reviewing the building permit allocation system evaluation report pursuant to resolution 24-11-131 adopted on November 19th 2024 two market rate residential allocations were made available for 2025 through BP
pass and one market rate without land dedication is available for distribution in quarter 1 of 2025 at the close of quarter 1 50 applications for market rate residential permit allocations were in the BPASS Q awaiting building permit allocation awards the market rate residential applications have been
evaluated scored and ranked according to the criteria outlined in section 30-476 the application recommended for approval is permit number PRSFC 202100428 filed by Ruiz George Alberto
on June 21st 2021 at 1253 p.m for parcel ID 00394486-0000110 0 at this time we recommend that the council approve this award of allocation okay um Martney public comment
um yes Mr mish excuse me Mr wish Meer it's hard getting that out huh yes joe Wishmire Plantation Key you know I've said this a number of times here before that we're in the process of redoing our LDRs and our comprehensive
plan and we are running out of BPASS allocations we don't know what the state's going to do we don't know what the county's going to do so at this time I would highly recommend that we hang on to what we got and we wait until the new comprehensive plan and LDRs come out
before we make any more land decisions thank you Arie anybody else no ma'am that's it okay public comment is closed councel Deb i'm ready to make a motion motion to approve
she beat me to it i'll second it okay marne would you call the role council member Anna Richards yes council member Debbillis yes council member Steve Freriedman no vice Mayor Don Horton yes
and excuse me Mayor Sharon Mahoney yes motion passes by four 421 john tab C is a resolution of the village council of Alamara Village Florida approving non-residential building permit allocation system rankings and awarding non-residential
building permit allocations for quarter 1 of 2025 and providing an effective date so again this is our first quarter 2025 non- rental residential building permit allocations uh pursuant to the village code 30-475 the village council is
required to act after reviewing the building permit allocation system evaluation report the available total of non-residential square ft for allocation in 2025 is 43,14 square ft this is the first allocation for 2525 there is one application for
non-residential B pass in the queue awaiting an award in quarter 1 the proposed resolution approves the non-residential building permit allocation system ranking and awards pursuant to the comprehensive plan policy 1-3.1.11 and village code section
30-476 the non-residential applications were evaluated scored and ranked according to the criteria outlined in the village code section 30-476 one application from the non-residential B pass category is recommended for approval and identified as PRBL
202400516 submitted by Castaways of Florida LLC received on January 16th 2025 for parcel 0045380-000000 they are requesting the amount of floor area of 1478 square ft at this time we recommend that you
approve this allocation award okay and I see Don you're not allowed to talk so you're not in this i'm allowed to talk kidding uh Marne public comment i'm kidding do not have any public comment for this
item okay council I make a motion to approve second marne would you please call the role council member Deb Gillis yes council member Anna Richards yes council member
Steve Freriedman yes vice Mayor Don Horton i abstain oh thank you yes I have that already in the vote called you anyways well I'm going to do it on all five so yeah I know and Mayor Sharon Mahoney yes okay that motion passes
forward to zero we are in the um quasi judicial portions so I'm going to read the quasa judicial information um please be advised that the following agenda items are quasi judicial in nature if you wish to comment upon these items please inform the village clerk by filling out the
available signup form an opportunity for persons to speak on each item will be made available after the applicant and staff have made their presentations on each item as a reminder testimony and quasi judicial items must be in person zoom testimony is not permitted these proceedings will be handled in accordance with the village code requirements all testimony including
public testimony and evidence will be made under oath or affirmation additionally each person who gives testimony may be subject to cross-examination if you do not wish to be either cross-examined or sworn your testimony shall be disregarded the general public will not be permitted to cross-examine witnesses but the public may request the council to ask questions
of staff or witnesses on their behalf the full agenda packet on the uh on each item is hereby entered into the record along with the village code and comprehensive plan any correspondence that was received by the village staff is included in the file and part of the record persons representing organizations must present evidence of
their authority to speak for the organization further details of the quasi judicial procedures in section 30-256 of the village code may be obtained from the village clerk today there are four quasi judicial items which are tabs DF and G at this time I
