Let us pray. Our gracious heavenly father, we thank you for the opportunity to and as council members, please give us the wisdom that the decisions we make
of our great please. >> Amen. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and
justice for all. >> All right. Please, please call the role. >> Mayor Hullbrook >> here. >> Council member Hayes >> here. Council member Worley >> here. >> Council member Charles >> here. >> Council member Ebahart >> here. >> Board member Frank Hartzel >> here. >> Board member Kellblanc
>> here. >> All right. Next we'll go to public comments. I see it's kind of sparse tonight, but uh we'll see if any of you have any comments for this great board. All right. Hearing none, we'll move on.
We'll go to the consent agenda. Uh a approval of the agenda. >> I'll move to accept consent agenda um A and B 3 A and B. Second. Um I just wanted to
make a note that on the um minutes on six board um Dow Hall um project it's misspelled a couple times. It's just a scribers error and then down
below um Jennifer it's Kado instead of Cotto >> Salsbury. So they're just scribers errors. I just wanted to >> I'll make those corrections. Okay. All right. That was A and B, right? We
did both. >> Yes. >> Okay. Uh, any presentations? >> We roll call on the vote. >> We need to vote. >> Oh, the roll call. I didn't do that, did I? >> We're all here. >> Motion. >> Call the roll, please.
>> Council member Charles, >> yes. >> Council member Everheart, >> yes. >> Council member Hayes, >> yes. Council member Worley, >> yes. >> And uh board member Frank Hartzel, >> yes. >> Board member Camel Block, >> yes. >> All right, I guess we go to five action
agenda. Pavement plan. Kimley Horn. >> Yes, sir. This is before you. The town received a proposed pavement plan prepared by Kimley Horn outlining the recommended improvements and the prioritization for pavement rehabilitation and resurfacing within
the community redevelopment area. Um I did meet with Mr. Leblanc last week and we looked at this a little bit in more in depth and wanted to bring it forward for council to review. We have before you um Kimley Horn submitted a proposal for professional engineering services
related to the downtown pavement plan. This proposal was developed based on a piggyback contract that was available through an existing cooperative purchasing agreement through the city of Sebring. In parallel, an RFP has been prepared and is ready to be posted on bidnet to ensure compliance with
procurement requirements and to allow for competitive responses. If the town council votes to move in that direction, the CRA may review both options and provide a recommendation to the town council. And we have those recommendations here for you.
Okay. Well, I I would move to um do the RFP. >> Second. I have some comments after having reviewed this. Um and um you know, Kimley Horn's price was $59,000. And what I found was from viewing it is that
their intention is that they would go do a visual inspection of all the roads in town. Um categorize them, rate them, determine which ones need to get paved next and when and all that. I mean, no um core samples, just visual, right? I I
I don't understand why we would pay $59,000 for that, which I don't think is that complicated of a thing to do. What what I really think we should be spending money on is trying to deal with our drainage issues in downtown. So, if we're going to spend $59,000, I I would
like to see us spend $59,000 to an engineering firm to determine, you know, where our problems are with water and what our solutions are and start coming up with a plan of action to deal with that. Um, you know, we we've been paving our roads here and there as needed on an
obvious basis of which ones need to be done. So, you know, again, down the road, maybe we could spend money on that kind of thing, but I don't think it should cost that much. I mean, I think we think anybody in town staff could kind of do a visual inspection of that kind of thing, at least for the time
being as we deal with our real problem, which is water downtown. That's my thoughts on it. >> U may I um I also had I noticed that the um extras seem to be the meat >> Yes. of the project.
>> So, the price that was given is >> Yeah, I saw the same thing. This was only the beginning of what it was going to cost and and and what they're doing for 59,000. I'm like, why can't you do that for five, right? And then you got all these other things. And so, again,
if we do this, you know, we certainly need to go out to bid and see what other people would charge for the same thing. But I really think, you know, our eyes on the wrong ball. Um although I think Charlotte was saying maybe there's a reason why we're trying to accomplish this and I'd like to hear more about you know why we would need to do this at
this time and we wouldn't just switch to dealing with our drainage issue. You want to mention that? >> Yes. So they do it in phases. So this would be considered phase one. It goes over the evaluation and looks at everything gives us a synopsis about what the path should be. However, they
go into the others would be a phase two and that's what they've done in the other municipalities. I will tell you that if we're looking for it to be cheaper, I don't know that that's going to be the case. Um, but they do it in phases. In order for them to be able to come back and tell us what needs to be handled for storm water and drainage issues, they have to go through this
process first. Well, and if this, which I to me seems like a very easy category of work, is 59,000, I can only imagine what the drainage would cost on their phase 2, phase 3 by the hour or whatever basis, which we're stuck into because we
signed a contract and we got to pay it. I'd much rather go out to bid, let multiple engineers, even some local engineers look at this. Um because the scope of work that's being accomplished even accomplishing the drainage issues we have is not that complicated. Uh you
know I mean it's easy to say but honestly you know it's very clear where the water problems are and it's very clear the direction they go and there are solutions to these things and um and I I think any engineer who's you know worth anything is capable of of handling
a job like this. Um, Kimberly Horn, you know, focuses on, you know, city stuff and all that kind of stuff, I suppose, but it doesn't mean that other local engineers aren't fully capable of, you know, accomplishing the same things. So, I'd like to see what other engineers come up with as far as the price, but I'd like the price to be from the
beginning, you know, include the or, you know, section it off, you know, analyze our roads if that's a necessary thing. That's, you know, price A, price B is analyze our drainage issues and come up with the solutions for drainage issues and, you know, have alternate prices for
different scopes, but have it actually priced out from the beginning is what I would love to see. Right. >> It it seems to me like if you if you're going to bid on this project, wouldn't you go through all these steps in the first place in order to create your bid?
So, I don't think we need to give somebody almost $60,000 to just do this in the first place when if we simply go out for bid um then those people each person each um contractor would evaluate what they see and how they feel like it
would be it would be best corrected. And I should think that if we put the RFP out to include paving and drainage that they would include those two things together. It seems like they would go together cuz how how would you how would you evaluate paving without evaluating
drainage? It doesn't seem to make sense to not do that. >> And I wonder is there any help we can get? I mean, you know, we all pay taxes in town placid, but before we pay our town Placida taxes, we pay our county taxes just like everybody else in the
county does. The county has, you know, engineering staff um you know, for in roads and bridges and all these kinds of things. I wonder if you know the county and and I think you've said before they're not very cooperative, but I mean it seems to me like they ought to be
cooperative and be helpful, you know, in some of these categories, you know, because we pay their taxes, you know. >> Let me let me clarify on the not cooperative. They're cooperative and they do meet with us and they've looked at our roads with us. However, they're not going to take care of assisting us
with what we need for our roads. They will only take care of countymaintained roads. Yeah, I I understand that. But but can will they not allow an engineer to come and look at our our drainage issues and all that? Help us prepare,
you know, for instance, a uh a plan of action, you know, on how to to, you know, get the quotes we need or this or that. I don't know. I just they have in-house engineers, right? Um which we don't. And >> they do, but if I'm I'm going to speak frank.
>> Yeah, please. They J D is their assistant county administrator and he's been their engineer and they just recently Dana, how long ago do you think they hired their new engineer? >> Two months ago. So they don't have the capacity to be able to help us.
>> That's that they we they work very well with us. Let me clarify that. They work very well with us. We have a good working relationship with the county. It's not that they don't want to help. It's they don't have the ability to do that. and we would have to enter into some type of interlocal and there would have to be a vetting process and also
lots of conversations. Our attorneys would have to be involved in that. So, a couple comments from my end. It would be helpful to have the RF the piggyback whoever they were piggybacking with in the package so that we can see
what exactly did they sign them up to do. So, I know we say we're >> That's it right there. >> Council that's it. Yes, ma'am. This is exactly what they provided to Sebring. That's the piggy. >> But is it in is it is it in the packet? >> No, ma'am. That's what I'm saying is that they it's addressed to us, but this
is the the same one that they used for Sebring. >> What I'm saying is it would be helpful to have that Sebring copy of their piggyback in the packet along with this individual project order number 11 that
we have. But I agree with the comments. I mean, I I I think it's an RFP and I think it's drainage. Drainage is a big priority, you know, as is repair of the roads and paving of the roads. Something that we've we've neglected. Even when I look at some of the older budgets, we
haven't had money in there for that. Um, I think it's hard to not separate them. If somebody's going to go down a county road, they're going to see our drainage issues and the same. So, it does seem to be a little more appropriate to go out
for an RFP and it needs to be beyond the CRA district. I know this is a CRA meeting, but we've got roads that need to be repaired and I think we've got the drainage outside the CRA district. So, I would hate to do something funneled at CRA and then we're going to come back
and do something on the rest of the town limits. So that's just um appreciated and I guess I was confused when we went through the budget process and Allan had talked about a master plan for storm drains, a master plan for roads. I
thought that was the general budget, not targeted only for the CRA. So So regardless, I mean that's why when I saw it in the CRA, I'm like, "Oh, wait a minute. We've got the rest of the town issues, too, and it makes sense to do it all." So
>> yes, ma'am. Um, you weren't I think you missed the meeting that the CRA meeting where they discussed and said that they would bring it forward here and so they asked us to bring it here to look at for CRA and for us to take care of it in the CRA district. Otherwise, we will have to wait or else council will have to vote for us to take it out of the general
fund. >> And I think this is the entire town of Lake Placid is, you know, this road plan is for the entire town of Lake Placid, not just not just the CRA district. Uh but when it comes to drainage, I think our our biggest drainage issue is in the
town of Lake Pla. I mean in the Sierra District, right? That's that's our big problem with drainage. Unless somebody else knows of another place that has a drainage issue. >> Does that be pose a problem if we were to go out with an RFP and the road is
broader than CRA? Can we prorrate, you know, back to general fund? Rachel H, however we do that, but >> we would need to look at that, Councilwoman Charles. So, we wouldn't be able to answer that tonight, but we
could certainly investigate that. >> I also think that we we need a couple of things. We need number one that the county to at least take a look at what what we're bidding out because we don't want to take, for instance, storm water or drainage and take the drainage off of
our roads and throw it all into the county roads. to here, you know, congratulations. You know, we don't want to do that. So, um, when when this says 167 center line miles of publicly maintain roadway infrastructure,
um, it says that that says the town of Lake Placid, but the CRA district covers more than just the town of Lake Placid. The CRA district is much larger than just the town of Lake Placid. So, in this situation, I don't know whether they're just talking about the limits of
the town or the limits of the CRA district, but um >> I think that's reversed, right? >> I I think you I think you said it backwards. You said you said it district is way bigger than town Lake Pl. You mean the town of Lake Placid's way bigger than the C district?