would like to ask anyone who intends to speak on the quasi judicial items tonight to please raise your hand to be sworn in by the clerk if you intend to speak at all and again these are tabs D E F and G in the matter about which you are to give testimony do you swear to tell the
truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do the witnesses have been sworn um Madame Mayor there are the while there are four items uh two of them there there's really two there there's companions for each one um
historically we've taken them uh together when they've been companion items is that something the council would like to do tonight as well everybody okay with it yes okay so I'll start with D and E first then and uh D is an ordinance of Isra Village of
Islands Florida considering the request of Windley Cove LLC to amend the village's future land use map from residential medium to mixed use for the subject property located on Windley Key with real estate number 0045350-0000 as legally described herein and to allow the parcel to be included
in policy 1-2.11.4 Four Windley Key mixeduse area 2 providing for the transmitt of this ordinance to the state department of commerce and providing for an effective date upon the approval of this ordinance by the state department of commerce tab E is an ordinance of Marada Village of
Islands Florida concerning the request of Windley Cove LLC to amend the official zoning map from residential single family R1 to Highway Commercial HC for the subject property located on Windley Key with real estate number 0045350-0000 as legally described herein providing for the transmitt of this
ordinance to the state department of commerce and providing for an effective date upon the approval of this ordinance by the state department of commerce uh these are ordinances on second reading uh council before we begin I would like you to please disclose any exparte communications that you may have had with the applicant or anyone else again
this is going to be on tabs D and E please include whether the person represented any group or entity as well as the subject matter as you recall thank you Deb i said when it came on the first time sorry that's okay i sat on LPA when
it came through on the first time and uh back then I believe I spoke to um that nice young lady back there okay Don you're out i'm abstaining okay Anna I don't believe I've spoken to anybody
about it i've spoken to Jocelyn about the property just doing the survey work but nothing that I can recall about the vacation rental or the Steve change yeah a recent text with Joselyn just inquiring about the property not really anything to do with this okay and I haven't spoken to anyone either since
the first time councilwoman goes when you said that nice woman it looked like you were looking at Miss Tedman i was sorry all right we're ready to proceed okay um I believe we start four wait you have the applicant's going to make her or I'm sorry plan director will make her presentation then the applicant and then
yes you're correct we start with everybody who's four afterwards so I don't really have a presentation this evening um as you recall this is second reading for these ordinances um to um reszone the property from the residential medium flum to a mixeduse flum and from uh R1 zoning residential
single family zoning to highway commercial zoning you recall that the purpose of the zoning change is to allow vacation rental use of this property these were heard by um this council on first reading on December 12th 2024 we sent the flums to the department of
commerce for the coordinated state review we received their letter with no objection um and that has been in your packet uh attached to your packet so I have nothing else to add there's no additional information um and as always or not as always but at this time we
recommend approval of these ordinances as was approved at first reading no should I ask if Joshelyn wants to get up and say anything or yes or no okay okay then John we're going to move in favor that's correct yes morning
i have no speakers in favor okay uh now we're going to move to all opposed marne uh first up is Van Caden Head good evening council um I remember when this first came to the LPA i was on the LPA as well
uh and it was uh initially uh the building permits were issued for affordable housing uh with Mark Greg propo proposing uh that they would be uh used for affordable housing and Tai Harris was
our planning director at the time and I did not uh think that the the the property fronted on US1 which was one of the stipulations and so I voted voted against it uh from the LPA and since
then uh it's now residential medium which there's two there's two beautiful homes there and uh Mark Greg sold them to his daughter Jocelyn Tedman and her husband and they have a a beautiful uh
uh pair of houses there that would be really nice for somebody to buy whereas uh to turn them into a for tend to vacation rentals you're going to arbitrarily uh give a huge
uh re-evaluation of the property because they'll be so worth so much more as affordable housing and and I I object uh to also you arbitrarily mashing these two things together because you're
denying me 3 minutes to speak against all four of them which would be 12 minutes you're saying that I should only have uh six minutes i think that's that's uh unfair and I I don't think that uh I mean if you want to do that