>> No, I didn't think so. >> No, I think the CRA district is bigger than the town, is it not? >> No, it's not. I know CRA is a small subset of the town. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> And and when it comes to drainage problems, I mean, aren't some of these
drainage issues generated on county roads? Is Inner Lake County Road? Main Street is, right? >> I don't have. >> So, some of these drainage issues are county roads dumping onto city roads and and into city properties. Um, stuff like
that. So I mean I wonder if the county should be participating in you know the solving of these problems as well because a percentage of this problem is generated on county roads. So um you know I personally don't have a problem
with the CRA you know helping fund solving this water problem in the CRA district. You know I think partially that's our job right fix these types of things. um if it's, you know, legit and allowed. Um but I I I do not think that
we should be paying for um a survey of town roads that are outside the CRA district. And and and again, I I don't think that, you know, I'm not even sure that's necessarily necessary now and and a priority or should be a priority of ours at this moment while we still have
this water problem >> for the drainage of the roads. Mr. go wrong. >> Um, >> for both. >> Well, I don't think we have a whole lot of roads that are in disrepair. Um, I think majority of roads are in really good shape and we have a plan for the
roads that need to get paved. So, I don't see um the quality of our roads as being a big problem. I see drainage as being a big problem right now in the CRA district in the downtown specifically. So I think I would think that we should
be able to manage the quality of the roads ourself with internal staff and stuff just making driving along and seeing the roads they see as they're emptying garbage cans, you know, throughout the entire town. Um, you know, they can tell us which roads, you know, are in disrepair. Um, but the
water, you know, needs a real hardcore fix >> and Allan would be able to tell us that, too. Allan probably would have a better idea of >> status of our roads. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> I would just hate to carve out just for
the CRA district unless we absolutely know we don't have issues elsewhere. >> You're talking about water issues, >> both water and roads. If you're going to do something, might as well just sweep through and do it and then we've got our budget plan for the next couple years.
Well, if we would if if that motion would pass to go for a RFP, then to break it down into CRA district and versus outside CRA district and then we'll know for the town what to budget for.
>> We can write this we can write the RFP up with whatever your your requests are and put that in there. I just want to make a comment that the county is working on a master storm water plan. They're already in the process of that, but it's going to only address the county roads. It's not going to do anything in the downtown areas for the
municipalities, which is the reason why Avon Park and Sebring already has theirs. They already have their plan because they're putting it together with the county. Lake Placid's behind. >> So, are you saying a county road that's in the town of Lake Placid, they're going to ignore in their master plan?
>> No. No. If if it's a county maintained road, it will be included in their plan. If it's any of our roads that are ours, they're not addressing that. >> Which, correct me if I'm wrong, Main Street is a county road. I've been told that multiple times. And is Inner in Lake a county road? >> Lake is also >> Actually, it's a state road, but the
county maintains it. We generally in Inner Lake is a county road. We at one point took over the maintenance of the parking area and the paving and the striping for parking, but the main road is county and so is main avenue and
I don't think I don't remember about Dow Hall, but it is in county. Okay, it is county also. So, those are a lot of main roads, but I just wanted to chime in and say I think we do need to go ahead and
um address storm water. um an RFP and work on the RFP itself because like Magnolia across from me, that street is getting down into the the gravel which means it's going to cost twice as much,
four times as much to rebuild if we don't do something right away. And we went over and looked at it and you you almost cannot address the road without the runoff because that's a big runoff problem there. And all you have to do is you're going to have to you're going to
have to rebuild the shoulders of the road anyway, right? When you're repaving and you've got to, you know, structure it so you don't um break off your asphalt. But there you could do so just like we did on hibiscus. Some slight swailes, doesn't it? They're actually
drainage ditches, but they're so slight you can still park in them. But that took care of we used to have I called it Lake Hibiscus down there towards Walgreens at the corner. took away all that runoff. Just those slight indentations. We could do that in
Magnolia because that's where it comes towards Inner Lake. But you can't I don't see how you can address one without the other because if you're going to do the work there, might as well do the drainage there as well. That'll help that whole area. So, if the county is working on a master drainage
plan and if that includes Dow Hall, Main Street, and Inner Lake, we ought to find out, you know, they ought to be able to tell us what they're planning or what where they are in that process. And, you know, we don't want to read it, we don't want to design over top of what they're
designing, right? So, I think it'd be nice to know where they're at in the process. And then, you know, because if we're not if we don't have to address the drainage on those roads, then we still have to address it on Pine and Belleview and and other roads that are contributing maybe hibiscus. Um I think
there's some drainage issues there and go through the entire you know area of CRA and find out where there's other issues. >> Um but >> we don't want our them taking the county roads and putting the storm water into the dump. Yeah. Into the town roads and now what are we going to do with it?
>> So it's our congratulations, you know. So, you know, we don't want that. But I think I I think we definitely have to do this together with the drainage and the pavement and the storm water together. >> And also, u like De said, I think we go to RFP and we put the RFP out for um
part A, the town roads or the CRA district, excuse me, but that part and then B the area around that that you know is is included as well. So that whatever comes in as an estimate for A, that gets paid through the CRA. Whatever comes in estimate for B, the remainder
of that's paid through the through the town. >> But I wonder if this should be part of this county's master plan. If anything, we're paying towards that for the roads that are not part of I mean, how does how do you combine the two or separate the two? >> We're separate. We're separate. And that's how we have to look at it. We are
we are a complement to each other, but we're responsible for our own municipality and our own our own assets. then this is a town asset. It's not the county asset. >> But it sounds like a lot of the roads that have the issue are actually county roads. Not to say we don't have issues,
too, because we have Belleview Street, Pine Street, and various other streets that are just dumping water down to what I call the French train, the train track. Um, you know, so those need to get addressed as well. So, we can address those, but maybe we need to only be we need to carve out what we're
responsible for and carve out what they're responsible for. make sure they're taking care of the drainage on what they're responsible for on their dime, not our dime, right? And then where are they going to put it all, right? I mean, they got to put the water somewhere. And if all they have is asphalt roads, where are they going to store the water that's coming off of
these roads? Um, you know, I suppose D Hall probably doesn't have much of a problem because it's been done, right? It's got a retention pond over there, but um >> well, they obviously know what what roads they're dealing with. So, we just
need to find out from them what roads are you dealing with and then we'll see what roads we have left. >> Charlotte, you made the comment that Avon Park and Sebring are working with the county and we're far behind the process. Can you elaborate what you meant on that? >> What I mean is that they've already
completed this. Sebring and Avon Park whenever they picked up that the county was doing a master road and stormwater plan and they already started theirs. >> Are they using the same company? Is everybody using the same company? >> Yes, they are. and and part of that is because they're in our library of consultants. So, you typically don't
have to go out for an RFP. >> It just seems like we're missing a negotiation tactic by having three different cities in the county negotiate separately with a a company to to do the work. I
just just seems like our purchasing power is diluted when we go like that. But, I mean, I agree with everything that's said here. It's like I don't know how the county can come through. I mean, it's it's it's extra work. You've have Kimley Horn coming through and they're going to measure the county and then
we're sitting there for our storm drain right next to it. I mean, it's it's all tied in together. And what council member Worley said is so important how I don't I agree you can't separate them because we have a lot of drainage from
the road issues that's causing call it the secondary. You know, I I'll make the mention of um over on Lake View, okay, my church, the church driveways at the edge of the road are just te being torn up because the water is just running
straight down. Now the question is okay is that the church or the individual's expense but the roads causing you know the drainage that we have is causing secondary issues and and we've got to make this a priority. You know we've got
businesses downtown that kind of when it floods right they're putting I'm not going to say the word sandbags out because it drains right inside their business. You've got the the museum that we've talked about. If you go to the museum and there's a rain, you can't get out of the museum. So, we know that
we've got some very significant and serious drainage issues. I mean, it seems like together we should have all done it, but if we're not, I don't know how you can separate storm drain from roads and and is it the best to
just carve out the CRA versus have it done and then carve out the budgeting? what goes to the CRA and not I think the bigger problem is going to be once it's done trying to find the money to get the improvements. >> That's exactly right and >> and I mean this is this should be a priority but
>> um it it's been a huge priority but we have limited staff and so I I know Mr. LeBlanc, we had this conversation. Uh when the county can come in and they have the GIS tracking and mapping system, they have a bigger pocketbook than the town of Lake Placid and they
can take and they can map it out and literally show us that this is what it would cost in materials and then they calculate and know what staff time will be. We don't have that. So Allan has gone out, he tries to look at it and make the best determination, but we
don't have on staff engineers and we don't have the equipment or the resources as the county does. And I do want to correct something just so we're clear. I don't know who's doing the county plan. I know that Sebring and Avon Park used Kimley Horn. I don't know who's doing the county's plan just to put that on record.
So if we would break it out to be uh a survey of the road conditions and and storm water just for the CRA district just for town maintained roads in the CRA district.
>> Yes, ma'am. and then maybe as an add-on to do outside the CRA district the same things road inventory uh drainage uh and so we
get a price that can go into the other budget. The only question is can the CRA legally pay for the add-on for the outside CRA evaluation? So >> the CRA can pay for everything in the
CRA district, but I don't believe they can pay for anything outside the district. But but what you're saying is kind of what I was what I was trying to say as well is let's let's go to RFP, but let's let's have it divided out so that we know how much of this will be
able to be funded by the CRA and how much of it will then have to be funded through the town. So we could outline it in the RFP where it's it's like two sections so to speak where this would be section one would be the CRA district section two would be outside the CRA
district and then we could see a breakdown of what that cost would >> two separate two separate bides. >> I can work out that what the RFP looks like. >> Right. Right. And do and do paving and drainage and storm water issues. >> Can I ask you something? section. >> The drainage system in front of the
Journal Plaza, which goes all the way down Main Street, I think in front of the grocery store, all ties together. It's a great drainage system until it comes out um and shoots down to the alley. It's It does not have a retention area that it goes to that's proper and
big enough and all that stuff. Who owns that system? Because it's water coming off the road, off the county's road that goes into the parking area, goes into those drainage system. Um who's responsible for that drainage system? the county. >> I couldn't answer that tonight, Ken. I I'm Yeah, I'm I'm looking because Harry
is out unexpectedly, so he's not here and I expected Allan to be here. So, I apologize, but I'm not prepared to answer that. We could certainly get that information and filter it back to you. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Do we know when the last time or how often the storm drains are cleaned?
>> No, ma'am. >> Bert, do you? Nobody. I can tell you that some of those they look like they're storm drains. They don't go anywhere. They they fill up and they overflow. And that was true down in front of the journal.
>> Um when we looked at drainage down there. So that was true there. It's true on Inner Lake as well. They're just almost like a French drain, but they don't go anywhere and they're not deep enough to contain all the water as well. >> Yeah. You know, back when Joe Barber was
uh engineer, we looked into that. And so that drainage system just goes all the way down the street and then the last drainage grade is the lowest one. So the water just pops out of that, goes to the alley. Uh but it goes across the street and they dug a little swale a little bit deeper over there. What they found was
it wasn't tied to the retention pond. If it was tied to the retention retention pond, it would solve all problems. You know, there's plenty of room in that retention pond that never gets filled up. And supposedly Joe went to the county and asked if we could tie that into there and they said no. I don't
know. I can't imagine that at the end of when they designed that project that their goal was that it pops out the end and goes to the alley. You know, I mean a proper design would have had it going to a retention of some sort somewhere. So I I don't know who put it in. I'm wondering, you know, at what point did
that system go in and just end, you know, at a popup basically? I can tell you that I met with the county. I've had two meetings with them. They've come to our office and discussed it and they have said that as far as having any history of anything that has been done, we don't have that. And that's that's
from our end all the way to Avon Park. And so that was part of the reason why they were requesting to be able to have a master Highlands County storm water plan that would address the county areas and then leave the smaller municipalities for their own plan. M. So those roads, I know the county maintains
them, but the parking area on the side, does the county maintain that too, or they're only responsible for the road? >> Definitely sh. >> As far as I know, we're responsible for the parking. >> And what does concern me about these stagnant water? You're not supposed to
have tires collecting water. Breeds mosquitoes, breeds disease. I mean, I'm I've always been concerned about that. I go over and dump chlorine in the one across the street from me. My brother almost died from encphilitis. So, I'm very sensitive to that. But I'm just
saying it doesn't work. I don't even know why we have it. It's not even retaining enough water to make that much difference. >> It's ringing because we're all on. Just so you know, I think if you check your green lights, the ringing is because we have all mics on. >> Sorry. So, another thing I just
discovered today actually was that um looking at code because I've been looking at the storm water and some people are complaining and so I started looking at the code and the code actually refers back that we do the town look it refers back to the master plan
for storm water. So, we we need it for our code as well to to make our code either that or change our code. Ju just on the comments that you made about the storm drain that goes nowhere right
when we do this RFP is that something they would identify so that we could I mean cuz just seeing the grate there you think it's draining right even though it doesn't get cleaned out it some purpose
but will this RFP be able to identify all of that and the issues associated with that? Yes. Is that just I mean >> Yes, ma'am. We we can put it we build the RFP to state whatever we need it to say. >> Both of those areas that don't go
anywhere are on county maintained roads. Actually, so they just have a a drain and they say, "Okay, I've checked that box. I've drained the road." Now, the fact that it goes nowhere is is like, oh, too bad.
>> It looks good. >> I think it's a redneck redneck French drain, right? >> When I was working over with the people that used to own the journal plaza, we were shocked. It didn't go anywhere, but it really doesn't. Like said,
>> I was going to say it's like our sidewalks that go nowhere. But does this will this really help? I don't know. It was just >> Yeah. And as bad as that is, and as obvious as that is, I mean, there is a solution to it. I mean, the town bought that triangle-shaped piece of property down the street that you could pipe it
to it and you could put a retention pond over there. So I mean I do see solutions to our problems and um but we just need to to get an engineer to you know identify basins uh of water flow which direction it's going what are our
opportunities to capture them and then put them uh there's nothing wrong with water flowing across a street a road it's always going to flow across a road you just want to capture it and then put it somewhere and that's what we're lacking is you know we have no place you know designated to put it with the
exception of the the retention pond on Dow Hall Boulevard which captures Dow Hall. We don't have you know anything you designed right and it's all doable. It's not that complicated I don't believe. >> So that retention pond that's across
from Journal Plaza and on the Dell Hall side that it's just there. No water flows into it. >> No I I believe what comes in it comes from Dow Hall Boulevard. Now, there's never more than 18 in of water in the worst rainstorm I've ever seen um in the
bottom of a of at least a five or six foot deep retention pond. So, it's got huge capacity. >> My understanding is when they renovated Dell Hall, they did that parking lot and that retention pond, but I wasn't here when it happened. So, that's just what I've been told.
>> And so, Deborah, there's that um that miracle having that we put in in front of in front of your place is not such a miracle. It didn't work. >> Okay. D and I have been talking about that. One of the problems is there's so much sand and dirt coming off Magnolia
because of the the crisis over there with the road that um what we want to do is when Magnolia gets fixed and we mix the drainage all that water stops running across and carrying all that dirt. There's an awful lot of dirt that
comes over there and piles up on Inner Lake. If we can stop that, we think that the per the pvious concrete's filled up with dirt. So, if we can get magnolia fixed and we can like maybe vacuum or get the instructions of how to get that back to the way it was supposed to
function, it may function. But we don't know that till we solve the problem of like just throw filling it full of dirt. >> And it does eventually drain. Um it it just it's not immediate, but it slowly drains through that system. So even
though it's clogging up with sand, it's it water still goes through sand. So it's just not as >> it's better than it was, >> but it was much better when they first put it in. That's because it didn't have the sand in it. But it's still definitely better than it was. It goes
down quicker and faster. It's just we we really think it's all that sand coming and filled it up with sand. And if we if we're going to do and I'd like to do over there, I hope this works for the historic museum is that look at the sand problem before we put it in. So we're
making sure we're not getting that. But all of that's about the runoff. So we have to look at that. So, just because I'm I'm not too smart with this, would that mean that we need to do curves before we do the paving because the the sand is coming in from
the from the yards and stuff and coming into the road. So, we have to stop that before we do the paving. >> We can out. >> My thought Yeah. My thought when we looked at that was if if you look at it um okay so you repave the road you're not going to reduce the pavement but the
the s the shoulders of the road are shoulders >> right right >> like on hibiscus what we did and there's there's concrete and gravel that needs to either be paved over or gotten rid of. My suggestion was to pull out that gravel. Okay, pull out that gravel and
sand rather than paving and now have more runoff >> is go ahead and pull that out. Make the indentation on both sides. Put a grass on it. You can still park there. It's not going to affect really people parking, but that will retain the runoff
and stop the dirt because there won't be dirt there. There'll be there'll be grass. And if you go and look at hibiscus, I cannot tell you the amount of water that was coming down and going to the end of the street. It's gone. It's completely gone. >> And and the grass will percolate, too. And that that it'll hold the it'll hold
the soil and it'll percolate the water. >> And that's why you can't separate the two. You almost have to do if you're going to spend the money to do the road and do all of that at the same time, it's going to be much more cost effective. I think when you hire an engineer to solve this drainage problem,
there needs to be meetings where they talk to people like you and and other people and uh identify where these problems are with sand coming. I mean, in front of the church building, there is probably three, five gallallon bucket loads full of sand sitting right there in the curb, which has traveled down the
street from somewhere, right? Some of it maybe is coming out of landscape areas um but I I don't know. It's coming from somewhere. And um so I think that part of their solution ought to be saying okay you need to have curbs over here to stop sand from coming into the road and
they should identify that as part of the solution to the drainage issues right but they we have to have the ability to have conversations with them not just hire them let them do their thing and then we get whatever they say you know there's lots of people in this town that have a lot of input that they need to
give to the engineer so the engineer knows the full scope of what we're trying to solve Right. Yeah. >> I think all this discussion is good, but we don't want to get into the weeds with solving the problems tonight. Maybe we should just get on with uh do we want to
do an RFP >> and maybe if you want to put certain specifics in the in the RFP. >> In other words, back to the motion. >> So, do I need to I think I need to revise that. that we would um go out for an RFP and
there'd be two seg two portions to it. The first one would be to an inventory of the roads and only the roads in the town in the CRA district and only town only town roads
and in that portion also address u storm water. Then the second half would be um to address the road inventory outside the CRA town roads only
and address storm water issues or just address storm water capabilities. So you're saying separate the CRA's cost from the town's cost outside the CRA district for evaluating roads and for
evaluating drainage, >> right? Yeah. and and and exempt or not do anything that's a county road. >> Not do what >> in the road in and in the road inventory exclude anything other than
uh our town roads >> town limit road. >> So no county roads, no analysis of county roads, no analysis of state roads. Although I I think there needs to be a conversation um with um Charlotte or Bert um the utilities guy with the
county in regard to that exact subject matter because you know water will travel from our roads across a county road back to our property or from county property onto our property. So if the county just says I'm not doing anything, then we're we're having to capture everything as it leaves their roads
comes to our roads. It gets complicated and I'm not sure if they ought to be participating in this, you know, or, you know, or there's some kind of connection between the people engineering the county solution, the people connect, you know, engineering our solution. There
needs to be some kind of collaboration. Yeah, I think we should cooperate, but I I don't want us to be paying for an inventory of county roads and assessing their longevity. >> Yeah. Yeah, I agree. I agree. >> But but they're doing that right now themselves. >> Correct. And and we are in coordination
with them. I've already clarified with them about any assistance for the town just so we're all aware. We've already talked about that. We have met. We have had these discussions. They're only going to take care of their county maintained roads. Charlotte, are we unique from Sebring and Avon Park that
we have county roads inside our town limits or do they have the same? I I couldn't answer that. I have I haven't studied theirs. >> I think they do have the same because county road 17 goes right through the middle of Sebring. So yeah, I I think
they have the same park main street >> the engineer from the city of Sebring how they're addressing that same situation in their town, you know, county versus town, you know, drainage, all that kind of stuff might give us some insight as to how to deal with it with the county. So, all right. So, do
we have a motion then? >> And Ken, just real That's where I was going because it still troubles me that we're all paying for somebody to come down the same road, but nope. I'm going to stop here, but I'm going to pick up here. So, that's why I was asking, are
we unique or do they have the same? And then you beat me, too. That's where it was like, okay, can we benchmark with them and see how are they handling this because they have a CRA district doing that. But I am just thrilled that we are finally talking about this as a priority. I mean, the citizens have been
asking, they've been complaining, the business owners and to um the comments that have made about health. Health is a big deal and safety. You know, some of these flooding areas, you hydropane a car in there. I mean, because it's quite deep. So, my fear though is we have no
money. Once we get this back, then where's the funding to fix everything that we already know about, let alone the other things that are going to come out? So, totally support this conversation. I will tell you, Councilwoman Charles, when we obtain this though, it does set us in a better
position to be able to apply for storm water grants. I will tell you that. But they look for a plan so that we have invested. We have some skin in the game >> and we can prioritize from there too. >> Correct. >> Correct. So it it >> it's unfortunate that we're at the
juncture we are, but it will help us to move us forward. And just for the the sake of making sure we're we're all on the same page, we've been and I know Mr. Mr. Harris is not here right now, but he has had >> he's here. >> Oh, see, he will he will gladly have conversation on this one. We have um
I've been here a little over a year and the conversations of us taking over county roads has been a hot topic and Mr. Harris has made sure and dug his feet in and that we will not take the roads because there would have to be a lot vetted out. As you stated, the
county receives the taxes for that. So that's the reason why we're trying to make sure we take care of our own so that we don't have this a bigger fight on our hand. >> So if we have that motion you made I would second that motion. >> I think it was second
>> was it? >> It it was previously seconded was it not? >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Okay. Yeah. >> So we have a motion and a second. Any other discussion from the podium? Hearing none, we'll take it to the
audience. No. Bring it back. Pull the council or pull the CRA board. >> Council member Everheart, >> yes. >> Council member Worley, >> yes. >> Council member Hayes, >> yes. >> Council member Charles, >> yes. >> Board member Hartzel,
>> yes. >> Board member Ken Blanc, >> yes. >> Okay. >> You didn't say anything. We're we're moving no money right now. At the last meeting, you had asked for an updated list. So, you have that in front of you.
2425 fell off. So, now you have 2526. And anything that was not completed in the 2425 fiscal year was moved over. You'll have that to be able to take review and advise once we receive the information back for the RFP. If we need to move
projects, we can move them around at that time when we have the number. You also have um Rachel put together a what do you want to call it? Expense report so to speak with what has been spent. And so you you have that as well.
>> The first page is for the current year. The first page is for the 2526. Yes, ma'am. >> The other one is for the >> Sorry, the first page is for the 2526, the shorter page. The other page is for
the 2425. That's just what was expensed last year. You're on a new budget. We have zero budgeting. So, whatever didn't happen, now we start with our new budget. >> And then Rachel can answer any other question.