that's fine but if you allow us to speak for six minutes per item then that would be 12 minutes which is what we're entitled to you're trying to cut our comment off in half just by arbitrarily mashing these things together and and I
think that you've done it in the past it's your modus operandi it's unfair and uh does not reflect uh any kind of of uh uh equality or fairness in in the uh ability of the public to speak to
something like this now I've spoken like this before um uh and so have many other people so uh I would I would hope that you would allow us uh in uh uh re retort of this uh uh I mean it looks like it's
a done deal i mean it looks like I'm just up here you know flapping my gums for no reason at all but the thing is we're the the public is being cheated out of the time that they have there's four items we should have four items to
be able to speak to four items at three minutes a piece instead you're going to mash them together and say "Well you get three minutes you get you know and that's all you get." Well I I don't think that's fair well you got your three minutes i got my three minutes and and I'd like another three on the next
one too marty next up is Joe Wishmire yes Joe Wishmire Plantation Key before I start my my comment on this I know that uh the attorney said that I'm allowed to ask some of you to ask some questions so
I guess before I even go with any of these because it might be a moot point uh my contention is that these this particular parcel was sold in January so it's not even owned by Windley Cove LLC
anymore so therefore by them applying for this to get the zoning change and the land use I believe is a moot point because they're not even the owners anymore so I would like to ask somebody who would know is am I correct in that
assumption seems how they're not the owners they should not be applying for this john I'd like an answer please i'm not sure if they're the owner or not but certainly an owner can give and anybody make them an authorized agent to apply for them i mean I I believe they were the the owner at the time of the
application at least um so you can transfer it basically you Yeah okay thank you would that require a written power of attorney or something saying that that you're that they're allowed to do that i I think Miss Tedman's here and she if you have a
question if as to whether she has the the entity has the authority to apply we can ask her okay okay well then in in starting then the with the public comment I remember when this first came up uh we went into a whole thing i know it was because they started in with
saying it it was fronting US1 and then they I think they wanted to put two units on each property and then we got into all kinds of discussions and then we had to come up with the definition of fronting and we did that uh and they did end up building and like Van said there
are two beautiful homes they knew what they were getting and they were built and at that time they did get them as the market rate so they knew all along what they were getting themselves into so to now go all of a sudden for vacation rentals I think is is
inappropriate u I would also like to reiterate on the fact that at the last meeting I did say that you all should come up with something that if you do combine several things that you ought to come up with a ruling for that just came up with the especially with the islander
properties where we all had a lot more to say and mayor you did give us a couple extra minutes on that one but it seems like we don't get too much on all the others so we need to come up with some sort of resolution for that thank you okay thank you Mary there's no one
else signed up to speak okay public comment is closed council well first of all I'd like to reiterate um that the those houses were not build with built with affordable housing
allocations they were built with market rate there was discussion of early on when Mark owned it of putting affordable there but he abandoned that idea did not move forward did not get the allocations
for it and there was um the proper applications for market rate on that it's it it's true and I've showed you the ordinance so yes ma'am I agree
um so therefore that that part isn't relevant in my book they they they didn't get the allocations to be affordable you can't change an affordable into a vacation rental so yes ma'am my point Wait wait wait wait wait
wait where did you come from public comment is over public comment is over unless he's being cross-examined which Miss Council McGillis is not doing so public comment is is over thank you have a seat please go ahead the the fact that that we made
a special area use so that the only additional um use that was allowed on this property and the next one that we'll talk about was the vacation rental uh there they don't get any more density they don't
get to do any of the other stuff um it's only to qualify it for vacation rental uh was a uh a carveout that I think we should use this property sits right on US1 it makes sense they are beautiful
homes so I will be supporting this anna I'll just motion to approve steve do you have anything you want to say i'll second okay marty would you call the role please oh and just we're going to we're going to do each one separately
so is this a motion on tab D yes on D okay for tab D council member Anna Richards yes council member Deb Gillis yes council member Steve Freriedman yes uh Vice Mayor Horton is abstaining and