Can I can I ask you? I think kind of the only thing out there that is in process right now that we will pay for um generally speaking is the pots on Inner Lake, right? Is that in process now? Are
pots being purchased for flowers? I mean, we did the walk. We identified where they would go. Um what's the status of that project? >> We just put I want to say we just purchased flowers from Robins, I believe. Harry is in the process of putting
everything else out, but remember he is in the process of also hiring a new staff. So, he has held up on anything that's remaining. I'm sorry, he's not here for me to ask where that status is. Um, but he is hiring for a new position and he's also training a new position. So, things will slow down. If you'll
remember, I said that last month as well. They will slow down because we're moving into the holidays and so we have a lose use it or lose it policy. And so we have a lot of staff that will be using vacation time so they don't lose that. >> Okay. I know. And I saw this one here too. So thank you. I want to say Ken
that he purchased them already but I can't. >> Okay. And then did we ever approve increasing the size of these circles. Remember we did the pots on Main Street. We did a certain size circle. Then we went to South Maine um and we increased
the size because now we had the pots and we realized our circles were too small. So then I think we got a price to increase the circles on the north side of Maine to match the ones on the south side of Maine. Did we ever process something to get that accomplished or approved moving forward with that? >> No, he he hasn't moved that forward
right now. >> Okay. >> But we approved it. >> Okay. So it's just one of those items hanging out there. So that and the flower pots are sitting out there waiting for Harry to basically get to them. >> So So a couple questions. Are we kind of
like on open CRA right now? that what we've moved to kind of like oh so I think we discovered that Hillrest property is not within the CRA district that that kind of came out on the pictures for the Central Florida
regional planning where we had an aha moment and then I came back and looked at the CRA and it's not. So we've got money situated in the budget for Hillrest that we're going to need to free up elsewhere for elsewhere. So that's one. Maybe for the next meeting
have that as an agenda item. I thought that the other and I appreciate Harry being stretched in many directions and everybody as we try to move forward with a lot of these improvements. We have over $600,000 in CRA money that's sitting there. We've probably rolled
over 300 400,000 from prior year. and we had talked about what do we need to do to revise our CRA to include a project manager. I think it would be in our best interest rather than just have money sitting there that
we could really be doing things for the town by the evidence of the list they have, but we just don't have the resources to be able to work on that. >> Do you want to take that, Councilwoman Worley? you >> well yeah that's like a reserve account
kind of in a way so that this we have the same sort of reserve account to do projects but also if we're going to do this storm water study the whole idea of the study is to send prioritize projects and get those done and I think I know
originally that's all I'm glad that I'm glad that we're doing more than original because before that's all we did but um we do have to be mindful that storm water projects are extremely expensive and it's going to take us a while. So, um I just think we need to be cautious,
get this storm water study done as soon as possible so that when the rains come next year, we will have some of these projects in place. And I mean, that's just my idea. I just don't I think we're going to have to have some reserves to do these big storm water projects.
They're expensive. >> They are. One of the one of the roads that Allan is looking at he said will cost over $200,000 just for him to take care of it. >> Right. So I'm not as much talking to the reserves. It's the projects that we've listed that we aren't able to get done
because we've got staff overstretched and that's where at one time we had a discussion that Sebring and the other CRAAS have like a dedicated person but we had said ours is written in a way that we can't and I recall at the last
CRA meeting we said why don't we look into what would it take to revise it >> now if we're saying hey the whole 600,000 we're now going to change mine and put it into storm drainage. Well, that's a whole different discussion, right? >> That's a tough one for the people. When
we've been talking about playgrounds and other things that we're going to be doing. So, >> when we talk about um revising our CRA, it's not as simple as just rewriting it and bringing it forward. You have to start all over. You have to start all over. So, that means everything would
stop. You would start all over. So um I could explore asking the questions because obviously in some of these when you look at them we don't have an engineer an engineer on staff any longer. So now we will pay we will have to pay for an engineer to prepare and put these things together for us to move
it forward. So we will end up having to use for I'll just give you an example. Let's see where's one um where we had it on here for the engineer town engineer design. Let's look at the Dow Hall parking and
sidewalk town engineer to design and then the commercial review process planning and address storm water could take approximately six months. Well, we lost our we lost our um engineer. So, we would now pay for an engineer services to be able to per perform this.
>> Are we are we going to hire an engineer at some point for the town? >> We weren't. we were using our um library of consultants and using them that way because it allows us to save money and use an engineer only when we need to instead of having one full-time on staff
where we're also paying for benefits and things of that nature. >> Yeah. Okay. >> And and I don't think that's a bad idea. I think that's that's a good idea. But when it comes to general CRA stuff, I think we need to be open to consultants there, too. So, you know, right now we're waiting for the master plan, which is supposed to, I think, come out in
January. And that should give us a kind of a plan of action hopefully of things we we want to do and moving forward. But I think when we get to that point, um you know, we need to be open to hiring consultants in order to to get projects accomplished. Um so if we do way finding
sites, hire some that to design them, put it out to bid, bring the bids to us, oversee the construction, things like that. Um you know, it's it's going to be a lot cheaper than that employee that you're talking about. So I think as long as we're small and we don't have big budget like Sebring, you know, we can
manage, but we need to be willing to use consultants in order to get things accomplished or the money's just going to pile up and go nowhere, right? So yeah. >> Could we make a request as well is for you to prioritize what is the most important, the top five, because everything can't be priority, and that's
the reality is we need you to prioritize what your top five would be and then what your next top five would be. That will help us whenever we get our plan back. from the Central Florida Regional Planning to allow us because if we're thinking that all of this is going to be able to start at one time, we don't have
enough staff for that and even to hire staff. >> Yeah. And redoing our plan, our CRA plan is something that most from when I went to that convention and was listening to people speak and everything and talking to other people and CRAAS, almost all of
them are using uh consultants to redo their plans. So, they're not doing it inhouse with their own people. Most of them, even the big ones also and small ones are hiring consultants to do that work for them because those consultants are quick and easy. They have all the templates for everything. They just, you
know, put it together and get it accomplished in no time. And they know everything about them and how to do it. And to them, when I talked to them, they were saying it was easy. So I know to you it's hard, but to them it's, you know, it's a heck of a lot easier because they do it every day. So I think >> and we can use CRA funds to hire these
consultants. I will confirm that. >> Okay. >> I I asked them that question and they were all using CRA funds to pay consultants to do all of these things and um a lot of things that that we think we can't pay for, they're all
paying for with CRA money. So, I think um anyways, um that that's just what I was hearing there. Yeah. >> And and just remember that everybody's CRA is different. So, if they're saying they're paying for it, it may be because that's how their CRA is written. Ours is written very specific to what Lake
Placid needed. And so they may be paying for it, but it may be outlined in their plan that they could do that. It's very specific based off of what CFRPC has advised. >> So Charlotte, I like the idea of coming back at the next meeting with what are
the top five we like to work on and and maybe in the meantime staff can tell because some of them are already in progress, right? And I'd hate to have somebody's got threequarters of the way through and we're like put it away. So it'd be also helpful to know >> on a lot of these how the status.
>> Okay. >> And then and then if we're going to update the uh spreadsheet um to take off Hillrest and that's about a 100,000. So then put a line item there for the roads and the uh water management.
>> Not 500,000. What did you just say? When you all the projects were Hillrest? >> No. >> And that is no long we found out that you said that's not in the CRA, >> right? But I didn't see 500,000. I saw 50,000, a 20, and a 30. I saw some money, but I didn't see
>> Okay. I've got I have >> Oh, I I heard you say 500,000. >> 100,000. Yeah. 100,000. >> Yeah. Whatever the hillrest will be available money. >> Yeah. So, take that off and then substitute maybe take what was it? 70,000 that we thought we needed for
storm water and and so and so forth and then leave 30,000 unallocated. >> I just I know while we're thinking about that um if you're going to revise the CRA plan then you need to look at all of it. I mean you don't just revise it just
to have a staff. you would want to look at every all the uses that were originally the original plan and re do additional planning whatever you want in the CRA do it all at one time because I was told it's also quite a process and
and even if you um it's just that you have to go through the whole process again and you have to revise it you want to include everything we're doing now but we might want to include more and that's a whole another discussion >> so if we've been talking about this you
over time about the need to redo the CRA plan. So, why don't we actually talk to a consultant, you know, soon and get their feedback? It'll be free to talk to them. >> I'm going to caution you. I'm going to caution you only because this is one of
the hot topics that we almost lost this money because it was sitting up to be wiped away. >> Well, what's being said, >> remember when the CRA when it was up being discussed for us to they were going to do away with the CRA? >> Yeah. Yeah. >> The reason they want to do away with the
CRAAS is because they're looking much like doge doge. Anyway, they're looking for efficiencies for taxpayers money to throw parties and do stuff like that. That's my opinion. They want to focus in more on
>> real projects that are in the ground and that sort of thing. It it is a it's a worry when you start down that road. But it it's something we can talk about, but I'm just saying you just don't change it for one thing you want. You have to really revise it, really have deep discussions.
>> It was being discussed there about that. And the the understanding there was they're not worried about it going away. They said that was politics and they weren't expecting to see it actually go away and the politics in the end um you know went
away and it didn't go away. And uh but I don't know. I I think we we should not be scared to do the work of the CRA because it might go away. You know, it's it's very likely not going away. And I think we should just be moving forward in the manner that we feel that we ought
to be. And so I think, you know, we've talked about this a bunch. A free consultation with the consultant um about what's involved for an hour or something is probably going to be insightful. And as opposed to talking about it over and over again for the next year, maybe we ought to have, you
know, uh maybe Charlotte, you have a you call a meeting with with somebody, one of us is there and um and whoever else needs to be there to see what they say um about that. I know you're busy, but you know, an hour meeting, you know, might get us a
whole lot of insight. >> So, you won't be able to move any money tonight. you'll be able to make comments to it, but because it's not a meeting where we have it, you have to be able to notice that and then be able to move it. So, it'll be moved at the next meeting, but we do have the notes down. Speaking of the next meeting, I'm
looking at the last page of the agenda here. And I the same thing on the town agenda, town council. Uh the council meets on the second and third Monday of each month. The second Monday of December is not the 15th, it's the 8th. I corrected that on the website. So
that's all been corrected after your printed copies, >> the 8th and the 15th. Yes. And then the CRA meeting then would be scheduled for the 15th of December. >> We are going to request for council to cancel that meeting because we have nothing else on that agenda and we will also have a lot of staff out during that
time. >> I'm thinking that as well. So okay. So we'll take that up in town council. Great. >> Yes ma'am. >> Thank you. >> But that would also be the CRA meeting too though. >> That's correct. So we would resume because it's got both of them both, >> right? >> Yeah. So it would be not just in
council. It would be >> Yeah, we all agree with that. >> Yes, ma'am. So we would have the CRA meeting we would resume in January. We could have some of the questions that have been asked probably answered by that time as well. >> Yeah. Yeah. And uh by the way, the landscaping on Inner Lake looks awesome.
It's really coming up now and it just looks beautiful. So I think the selections of plants and everything looks really, really good. Yeah. So, good job. >> Do we have an update on Dell Hall? >> We do. >> The inside has been painted. We still
have not had any luck on estimates for the covered patio. Harry said that he is um completing one of the wheelchair ramps tomorrow and the numbers have been put on the building. The fire marshall came and did the inspection on the suppression system over the stove. It did pass. Um he made labels for the
breaker box and then he said that he has the final inspection coming up after he finishes tomorrow. So that's to be it'll be to be determined when we can open which brings up that in January we'll
have to discuss what fees will look like. So there will be a lot to kick off the new year with. Put on your roller blades. I I have a question. From my reading the past minutes, we were looking for grants
of um $200,000 for DH Hall, $100,000 for Spruce. Is that right? >> Say that again. >> We were looking for grants $200,000 for Dal Hall, and $100,000 for Spruce. Will those be the kind of grants where we
have to upfront the money >> if if they're if they are um our pack? Yes, ma'am. >> And for >> and for both of them would be money upfront. >> Okay. >> Yes, ma'am. >> Did Did we apply by the ferdap date?
>> We applied forentennial it. Sorry. Rachel says yes. Bsentennial park. >> Bsentennial park. We applied for how much? A 100,000. and we have to match it 100. >> Okay. I don't have that information
tonight. Councilwoman Charles, >> I did assist with that. So, it was a little under I believe under the 200,000 because once they priced, we got a quote because you have to some kind of pro quote. So, how >> just under 200 for the total project and
then you applied half of that for FURDAP. All of that for fur. >> So then that means we have to match 200,000. >> No, you ask for a waiver because we're in a ready district. >> Okay. >> So it's usually a 50,000 match that we ask for a waiver because we're in a
ready area which is I forget what the stands for, but we ask for a waiver on that. >> So we pay nothing or we pay 50,000. >> You'll know when we get the grant. I can't stipulate, but we ask for the waiver. So you'll know when you get your grant application. If we get the grant,
then you'll get your agreement and then that'll all be stipulated at that time. >> It's just important for this budget so we know how much are we >> I I get it. You can't say you can't say till you get it. >> No, no, I get that. But on the grant itself, it would have said what our
local amount was. It says how much you you know how much your project is, how much you apply and and then how much our local contribution is. >> So under FRAP, we ask for a waiver. It's usually for a 200,000 it's a 50,000 match. We ask for the waiver.
So whether we get the waiver, typically we do get the waiver. So So just Charlotte, that'll have for like January meeting some potential budget impact of some way. >> Exactly. That's that's where I was going for the January meeting because if we
have to upfront between the two of them $300,000, we have to know where we're getting it from cuz I don't want to borrow to do it. >> Okay, I'll take it to staff. staff have anything to bring before the CRA?
Okay, I see none. We'll bring it back to the board. Any other last comments? >> No. >> I was going to Yeah. All right, audience. Nope. Okay. If there's no other business to come
before the C board meeting to the side and behind me I had to keep >> I called you but I don't remember what about >> so I'll call you back again when I remember it.
Oh, I did remember, but I later have to make sure I can All right. Being 6:39, I now call to order the regular meeting of the Lake Placid Town Council this Monday evening, November 17th, 2025 in the government center of the
Lake Placid, Florida. Uh, call to order. The invocation and pledge has already been done at at the CRA. So, we'll we'll move on to the roll call. Please call the role. >> Mayor Hullbrook >> here. >> Council member Hayes >> here. >> Council member Worley
>> here. Council member Charles >> here. >> Council member >> here. >> Okay. At this time, I'll open the floor to public comment on non non-aggenda items. Okay. Seeing none, we'll move on.
Approval of the agenda. >> I'll make a motion to approve the agenda. Second. >> Uh, we got a motion and a second. Any comments from the podium? >> Hearing none. Take it the audience.
>> Seeing none, bring it back. Pull the council. >> Council member Charles. >> Yes. >> Council member Worley. >> Yes. >> Council member Hayes. >> Yes. >> Council member Everheart. >> Yes. >> Yes. There. >> Uh, number four, presentations. Citizens
on the agenda. I don't have anything. Is there anything to come before the board? Okay, seeing none, we'll move on to public hearings. Uh, a LPTC.25.8 request for consideration of a variance
to the architectural design design standards for an addition at 162 South Oak, Lake Placid, Florida. Thank you. Good. Okay. Good evening. Dana Redell, town planner. For the record, tonight I'll be using
the U agenda package to navigate us through this request. The property is 162 South Oak Avenue, known as First Baptist Church, and recently renamed to South Oak.
The property has recently applied for a commercial review. Um, and they've gotten through everything they need to with the commercial review in order to add an addition onto the building. The addition is an entryway to the building. And I'll go ahead and get to the site
plan so you can envision it a little bit better. It's an entryway that includes a bathroom um and increases ADA accessibility and makes it easier essentially for the public to enter and exit the building.
The property is located south of Inner Lake and east of South Maine between uh between East Hibiscus and East Royal Palm and also between South Oak and South Magnolia Avenue. It's zoned R1A residential. The property
has been unified to comply with the minimum lot size requirements and years ago a special exception was was achieved on the property in order to allow a church and church uses to bring it up to standard because the church did exist
before zoning. But the moment they needed to add an addition, they were expanding a use and needed to bring it into conformity. It has a lowdensity residential future land use. You can see on the property there's existing structures. In section 154-17
of the town code, it requires two out of three options. One option is like an 8 foot wide very long arcade style entryway. Another option is a 100 square foot porch. And another option is 30%
glazing. And this is on the primary facade. A couple years ago, town council asked that two up to two, if it's facing more than one street, that up to two sides be considered primary facades.
This addition will be facing three streets or surrounded on three streets by East Hibiscus, South Oak, and Royal Palm. So, they had to make two of their sides of their building comply with
those options for glazing an arcade or a porch. We were able to utilize some of the existing structures to show compliance with the porch. Um, they far exceed the requirements for porches, but
they on one side of the building they could not achieve the glazing. Um, so you can see here, this is the proposed addition. See if I can zoom in a little bit. It's a 2,67
square foot edition. There are porches here. They, as far as I know, don't meet the 100 square foot entryway, but there were porches on the, you can't really tell from this image. There's porches on the west side of the
building, south side of the building, and north side of the building. So, it meets that requirement. Just moving on to look at other images. So, we were provided with some renderings of what they were going to look like. These are black and white
renderings. So, I'll say a big part of the reason I'm recommending approval for the deviation from the glazing requirements are because this building is going above and beyond with visual interest standards. So, they have stamped concrete, they have stucco, um
they have nice caps on their parapet walls, they have awnings that they intend to use, and they are adding additional porches in addition to the porches that already comply with the regulations. So, I believe the intent of the
architectural design standards is to create that visual interest, and I do believe they are achieving that with this building. the applicant is here. They also provided um color images and a PowerPoint in the event that council
would like to hear them speak. But I'm available at this time for any questions you may have. This is this is the applicant's PowerPoint. I'm just flipping through real quick. You can see on the south side that's the existing building and on
the north side that will be the improvement. >> So it looks nice and I'll go ahead. So this is staff's recommending approving and this is your motion to recommendation move to. So I'll go ahead and move to approve LPTC25.008
008 to allow a variance from the minimum glazing requirements on the front elevation of 164 square foot for a total of 18% glazing. >> Second. >> Okay, we have a motion and a second. Any
further discussion from the podium? Seeing none, I'll take it to the audience. All right, hearing none, bring it back. Pull the council. >> Council member Charles. >> Yes, it looks nice. Council member Hayes, >> yes. >> Council member Worley,
>> yes. >> Council member Everart, >> yes. >> Okay. >> Thank you, council. Have a good night. >> Thank you. Next, ordinance 2025-17. This is second reading on the utility
rate change. Ordinance number 2025-17, an ordinance of the town of Lake Placid amending chapter 135 of the town code entitled regional utility system to increase residential and commercial water and wastewater rates to prohibit
se severability and to pro provide for an effective date. I'll make a motion that we approve ordinance number 2025-17. >> Would you would you include the word adopt? >> I'm sorry. Adopt. >> Thank you.
>> Wrong word. >> Sorry for the interruption. >> Thank you. >> Oh, second. >> All right. We have a motion and a second to accept and adopt. Any further comments from the podium? Um, I'd just like to point out for the
people that might be there aren't that many here, but just for somebody that may have missed it the last meeting that we don't do this lightly, but that there was a study by Florida Rural Water Association that uh, for example, we are supposed to
have 79 days worth of reserves in operating and maintenance. Excuse, excuse me, we're supposed to have a minimum of 90 days. We have only 79 days in reserves. Um that's the minimum. The recommended is 120 days. So our 79 days
is far short of what rural water recommends. So we have to do this is a has to be done. And again, council member Everheart is our liaison to the uh regional utility
and I understand they approved this unanimously as well. Okay. actually correction. It it was technically was not approved. Um there were only uh the chairman chair and two
people at the at the meeting >> and the two members could not agree whether it should be the full raise or a partial raise. So they did not >> come to a consensus. >> Oh okay. But those were there were in favor of
it. I said you didn't have a consensus at the meeting, but it was discussed at the meeting and those that were there were in favor of it. >> No, they could not come to agreement on the rate. >> Oh, okay. What was the vote? >> Um,
it was remember one person voted to for the full amount and the other person wouldn't second it. The other person voted for a partial amount and the first one would not second it across the board. All right, we'll take the audience. Any
comments? My name is Josephine Conley at 607 Sunset Point Drive. Uh just a question and tell me if I'm on the wrong page here. I'm not questioning the rate. What I'm curious about is as you indicated, you had to have a second meeting. Today
is the second meeting is my understanding, but when I look at the documents, it says it goes into effect on the 15th. Now, today is the 17th. Now, is that correct?
I'm I'm looking unless the document's wrong. And this is the second meeting. >> I'm sorry, where did you say is the 15th? What page are you looking at? >> Well, 34 of 84. >> 34 of 84.
>> And then you go the A section A. >> Yeah. All of them. Mhm. >> Well, just the first one actually because yeah, there's 26, 27, 28. >> No, all of them. D A B C D. >> It'll say on the second line.
>> Oh, yeah. >> of section A. >> I thought we caught that last time. And >> yeah, it's throughout the document. It's the 15th as a >> error. So, that's an error.
I suggest an amendment to the ordinance to make it effective that rate effective today rather than the se 15th because your effective date is upon adoption. >> I'm going to amend my motion to
>> What is the billing cycle? Is that is that good Rachel and Bert for your billing cycle? >> Okay. I'm going to amend my motion to adopt ordinance number 2025-17
with the noted change changes. >> I'll amend the second. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. >> I know
that is only in the first one, which would be 203A. Well, 203 I'm sorry, the next one which is 204A would be November 15th of 25. I'm sorry, just a minute.
The 26 and 27, etc. are the different dates of 15 October. So yes, all the 20 25 dates would go to November 15. I mean 17, November 17th >> and it's through all. Okay.
>> It's another section. >> No. >> All right. Another comment. Public public council. >> Right. There was also on so the changes were on page 34 and 35 under 135-203A.
Actually um the we need to go through the whole document and take all of the November 15 205 dates and make them November 17th 205. I think my motion to to make the changes to to you know um
modify my motion to make the changes as appropriate to date for the date to be moved from November 15th to never 17 >> throughout the whole document. Yes. Thank you. I'm good with that. >> But then I have another question because it says each year and we assumed it was
going to be October and so every year it says October after that. Correct. >> It's okay. >> But that's not a year. If we're changing it to today, then all of those future dates >> are 11 months later.
>> Oh, you're going to do just 11 months versus one year. >> Just 11 months. The rest of them would be >> The study was based on an >> The study was based, I think, correct me if I'm wrong, Bert W, on an effective date of October 15th. So we use that for
everything except the intent was supposed to be this year. Why I let 15 versus 17 get by? I can't I think we were that's a holdover from a prior meaning October date. I don't
recall that we said we >> we ran into problems. So we had to push it forward. >> We did. We couldn't get the ordinance done, >> right? >> So it had to roll forward. And I'm not sure why the two-day delta there. I don't recall. Sorry.
But I don't think there's any comment or commitment in our ordinance to hold the rate steady for 12 months. >> No, >> I mean we that's why we use the chart saying on X date it goes up to
that amount. October 15, 2026. >> That falls fiscal year. Correct. >> New fiscal year. for budgeting purposes. >> Okay. >> All right. Any other comments?