uh but Mayor Sharon Mahoney yes the motion passes four to zero all right I'll make a motion to approve tab E as presented second Miss Marne okay council member Deb Gillis yes
council member Anna Richards yes council member Steve Freriedman yes and Mayor Sharon Mahoney yes okay the motion passes four to zero okay okay get to No I got you that time okay um so I'll read
tabs F and G uh and again these are on second reading uh F is an ordinance of Alamara Village Florida considering the request of Windley Isles LLC to amend the village's future land use map from residential medium to mixed use for the subject property located on Windley Key with real estate number
00405360- 000000 as legally described herein and to allow the parcel to be included in policy 1-2.11.3 Windley Key mixeduse area 1 providing for the transmitt of this ordinance to the state department of commerce and providing for an effective date upon the approval of this ordinance
by the state department of commerce tab G is an ordinance of Alamara Village of Islands Florida considering the request of Windley Isles LLC to amend the official zoning map from residential single family to highway commercial for the subject property located on Windley Key with real estate number
0045360-000000 as legally described herein providing for the transmitt of this ordinance to the state department of commerce and providing for an effective date upon the approval of this ordinance by the state department of commerce jennifer do you have anything you want to say oh I'm sorry thank you Jennifer
um before we begin uh council will you please disclose any exparte communications you may have had with the applicant or anyone else and again this is on tabs uh F or G deb uh mine is the same as the last one i sat on LPA when it first came through and I spoke to
Joselyn in that time frame steve same as before anna same as before same as before thank you and my presentation is the same as before this is heard on first reading as December 12th 20 on December 12th 2024
uh the village council adopted the ordinance um it was sent to the Department of Commerce they we received a letter of no objection it's been in your packet at this time we ask that you approve the second reading as in your packet okay
i guess we'll start with uh in favor uh unless um Tedman has any presentations she's shaking her head now so all right so Marne in favor we have no speakers in favor okay marne not four um for the
opposed we have Van Caden what I would I'm Van Caden head what I would like to have said uh I realize that these are RM zoned houses that were built but the original building permits that came before the LPA were for
affordable housing and to me to switch from affordable housing permits into RM is disingenuous and and it was like changing horses in the middle of the stream now Mark Greg is a really good land use attorney he knows what he's
doing he did it the right way i'm not saying there's anything illegal about what he did but it was surreptitiously done with the present presentation of the LPA was for affordable housing was not for RM but the RM is is where the
houses got built and so uh now that they're built as as we have pointed out they're gorgeous houses and now uh you want to probably double the price uh double the value of those both those properties by allowing them to also be
rented uh like a motel you know by the week or by the day you know the the the islands of Alam Marada was supposed to be a vacation rental but not a motel and now you can rent that by the night and you can do the same thing with this it's
going to be like a wonderful $2,500 night motel and uh if you want to let uh uh disingenuous action at the beginning of this it's a house built on sand boys and girls morning next up is Joe Wishmire yes Joe Wishmire Plantation Key uh just
the same thing that I said about the last ones uh but I'm not sure that we got clarification as to whether or not the new owner gave them permission to do that or not so to avoid uh a problem later on I just thought you might want
to get that straightened out thank you Marty anyone else no ma'am okay public comment is closed council I'll make one comment please um when it came in front of the LPA that I sat on it was brought to us as
presented tonight so um it was not brought forward as affordable project that had been scrapped i don't even think that they I know that they didn't have allocations for it so um that being said I'll make a motion to approve does
any have a I'm sorry okay i'll make a motion to approve uh tab F anybody else have anything to say first nope second it okay marne call the role please okay for tab F council member Deb Gillis yes council member Anna Richards yes
council member Steve Freriedman yes vice Mayor Horton is abstaining and Mayor Sharon Mahoney yes that motion passes four to zero okay moving on to G do I have a motion and a second motion to approve i'll second barney
okay council member Anna Richard yes council member Deb Gillis yes council member Steve Freriedman yes okay mayor Vice Mayor Horton is abstaining and Mayor Sharon Mahoney yes that motion also passes for Z thank you very much
now on to the easy stuff no well um I was asked to take just a five minute quick break oh sure oh that is the easy stuff that's the easy stuff so I am I'm not Buddy Pender 5 minutes is 5 minutes thank you everybody have a seat please let's