>> All right. You've got the motion in a second with the corrections. >> Yes. >> Okay. Pull the council. >> Council member Worley. >> Yes. >> Council member Hayes. >> Yes. >> Council member Charles. >> Yes. >> Council member Everheart.
>> Yes. Okay. Now we go to C. Ordinance 2025-18 second reading amended the 2025-2026 town budget and the Lake Placid Regional Utility Budget to allocate funds for the
construction of the town police station. This was coordinated between myself and Rachel significantly. Um, I think we're all on the same terminology page. Um, you heard the explanation a week ago. Happy to walk
through this line by line if you'd like or stand for questions. So, we need a motion, right? >> Approve and adopt the the ordinance. >> So, I'll make a motion to approve and adopt ordinance number 202516,
the town 2526 town budget and Lake Placid Regional Utility Budget to allocate funds for the construction of the town police station and providing for an effective date ordinance. >> The agenda package I have shows it as 2025-18.
Correct. Sorry, it's Yes, we're a amending >> second >> 16-8. >> All right, we got a motion, a second. Any further comments? >> 16. >> Okay. >> I do. >> So, I have some comments and I have an
issue with the ordinance. So, tonight I want to begin by fully saying I support the police department and the vital role they play in protecting our community. I also want to acknowledge with understanding the very real needs they face today. The evidence
room is too small and poorly laid out. Officers have asked for a shower and that's a reasonable request. Electrical upgrades are needed. Storage space is limited. The building itself should be hardened with hurricane resistant windows and we must plan for better
utilization of the existing space to accommodate both current operations and modest growth. These are legitimate needs and I want to see them addressed. But the responsible way to do that is through renovation, reorganization, and targeted
improvements, not by committing $2.3 million to a new building that greatly reduces our reserves and bypasses proper processes. When Town Hall was purchased in 2018 for 1.2 million with upgrades, that decision
included space for the police department. Citizens are now asking why not move them there? Why not renovate or repurpose another building? Before committing millions, we must hold a special pro a special public meeting,
present the options, and let the residents have input. At the bid meeting, 12 contracting companies attended, but only three submitted bids. The bids range from 2.3 million to 2.8 million, well above the
1.6 6 million budget figure that had been discussed. The lowest bid was 2,299,000. Rather than rebidding or reassessing scope, the administration is now calling scope deletions value engineering.
But this is not engineering. It is cutting corners. Some of the proposed changes are material substitutions, cheaper doors, stucco instead of stone veneer, CPV um instead of copper, duck board instead
of metal duck work, and cheaper lighting. Those can be argued as value engineering, though they reduce quality and durability. But other items are outright deletions. Utilities at $192,724,
lockers and evidence storage at 91,000, appliances at 12,000, and a generator at 37,392 have all been removed. These are not luxuries. These are essential components of a functioning police station.
The Sumco contract shows 46,32 in deletions and downgrades, bringing the revised bid to 1,893. But when you add back the 192,724 utility project, which is essential,
the true cost is 2.2,85,000, still far above the $1.6 million budget. This is a red flag for internal controls. Let me be precise about the utility project. The $800,000 legislated grant was submitted for the police station and
because utilities were buried in the project, it would not normally require utility commission or or lupre review. But when the bids came in high, the administration devised a way to make the station appear less costly by pulling
out 192,724 of utility work as a separate project. That work is essential. The police station cannot be completed without it. Once it was carved out as a separate project, it became subject to our MUN
code 135-102. Utility projects must be reviewed and recommended by the utility commission, then approved by council and then bid competitively. Awarding it directly to the lowest bidder under the justification that it
is funded by the utility fund bypasses both the commission and the council. And let me be clear, ordinance 2025-18 itself states that the rupra infrastructure funds are being encumbered for this project. Yet it was
never presented to Rupre, which is the utility commission. If if those don't know that acronym, that is not just a procedural oversight. It is a violation of our own ordinance and a breakdown of internal controls. The infrastructure fund balance is only
323,650. Taking 192724 from that utility balance will leave just over 130,000. While there is no statutory reserve requirement in this count, draining it puts at risk other utility projects that
might be a higher priority. That is precisely why the ordinance requires utility commission and council review to ensure funds are allocated responsibly and transparently. And I want to point out something troubling in ordinance 2025-8
itself. On page two, it states, "Whereas no valid objection has been made to the proposed ordinance, and it appears to be in the best interest of the town, that the ordinance be adopted." That statement is simply not true.
Valid objections have been raised by myself, by citizens, and by the fact that this project was never presented to the utility commission as required. To adopt an ordinance with language that erases disscent is not just misleading, it is a false record of consensus.
This is exactly the kind of red flags auditors look for. We raised property taxes 18% this year and at the same time the county raised property values 8.46%. On top of that, we just approved a 22%
water rate increase, a 5% wastewater increase and an 8% annual increase for the next four years. Three of our four enterprise funds are already under reserved. Sanitation is in deficit and we rely on our infrastructure and
general funds for cash flow and hurricane emergencies. This project greatly reduces those reserves leading leaving us unexposed when the next storm comes. This is reckless fiscal management. Meanwhile, hydrants and valves are
failing. Roads need to repair need repairs and resurfacing. And storm water drainage is unfunded despite known flooding. These are immediate risk to citizen health and welfare. Yet, we are prioritizing discretionary construction
over fire protection, safe travels, and flood prevention. We applied for an $800,000 legislative grant, claiming council and citizen support. In reality, council was split three to two, and citizens have asked
repeatedly for alternatives. That is not full support, and grant reviewers will see the discrepancy. Construction is scheduled to begin in January before grant funds are secured. If the grant is denied or delayed,
taxpayers will bear the full $2.3 million cost, greatly reducing reserves meant for emergencies. That is mismanagement. I cannot in good conscious vote for this ordinance. It greatly reduces reserves,
mismanages taxpayer money, bypasses internal controls, and relies on questionable procurement practices that will not withstand inspector general audit scrutiny. It prioritizes discretionary
construction over urgent infrastructure and undermines citizen health and welfare. I want this on record. This is poor governance. Our p our police deserve better facilities, showers, hardened protections, hurricane
resistant windows, and reorganized space. But our citizens deserve responsible leadership. Before committing millions, we must hold a special public meeting, present the options with pros, cons, and costs, and
let residents have input. I ask my fellow council members and the mayor to consider your vote carefully in light of these facts. This is not just about one building. It is about the integrity of our processes, the protection of our
reserves, and the trust of our citizens. Thank you. >> Okay. Um I agree also that the existing police station is in dire condition. Uh we need better. My objection is um the
financial wisdom of doing it immediately. We don't have any guarantee of the $800,000 grant. One was denied a year ago. This would draw down on our reserves. Um,
first of all, it draws down on the utilities. Um, we only have $327,000 for capital improvement funds. Taking out this 192, which is just kind of shuffling the money around. It's still costing us 192,000 to run the utilities,
the fire department, that takes out 59% of the capital improvement fund. Um, and then as far as a general infrastructure fund about 2.5 million, if we do not get that grant,
it's going to draw down 76% of our reserves, leaving about $600,000. Um, the argument has always been if we don't do it now, prices are going to go up and up and up. However, in 2024,
inflation was 2.9%. And is expected to be 3% this coming year. We are making more on our money, our more interest on the money that we have in the bank than that 3%. So, we
are making money by waiting until we know we have the grant in hand. Um, it's um I guess I just cannot I can't do it now without knowing we have the grant. And then secondly, why didn't we go for more
than $800,000? The $800,000 was just like a the makeup from what we thought we it was going to cost us. So even though I know I'll be outvoted, I want to go on the record. I don't think this is fiscally responsible to go forward at this time.
>> I just want to make reference uh to a few things that were mentioned. Um renovating the current building does not address the space needs because there is no room to make the current building any bigger. So um why renovate what we have?
it's not going to make any difference because the space is going to remain the same. Um the deletions of the essential components are not deletions per se. They were just um going to be utilized in a different way. One of them was the lockers. We're not going to get new
lockers and move the lockers we have. Use a generator that we already have. Um it's just uh going to look at things in other ways. Um, the funds you're referencing for streets and drainage, I don't think they can be used uh in this way. Anyway, I I object
to the fact that you call it discretionary construction because it is not, in my opinion, discretionary construction. It is extremely needed construction and has been for probably the past as much as 10 years. Um the
fact that the the alleged fact that we have not brought this to public discussion is just unfortunately not true. Um but possibly didn't look back far enough to see how long we discussed this in council and many times that this
was discussed in council. The people that I see out there right now are three times more than were in the building at the time because nobody came to council meetings. So, um I can tell you that all of these options were thoroughly vetted. Um the the places downtown that we tried
to put the building were thoroughly vetted and um I I just agree with Councilman Eberhart that that by doing this putting it off, it won't hurt us. Um we've seen in the past that it will hurt us and if we don't do this, this is going if we don't do this now, it's
going to go up another 300 or 400,000. And based on the experience that I've had with this this whole cluster that we've had and trying to get this done, um to think about trying to do it over again to me is is just not even going to
happen. So um I that's why I I just strongly say that we need to go forward. I know Councilman Charles thinks that this is not responsible. That's fine. that she is certainly welcome to that and and um I can I can understand why
she might say that. But um when this was first considered in 2021, it was mentioned to be a 5,000 ft building. It was immediately kicked back to a 4,000 ft building and um it was expected to be $600,000
and now you can see that we're over 2 million to build the same building. And in in my judgment, I can't see how putting this off any longer is going to make it any cheaper. This is only going to make it more expensive, which is what I said the last time. Um,
I think it's still important to move this project forward now for the protection of our civilian employees that work in the in the uh police department and also for the retention of our evidence so that our cases don't get thrown out of court. and also for the
council to be behind our police department and our police officers and that they need uh these things to where they can where they can for instance shower so they don't take any um contaminants into their home environment and endanger their family. So um I'm I'm
still saying on exactly the same things I said the other night. I'd like to have Miss Osborne come up. She's our chief financial officer. Pleased to address some of the concerns about the financial >> Councilwoman Charles. I am It's
unfortunate that you >> can you hear me? >> Can you hear me now? It's unfortunate that you feel that it's that we're not we mismanaging funds, but the ultimate decision come to council. Can you hear me?
>> Can you hear me now? But the ultimate decision come to town council. So, we just only acting or bringing the proposed as far as how is it could be worked. So, um, >> and and my comments were not directed to
you. My comments were directed to council who's voting on this. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Do you feel like we are going to be okay financially to go forward on this project? >> We're pulling up the spreadsheet for you. >> We're pulling up the spreadsheet.
>> Okay. Uh, Councilwoman Burley, I don't want to make a decision as far as this is what we should do or not do. This is a uh, options that we bring to council for you guys to make that decision.
It's doable. >> I thought so. I think that I've known Rachel what 25 years. Um, she's been through this. Government is different than any other thing in the world. I don't know what
you can do, what corporation, what entity, whatever business you would ever go into. Government is different. It's handled differently. The monies don't come in all at once and sometimes it's very it's very difficult. I wouldn't want your job. You have to uh count on
other people and the funding that comes in from all different sources at different times of the year. I mean, we don't even get most of our funding. We don't get it all at once. We don't can't plan. We can't I I just wouldn't want your job. But I trust you totally. And I
think you would be jumping up and down. And um I've heard when it's a negative, don't do that. And she still leaves it up to counsel, but we would hear I believe we would hear more from Miss Osborne if there was a problem. Not that she's saying there is or isn't a
problem. I'm just saying I think through the years that um we would definitely know >> I could remember the day when the town I'm pretty sure the mayor will remember this as well when the town couldn't pay payroll but in this case it has nothing
to do with the operating funds it's all capital so the infrastructure funds is exactly for these kind of projects so it's not mismanagement it's actually putting it in projects that it eligible to be used for it's called a priority,
right? There's other things we could use the infrastructure for. It's taken it down to a level that and again on many occasions I asked for money and I was told no, we need those funds for
emergency for cash flow and other earlier we talked about storm drainage and roads and we can use these funds, right? the infrastructure fund we can use to help fund some of those storm drain issues that we're going to have to fix and roads that we're going to have
to fix. So, you're right, it's just a priority. Do we have the money? Absolutely. I think you said that the infrastructure has like 2.4 million, 2.5 million. We've already allocated some out for some projects this year. So, we
would basically greatly deplete it. So, I agree. Do we have the money? Yes. Is that the right decision to make with all of that money in one construction project when there are other things that it could be done with or and we have never looked at
renovating the current building and and I understand sure there's space issues. I've been in it too and and clearly the evidence the document storage is overcrowded. But when you look at the new design of the 4,700 square foot, there's like a
700 foot evidence garage. We could do an interlocal with Highlands County. They have the holding cell. They have the, you know, the jail. So I think the chief had said it averages. One time it was one year that we had to store. You know,
the the point is to not debate this and this and this. We've never sat back and looked at whether their options and those would be the pros and cons of each of them to what I'm going to say try to save $2
million. I mean if this is 2.3 million we know it's going to be a lot more and if we could renovate a existing building for five six what other thousand it would be that's a $2 million
savings for the taxpayer. Second is on the value added engineering. Yes, I get it. We're going to reuse things. The point is that's not value engineering. That is deleting something from the scope. That gets into red flag on internal controls for procurement
issues. Those were the points I was making there. It's all on the procurement and how we've done that with the bid versus value engineering. >> And just a minute >> and and I think that Rachel said it again. It's like all those issues you were talking about are issues for the
council and not for Miss Osborne. She's our financial director. >> And to sit here and say that it that that it was not um looked at to renovate the current building is just false. I'm sorry. It's false. And because you
didn't see the estimate that was done, it didn't come to you. It wasn't in a packet. I'm sorry. That doesn't mean it wasn't done. It was done and it was we could Excuse me. I'm talking now. You had plenty of time. It's my turn. >> Um Mr. Brantley told us that he looked
at that building and he determined the cost for it. Did he put it down on paper? Probably not because that was 10 years ago. And a lot of times we didn't do things that way 10 years ago. But I can tell you that this not only this council, but councils previous to this have looked at renovating the other
building. My god, would that have been easier? Yeah, that would have been a lot easier. Would it have been efficient? No. Would it be would it consider that the town is growing and that you know what? As the town grows, our police department has to grow. And if our
police department has to grow, the the necess the necessity of a police station grows as well. And so to to to try to renovate something that isn't going to do us any good more than 2 or 3 years down the road doesn't make sense either.
And that is also not fiscally responsible. I'm going to call a question please for a vote. >> Sorry, what did you say? >> I'm calling the question which means I'm
calling for the vote please. >> I still didn't understand what you said Deborah. >> She called the question. She wants a vote. Oh, but but we still have comments making. >> No, I'm calling for the vote. It's a pardon.
>> Not yet. All the discussion is done at the podium. I'm going to take it to the >> Okay. Thank you. >> I'm saying for us. >> Yeah, we've got a motion in a second. >> Well, I still I I would I would ask Councilwoman Hayes who says a study was done on renovating the current police
station. I I would really like to know when because to to clarify, a study was done to renovate the old town hall after we moved out to move the police department over there and to renovate the town hall
to do to expand it in different ways to incorporate the police department there. There has not been a a study or a cost on the current 8 North Oak Avenue renovating that. So, if
you're saying there is, you can separately get me that information, but I don't believe um that there has. And I clearly stated that it was not written that Mr. Brantley took a look at the building. At that time, we didn't do everything just like we do now. It was
10 years ago. Things have changed. Okay. But I know that it was looked at and it was considered not feasible. Can I give you a written estimate? No. Because if I could have, I would have done it about eight months ago. Okay? But I know that it was considered. I know that we looked at all of these options. We truly did. I
know you don't believe it. You won't ever believe it. But I promise you we did. Rachel, I want if you would please run through this so that we can make sure that proper information is going to the public on where the allocated funds are and also if you will point out what we
can and cannot use these funds for so that that is also clarified for the public. And just to make a comment just um I'm sorry I ran down the hallway. I'm out of breath. Um, in the last meeting I also stated that um
I can't remember now. Forget it. I'll think of it in a minute. >> Okay. >> Something council. >> But I want to start off saying that if I felt that the town could not afford it, I would not have it wouldn't have been an option on the table. So I'm still not saying do it or not do it, but it
wouldn't be on the table if the town could not afford it. >> I know what it is now. Thank you. it was on that you had asked about the being able to have a playground and so I just want to say that I understand that Councilwoman Charles is going to bring this up in the public. However, we have
clarified this in several meetings, two meetings we clarified this and we also stated it in the last meeting. It was because of where you were asking for that. And so when we're saying that we're going to dissolve all of our money that we need for emergencies, that is a pocket of money that you don't even see
on here. And so it's not it's not accurate to say that that's where the money is coming from. Please go ahead, Rachel. >> I don't know what you mean by connecting that to when I ask for infrastructure money for playground. >> You were asking for a specific account
that you were asking for and that's the emergency account and that's why we would clarify that we can't take it out of that fund. So it is correct that we can't take it out of there. However, this council could have voted for us to take it out of infrastructure if that's what you so chose. >> That was exactly what the request was to
take it out of infrastructure. >> When it originally came up, it wasn't out of infrastructure. We kept 1.3 out of the 1.3. >> It was out of infrastructure. >> But you kept referring to the 1.3 and that is the 1.3 that is for our emergency fund >> and that was why we said we don't need
to hash that here. the point >> we do we do need to because we we have to make sure that the public is getting correct information and we are getting questioned on what we are doing inside and whether it's ethical or not. So it is very important to clarify that here. So my comment was because the three of
us met and we talked about taking it out of infrastructure and we and and the discussion was you can't because you it's a park and remember we went over the whole thing with infrastructure Charlotte the whole we pulled out the
procedure and then you called Sebring to clarify that they do use infrastructure for their playground. The conversation had always been using infrastructure funds for playground, never any emergency. That would not be
something I would ever ask to take emergency funds for that. The comment was made when I would ask at different times. We cannot deplete. It's taken us years to build up all these funds. We cannot deplete them. We need them for
cash flow. We need them for emergencies. So, I've never to to both of you have ever asked for emergency funds for playground equipment at all. >> I guess the miscommunication was you kept referring to the 1.3 million. The 1.3 million.
>> I always said infrastructure. In fact, the motion I made to take 100,000 out of infrastructure for playground equipment at Lake June Park was never seconded. It was it was brought to council as part of a group
and then as far as that project never got approved. >> Agreed. Agreed >> because we need these funds for emergency and cash flow. But regardless, we've never taken it even though we say we've had public meetings. We've only had public meetings on construction of a
new police department, but not options. So point one. All right, let's take a good evening. First, I want to say the Christmas lights around town look really nice. They look very nice. Good evening. My name is Marlene Barger. 760 Sunset
Point Drive. Independent of Colleen and hers is much more detailed. I have prepared a letter for each of you for my concerns about what we're doing regarding the police department. First of all, I want to make a couple of comments. I believe Colleen said on the
former town hall when we looked at expanding that that was not for the police department. Actually was for expanding it for the town hall to be there. that was not part of putting the police department in it. Secondly, at last meeting council, our town
administrator said, "Mr. Miss Rose, Mr. Chad, if I counted all the times we had workshops, I couldn't. We've had more workshops than I could possibly count, but we have never had a workshop on two
important issues. The two big highpriced issues. one, the police department building, and two, the pickle ball compound. There's never been a workshop. The value of workshops, if you've ever been in industry, is that people can sit around and discuss ideas on the police
department. We like the police department. We could have discussed things like why not move the evidence department into this building and secure it and then when you can secure that building, you would have enough space. Several things concern me about we what
we have done with the police department over the last several years. We stand here and we all say how much we appreciate them and we do. However, in the last 16 to 20 years with many town councils, we've never ever talked about
fixing up the interior of that building. We replaced the roof on it before the hurricane rush that we had three in a row over six weeks in 2004. Then we had to replace the roof again. And then recently we put a metal roof on
it. So the roof is secure. That building has been standing there through 50 years of hurricanes and it's still standing. And when you talk about what we can do for the police department, my question is why hasn't the town council or the
mayor ever considered allocating funds to fix up the current interior of that building? So I think we do we need to do that and my letter discusses all the things not everything in the detail that Colleen did. Both our comments are
independent. Neither one knew the other was doing that. So it comes together at the same time. And again think carefully because we are overspending. You also said last week, the town administrator said in a discussion with
Bird Harris, funds, grant funds are not guaranteed. They are not. To assume that you're going to get that when it failed last year, to assume you're going to get the $800,000 this year is irresponsible. It is irresponsible management.
And we should consider ourselves carefully. We care for the police department. Let's take care of them, but let's do it in a financially solvent way. Thank you. Hello, it's Josephine Connley again. It's 607 Sunset Point
again. Here's my concern. I hear everything that you're saying, but for heaven's sakes, why can we not take some of these funds, which would be a much smaller amount, and take a look at the building we're
standing in? And I would also like to have a tour of this building. I go by here four times a week during the week and I see three cars, four cars. I'm like, "Wow, what are we doing with
this big building?" I understand you have staff, okay, but there are times you can have staff maybe in closer together, but I don't see why we can't take monies and put it into this building. That's what you were going to
do originally when you moved here. So, and then they have the room behind the building which they could have because I think that's a pretty decent sized building for all the things that you want to put in there like the records.
And here we are. We're back to this again. And I mean, when you talk about having all this money, do you understand? If we don't get these grants, if we don't get these grants for the pickle ball, I don't see it guaranteed because
you keep changing on the pickle ball, we're going to have this, we're going to have that, we're going to take this out, we're going to do this. Well, hello. If we don't get refunded for that and we don't get a grant for this, Mr. Mayor, we're going to have a financial
statement that's going to be in the red and we're not going to have any money and who's going to bail us out? So, I'm just asking you to please think about what I'm asking. I don't want I I need our policemen to be out there and be
happy. So, first of all, can I have a tour of this building? Mr. Mayor, may I have a tour of this building? I would like to have a tour. I would not tonight. I would like to be able to come in and actually see the
workspace that you currently have. and is it something that's doable? Otherwise, there's no point in me talking about that. But because we have a 17,500 ft building, I'm thinking, why can't we?
We have how many police officers? Five. And they're not in the office all the time, just like they're not in the office in the town. So, I'm not getting a response, though. I mean, as a taxpayer, I should be able to have a
tour through the building and see if there is space and then you have everybody together and then maybe, who knows, you might find it, you might love it because you're in the same area. Now, my question isn't answered.