start okay okay um I'd like to say something before we start if that's okay um I have sat on council now for two and two years and something and I've had
been through the roller coaster ride of managers and uh I know Debbie you've been on council before but when there's a divided council on the candidates I have a problem with that big time because to me the manager
should come in with a 50- vote not a 3-2 or a 41 and not that I ever want to quote Mark Greg but he did say uh we should all be united i have a concern that whomever is
selected for this job if it's not a 50- vote you'll probably be gone at the next election just because it seems to be the pattern um I wish Steve and I owe you an apology that I should have I want the best
candidate for this community and I do feel and I did tell you Terry Jamie that um when the fourth candidate dropped out I was concerned about only having three i wanted to bring others back in because
this isn't this is our decision but it's a community's decision and it's a decision that we have got to make that we all agree on and I'm very concerned that there's going to be split vote and we're going to be looking
at a divided council again or a manager whose lifespan is not going to be that long um I want to uh put it out there that I I would like to reconsider other candidates at this point and I know you
guys probably all don't agree with me but I'm having a really hard time with this because I think we're going to be divided and I think that's a horrible way to go into this so I wanted to say that and uh at least I know whatever happens I'll go along with the council
i'm happy go-lucky and easy to get along with but I want Okay Van I want the community to get the best person the best candidate and for this person to stay for more than the next election because whether we like to admit it or
not some of us will be here two years we'll run again some of us will run for the hills in two years so there'll be new people up here and I've seen what happened with Ted and I saw what happened with Rob so I just wanted to to clear my conscience and say that so
anybody else want to say anything i'd like to kind of tag on to that um yeah I have said on councils and that we've had to pick managers um this town is known for um picking managers
um there's been lots of reasons why managers leave and all that but what I want to say is that because of the kind of personalities that usually you'll sit on a council and not picking on is Marada as a whole you've got a
personalities and um Sue mentioned it earlier if we don't disagree on things then something's wrong that doesn't mean that I don't think we need to all be on board with a
manager at the end of the day but I do think it's very difficult probably impossible to get on first blush first vote first um consideration all five of us to be on
the same page we've all developed a a thought pattern of what we want what we like um and I know Sue said that all of them in the past had a 5-0 vote i don't believe they all started with a 5-0 vote
i do believe that when we took the final vote it was a 5-0 vote that we said that that says that yes we will support this manager yes I can live with that manager if we do today if we do some kind of
straw po poll um and we're all over the board um or maybe it'll come out that it's you know it's 4 to one or something i don't I don't know what that will come out then make that determination of whether
or not maybe that maybe the person or the two people that um I'm I'm going to assume a two three maybe the two people would go well you know I really like that person I I can
live with that person uh and I will support that person but I don't want somebody to vote for somebody just to support I want them to back the person but I think it's only fair for
all of us to to have an opportunity to um I just I just don't think 5A personalities are going to come up with one person on first round without some discussion or something
steve yeah Sharon i I appreciate you bringing this up um I I've been saying along that uh I want the very best candidate i want the very best manager that we can possibly get i think we have three outstanding candidates right now applicants that have uh have graciously thrown their hat in the ring and have
probably ringing their hands quite a bit uh over this process and um I think we owe it to the public to um to make a more exhaustive search and do some more interviews to find out if indeed we do have the three very best candidates
anna I think I'm happy sticking with where we are i think we have three fantastic candidates they're all local they know the issues they know what happens here in Alam Marada um every time everybody
goes outside of the county outside of the state it always ends up that they don't stick around they end up leaving they don't understand all the dynamics that go on around here and so
and it's not fair to those three to continue to drag it out and torture them in that in that light i don't see it as torture i see it as um picking getting the best candidate that's just my opinion go ahead Don so
um I' I've been with the village started with them in 2000 we had a manager that was uh had some longevity he came from South Florida uh we had some longevity with his replacement which was Bernie and uh he came from
South Florida he lived here in the Keys uh then we had a string of um of uh managers that came from other places and they didn't last very long we had uh um Maria fill in and fill out
fill in and fall out and fill in and fall out we uh uh end up with Ken Fields uh he didn't last very long he didn't come from South Florida he didn't come from Florida and he didn't last long uh then we ended up with a a staff member
uh who didn't last all that long and then we ended up with another string of folks from out of uh South Florida out of out of Florida uh that was seemed one right after the next after the next after the next i think a lot of uh
managers that come from somewhere other than where they uh from here from South Florida um uh don't realize the expense uh how excl you know how we're excluded from the rest of the country we have a
different mindset uh Sue can pick on me all she wants and all she's got to do is call and ask her to help her after hurricane and I'll be there with her i'll be there for her and and I you know that's that's what discourse is good uh arguments are good
and I don't disagree with that um I I think that we were really lucky this time that we uh that we got five people that have a Florida experience and whittle that down to uh really um
three that are you know are are home folks and they are all very qualified their uh resumeumés are awesome and I think we're making a terrible mistake if we don't choose one of them that's where I
go may I take on because mine wasn't about whether or not we should go back out for for uh more interviews because I am satisfied with the three that we have also I'm willing to pick from the three i was just trying to address that um I
think I just think it's really difficult on first vote to come up with one name five times concess yes that's all um I would I would prefer to move ahead with this tonight and and stay with I I've
sat on all those councils with with people from out of state and they try they're good there but it just didn't always work there's been a variety of reasons why council or like why managers leave um I think if you charted it it
was never the same thing um so it'd be really difficult um but I do think there's a mindset about South Florida uh particularly the Keys that will I think we ought to try it i I I really think
it's in my heart that we should try one of the three qualified candidates for today okay so Steve and I are outvoted which is fine so how do we Let's move on then does anybody like my suggestion of
the first first round i'm just asking i forgot what your suggestion was what What What is this of of like a a paper vote a straw vote of just to see where we are it doesn't matter whatever everybody else wants to do I'm fine with what
everybody wants to do i'm not going to write it on paper you're not I I just I just just to go just do a vote similar to what we did on council um but but it won't it won't be
tied there unless it's a 50 and I I just think it's important for for each of us to be able to say okay so this is the personality that I thought and then if we figured out that
okay three of you are already in one corner or four of you are in one corner then the other person can go yeah I can do that or no I can't do that and then we can discuss whether it should be a unanimous
vote to move on does that clear that up what I was trying to say let me see if I got this so you want to write a name down the first round and take and and if there's if there's three of one name then that's
it no that's not it because it has to be an official verbal vote it has to be the the tally vote cannot Can you jump in here please yeah there there would need to be a formal motion to uh select person X uh as the manager
and then um authorize u uh staff to uh negotiate an agreement um to be brought back to the council uh unless um unless the candidate was willing to sign like the same agreement Mr cole had and
then you all could obviously say we're we're willing to agree to that authorize the manager to sign obviously we'd have to replace the start date and the name but the the material terms would be the same so but there does need to be a formal we all write down a name on the paper and it comes three to two or
whatever then then we know that we really have a if it's three one and one huh it could be anything it could be well we don't have five names we could have three different names though whatever you guys want i I don't care if
you want if somebody wants to make a motion but I just think it would it it the council needs the opportunity to um and that that vote is it has to be made public the paper vote has to be made
public clarify me if I'm wrong um eventually but not necessarily on that very first round it it just works that we go okay we're all thinking on the same page or no we're all over the
place she's already cutting up paper i know the answer on the vote is yes eventually it is a public record so it' have to come out if if you all wanted to do it um where you don't know as we sit here today i mean we all would obviously it's
a public record eventually people would know but if you want to keep it amongst yourselves of just have Jamie say X number for person you know this number for person X this for Y this for Z we can do it that way again for for public records purposes and so the public's
aware that your name will be on it and and we that will be uh available to everybody let's just do round one paper that's what I'm saying just round one just let's start somewhere okay yeah
doesn't matter okay we promised not to go through a rema paper well I only brought so many so you actually brought these i came prepared just in case like a girl scout i am like
a Girl Scout i am very prepared when you're just voting for one right yes only voting for one right what that that was that was how I believe you all decided to do it just just vote for one is what I envision
you got to sign your name right and yeah absolutely their name will be on it absolutely we see who signs the checks thank you we had uh three votes for Ron Saunders and two votes for Jennifer
Deborrian sure whoa i know i actually said I thought it might come out yeah I did too all right so I'll make a motion to ex um offer Ron Saunders wait a second i want to have a
discussion manager well I'll second that now we can have a discussion you can still have a discussion absolutely jeez Louise somebody want to say anything no you You wanted to say something say something you could also if you weren't ready yet you could open it up for public comment
if anybody has signed up for it i'm not sure yes we do have speakers for public comment okay we'll start with Van Hayden van Kaden Head followed by Joe Wisher followed by Dr harold Dalton it's a 3-2 count and the pitcher
winds up well um you've got a quandry we've got uh a very important decision that you all are making tonight and uh I wish you luck with it
because Isa Marada needs a steady hand on the tiller and we must have uh stability we must have uh someone who's going to be here for a while with longevity and experience
so uh I'm not going to speak for any one of the three candidates i'm just going to encourage you all to look within yourselves and and see which one that you think you can work with of the three
for an extended period of time because whoever gets this I sure would hate to see them blown out of the saddle in a year and just because of uh 32 votes you know we need to have some kind of unison
we need to have some kind of conformity we need to have some kind of stability and uh if you can examine uh the a 3-2 count it's either going to be uh four balls and you walk or it's going
to be you're struck out so So let's make sure that we get uh swing for the fences folks thank you morning next up is Mr wish me yes Joe Wishmire Plantation Key uh
Councilwoman Gillis I believe you are correct that the first manager there was a vote and it was 4 to one so it was rejected and then it came back until they actually voted 50 to make a unanimous choice so bottom line is all
of our managers have been elected with a unanimous vote even though you're three to two now I think that the main thing that you guys really need to consider now is what I mentioned earlier who has the most
administration experience who has the most experience running a city or a village on a day-to-day basis i believe there is a big difference between the candidates i'm not going to say which one should be here or which one should be there you all have done the
interviews you all have all the information so you can decide amongst those questions who you think would be the most qualified because like I say financially and our daytoday our future is going to depend on this thank
you thank you morning next is Dr harold Dalton good evening council and thank you for your service um I'm going to disagree with this unonymity thing uh quite
frankly it is if it's a 3 to2 vote it's a 3 to2 vote three win and it's the obligation of you elected officials to work with the new city manager even though you lost it's not up to hey I
didn't vote for them i'm not going to work with them no you got to be professional you got to work with who won now that being said and I know the other speakers have not uh had any uh
recommendation for a new city manager but quite frankly I do there is only one of the three applicants and there there I I got took the opportunity last night to meet with the applicants they're all outstanding i've read their CVs they're
all qualified i think they'd be great but that being said there's only one that has decades of public service to this area in the municipal the county and at the state levels there's only one that has a deep understanding of the
current and historic issues affecting this community and has extensive contacts and relationships that will provide immeasurable value to the citizens of Alam Marada and that's Ron Saunders and I urge you you've already
voted 3 to2 uh if you want to make it unanimous that's fine but he'll be an amazing village manager thank you thank you Marne there is no one else signed up to speak okay there's a motion
say does anybody else want to say anything no deb no okay motion in a second marne call the role council member Steve Freriedman yes council member Deb Gillis yes council member
Anna Richards yes council me or excuse me Vice Mayor Don Horton yep and Mayor Sharon Mahoney yes and motion passes five to zero congratulations or deepest sympathy one of the two now just uh so
that was a motion to select uh Mr saunders to to be um the next manager the next question is in terms of timing for us is it a direction for council to or legal counsel sorry direction for
legal to negotiate with Mr saunders um uh for an agreement or is there and I guess this is more of a question for for Mr saunders is is one of our agreements that we have with a prior manager we have amenable to him that we could
replace um his name and a start date and then if that's the case I would ask for a motion authorizing the mayor to to sign such here's a question and nothing against anyone here but is there okay let's take the uh contracts for past
managers who haven't been from here can like can we is it automatically the same amount no matter what or can we make some suggestions and if it's not going to be exactly the same my recommendation would be for us to negotiate an agreement to be brought back for you all
at a future council meeting for approval um because if it's if we start making adjustments here kind of on the fly there might be other things that that the council may have wanted to adjust so if it's not going to be exact my recommendation would be that that it
just be Let me see how everybody else feels does anybody else want to change anything or look at it differently or we're just going to go with what we got and obviously that would be subject to Mr saunders agreeing to that of course of course i mean of course go ahead Don
we already have it in the budget what the salary was under the previous manager and u unless it unless there's a problem with that I'd say we stick with the same salary we're not amending our budget and
um and uh then we can see what happens when we start going through the budget cycle but I say we just be continuous with the with what's in the budget at this moment it sounds like that would expedite the process a little bit as well and that would also include that would expedite the process as well by
doing it that way yes you're right it sure would yep and that would include the housing allowance right that's what I was talking about yeah well talk about that well he said not to oh okay well we if if we want to negotiate the housing
allowance then then we need them to do that go ahead because he's local he's he's motioning to me maybe I could some clarification first off thank you very much uh all five of you i I I pretty much knew uh somewhat how the vote might go but I I know all five of you very
well and the 50 vote means a lot to me and I'll work equally well with all of you uh as far as the agreement I agree with council i think the most transparent thing for the community would be to know what it's going to be in advance so my suggestion would be uh there was an exhibit A to resolution
24-3-26 to him and that was uh Mr kohl's and so what I would suggest put my name where Mr polls was uh use a start date of April 21st 2025 an expiration date of 1
year um April uh 20th 2026 so everything stays exactly the same the wording is all the same now during the budget cycle uh which comes up in a couple of months I'm more than willing to take another look at any changes but I think in order to expedite this and get some stability
going because I know Miss Denort would love to go back to her full-time uh role as our building official I I would just say just move with the uh exhibit A to 24-3-26 it was an exhibit A and that I'd
be happy to go with that so so if we do that um his start date would have to be at the next meeting right because we have to approve the contract no well no and actually Mr saunders was proposing a
start date of the 21st and if I could be in effect what we could do is if we're just replacing I mean literally the material terms of the agreement are remaining the same we're just replacing Rob Cole with Ron Saunders and and a start date will change i think we can
make a motion to authorize the mayor to uh execute an agreement under those terms because the the terms Yeah maybe please please please um so I I think we could do it that way and and Ron you you you'll be able to start on the 21st
that's very quick yes that's two weeks i purposely I you know you never know what's going to happen as long as she's got that figured out i thought this might come up tonight just in case i said that's enough time to transition with Sheila u for me to find a place to live here because I committed to be a resident of Alada that doesn't happen
overnight but I think within 10 days I can do that okay okay uh John anything else yeah I would just ask for for a motion um to authorize the uh uh the mayor to sign a um uh an agreement with
Mr saunders um uh identical to that which was executed by Mr mr cole um obviously with replacing the start date and the uh the the name do I make the motion or does somebody else Anybody can make that motion yeah make a motion i make a motion to do what he just said
yeah ditto okay marty do you need to call the role okay vice Mayor Don Horton yes council member Anna Richards yes council member Steve Freriedman yes council member Deb Gillis yes and Mayor Sharon Mahoney yes
that motion passes congratulations can I say one last thing go ahead just one quick thing i have one sheila you've done an awful awesome job in filling in and said awful awesome i only said awful that's a S there's an S and I want to thank you very much for your hard work i
do i appreciate you've been a pleasure to talk to thank you no thank you very much i I appreciate the opportunity that I was given and it's an experience I won't forget and and I I would support that completely too and I would also ask that
the council now that we've said this that we dedicate ourselves to making this work yep all right meetings adjourned