>> Well, that would be up to the chief if he wants to >> allow Oh, this building. Yes, this building. >> This building >> I'm talking about. >> Yeah, that would be up to the administrator and staff to >> to do it. I mean,
>> I'll be happy to arrange that. I I would >> It's not a problem at all. >> Right. Cuz that's what I'm talking about. Not the old building. I'm talking about this building. It's already very nice. Whatever. Let's see if we can make it doable. And this way we don't have to worry about our financial statement being in a red with all these projects
going on. >> Miss Connley, I have no problem taking you on a tour. I do just want to note though that Councilwoman Charles brought forward um a few months ago, I can't remember exactly when, where Phil Williams did look at this and they did a cost estimate on the amounts and he
determined at that time based off of having conversation with construction builders that in order for them to harden it as a true police department with everything that it would require, it was going to cost too much. And he had estimates on there. Councilwoman Charles brought that forward and we also
put it forward into our package with the history. You will be forthcoming as soon as we are able to get it up and running. All of this information is open to the public. We do not disclose anything from them. In the last week's packet, it also had historical excerpts where we brought
it forward so that council could see on pickle ball and police department that this has been discussed at Nauseium. And that will all be located on a um resident portal that is forthcoming and it will be out there for everybody to see. And so it has been looked at. I
will be happy to show you this building. It's just please keep in mind I'm not an engineer and when we're listening to engineers who are saying that it's going to cost too much. We take what they're saying if they say this is going to be your best bet. Have we had group meetings most recently? No. not with the
new council because this was a previous council project that they had already vetted out and had been moving forward. So, I just want to make sure that we're clear because yes, it looks like this building has a lot of space, but it really doesn't. Not whenever you have to take and make it a police department.
You all vote and we will do whatever you tell us to do. That is what we are paid to do. We do not get to have an opinion. We do what council votes and asks us to do. We look at the finances to make sure that it's there and then we bring it forward just as it's here. Everything is
open to the public. We get emails constantly saying that we're not being transparent. It is right here in front of you. Right here. And then I just want to make one more comment with with all due respect. We have a back part of the building and so you don't see all the vehicles because we have staff who park
all along the back. >> Okay. But you are, this is the first time I've ever heard that you have gotten an estimate on converting it because I remember looking at your diagram, but I'd still like to look at it and I'd still like to see that. I'd like to see what that show to you. So
when I do the tour, you'll have the estimate for me. Absolutely. Because I really think it's vital that we look at that. >> Yes, ma'am. Absolutely. That's open to any person and >> Well, I've been here how many? >> All you got to do is just just go in and see her. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Okay. And we have had um residents who
have asked us and Rachel and I have sat with them and we've gone over our finances and so just as we have said to everybody else in the past, our door is open. We have to be able to arrange it. But any resident who calls and asks us if we will sit down, Rachel has a spreadsheet prepared and we're ready to
go over our financials and we'll be happy to explain it to them. >> Absolutely. Hey Charlotte, I've never talked to Phil Williams on this building, so I don't know what you just said that I gave you something with all the cost of this building. >> You had brought it up in one of the council meetings.
>> Are you talking the 2018 study of all of Yeah, that >> Yes, ma'am. I don't didn't see anywhere and I'll go back and look at it in that study where it had costs for this building of renovating and hardening and everything that you're saying and therefore they
were recommending not because the decision that was made was to purchase this building for $9.95 another 200,000 for improvements and the police department was going in it. So maybe something and and again this is the
questions that come to me and I have it myself. What happened? what happened that that decision wasn't made and that I cannot find any minutes or anything where that answer is there
that I know that that was um that was during Phil Williams tenure as county ad count hello as town administrator and um I I remember we got
the diagram in our last packet of the diagram of this building and how it was originally going to be set, you know, um the police department was going to set in this. You remember that diagram we got? Yeah. Okay. Um apparently Miss Conley did not see that. Maybe it was
not um available to >> No, it's part of the 2018 whole study that was done. It's in there. It's part of the minutes of the package and that was what was approved. What everybody's question is including myself
what happened after that because the council approved incorporating this as municipal offices including the police department including the utilities director and something happened. So that's all they're asking. What was the event that
happened that that didn't materialize? Because then there was of course the discussion, well let's move the police department into the old town hall and there was a lot of discussion on that. You're actually not on council but you're copied in the minutes of
>> supporting that it stays downtown close to the schools from your prior role. >> I did support that. So, so that's where it's this timeline of how it was approved by council to buy this building, including the police department.
Something happened that three years later we're going down the path to construct. That'd be that's that's a valid question that citizens have that has never been answered. >> I can answer it for you. I can. I think I can. Um, so the building was bought
and and the police department was laid out on the on the inside and then it went uh it was determined and I don't know how but Phil Williams determined that it would cost too much to do that and they could not bring this building
up to the police standards uh the things that you have to do to make it you know accreditation and FDLE will approve and all this kind of stuff. So at that time is when council started to go out and look at other options. Um one of them I'm sure at that time was probably
renovating the old town hall. I don't know exactly where that fell in the in the timeline but that is when town started looking at the the property that Mr. Compton donated to the town was determined that wasn't big enough. I don't need to go through all those
steps. they were in the last packet. But that's I think that's the gap that you're talking about. I'm sorry I can't fill it in any better than that, but I think that's the timeline. Chief, anything to add there? Did I miss something somewhere?
>> I think one of the things that held this up and continued to drag it on was the argument over where it would actually be placed >> and and what they were looking at. Um there was a there was a large debate between the Hillrest location and up
here at Town Hall and that took multiple years for them to determine which one they wanted to go with. That was a huge gap in the time there. Once it was determined that it would go up here because it was more cost-effective to
put it here. We don't have to pay for the paving and the parking and everything else that goes along with putting it on a fresh site. That's why it came up here and that's when it began moving forward again. >> But we've never looked at renovating the
inside of the current building. I mean, interesting to note is right, we hear growth for the future and we just learned from Central Florida Regional Planning that we're currently at 2,419 residents
and by 2050 we're going to be at 2900. So modest growth if you believe those numbers or not. Um I think it was mentioned before it's the greater lake placid that's growing not
the town limits but again I continue as the residents say over and over we haven't looked at other options. This is a lot of money to go into a construction project. And then second, we are now taking money from the utility fund that
hasn't even gone to the utility commission. Oh, I also want to say that the $800,000 grant, it has nothing to do with the numbers up there. It's not a deal breaker if the town don't get the $800,000 from the grant. So, it's not
factored into the to the option that we given tonight. it is to the citizens because it's all their taxpayer money that's been res reserved for other things that we could use it for. Rachel, would you please for the sake of
the public go through the what general fund infrastructure and that these are all different funds and can only be used? So for the the general fund, you can only use that for general services, which is
uh police, which is administration, streets and roads, um code enforcement, but infrastructure, it has to be building. It has to be something that um you just can't walk away with like a truck. Only time they
can do trucks or vehicles is for public safety only. I think we can use infrastructure because it's the infrastructure for storm drains and roads, >> right? Something you can't walk away with, >> right? Sidewalk, storm drain, right?
Your basic infrastructure. You just can't use this infrastructure for the enterprise funds, which is sanitation, water, wastewater, and cemetery. >> Correct. And earlier we talked about the challenges we're going to have with drainage
and the funding that's going to be needed. >> And you can't use it for operating. >> Agreed. >> Okay. >> Okay. Any other comments from the audience? One more. I'll be brief. on. My name is Chad
Heath. I live at 588 Sunset Point Drive and in Lake Placid. Um, I asked last time, I asked again, have we seen a comprehensive examination of the current alternatives to this
building and what they would cost versus what we would do with a new building for Mark? I don't I don't see that information. There's all kinds of vacant buildings in this town. I'd like to see them utilized. It's unproductive to leave them vacant
and they look strong. I haven't gone in there with an engineer to determine if they are, but at least one of them must be. And if we're very concerned about the survivability of the police headquarters in this building, aren't we concerned
about the municipal headquarters as well? Isn't there a great danger that this building will, if it gets struck by a hurricane, will be just as damaged as the police would be? I don't think the police are a target of hurricanes. I don't think the information has been
examined thoroughly. That's all I ask. I'd like to see it put together on a spreadsheet with examples of different properties that are available and let the public decide.
If they decide to go the direction you have, then that's the will of the people. Thank you. All right. Any other comments? All right. All right, we have a motion, a second on ordinance number 2025-818. >> Oh, you're coming up. Okay.
My name is Rosemary Heath. I live at 588 Sunset Point Drive, Lake Placid, Florida. I left my notes at my seat. I'll try to do my best. Okay. One of the reasons you want the new
police station is because of population growth. The population growth of Lake Lake Lake Placid according to the world um US News and World Report is that our town is growing 1.76%
a year. Charlotte, in your um grant, you said something that our growth, our town is 2,400 something people. >> About 2500. Yeah, >> about 2500.
The projected um growth for this year should have been 2,66 people. So, we're less growing than the 1.76. um
what happens to this town if we don't receive the 800,000 and we don't receive the 299,000 for um the FURDEP grant. I used to write grants. I don't see it is my opinion. I
don't see how you're going to get that grant. You can't say it's for paving and it's to get rid of the potholes at the lakefront and not pave at all and get the 299,000.
Uh, it's not going to happen. Um, what else? We don't have money or we don't know what we're doing with the storm water drainage, the road maintenance.
That all affects the safety and quality of life of a res of a residents. Our taxes were just increased and they need to be used wisely. We don't need another 12 to 18% increase
next year. Um, we need to invest our money wisely. We need to protect our town's future. We don't need to jeopardize the money that we have in our infrastructure.
I guess I'm done. And I feel it's very, very poor judgment if you vote to start this police station now and not wait until we have more knowledge of what we have and what we need. Any
other comments? >> All right, bring it back. Pull the council. >> Council member Hayes. >> Yes. >> Council member Warley. >> Yes. >> Council member Charles. >> No. >> No. And also I think that you know
whether the town attorney needs to speak on us using ARPAC funds without it going through RPAC number one and then the one clause that says it's no valid objection has been made to the ordinance. So no
>> ARPAC I don't this doesn't apply. >> Thank you. >> Loop Lupre Loop does not have funds. No, >> no, but the utility, this is taken from the utility fund. >> Read the ordinance talks about lupre,
right? >> Yeah. Go ahead. >> Not that part of the ordinance is found at chapter 135 102.9 which reads advisory and nature. The utility commission shall make
recommendations to both the town council and the utility director. That's all it says. Make recommendations. There is no requirement that every issue be approved by the regional utility.
Your action is lawful. You may proceed. >> Okay. So, Councilwoman Ibrahart, this is saying encumbrance of the Lake Placid Regional Utility Infrastructure. So, it's saying Lake Placid Regional Utilities throughout has not gone to that commission. That's my comments that
I was making. >> I didn't say >> I didn't hear the last part. >> That's my comments I was making. Okay. >> Have you got everybody? >> No, I did not. Hm. >> I did not. >> Okay. Continue.
>> Council member Everheart. >> No. >> Mayor Hullberg. >> Yes. >> All right. Now we go to ordinance 2025-9 on first reading. Budget amendment 2020. head an ordinance of the town of Lake
Placid providing for amendments to the town's budget providing for severance and savings and providing for an effective date. >> Miss Osborne, since you're there, could you just explain it briefly? >> So, every year we kind of if it really
requires that we do a budget amendment that could ding us in an audit and this one is a bit over. So we kind of took the budget and made it to actual including moving the projects out that did not take place this year. So it's pretty much just like a true up to the budget
and a line item adjustment. Thank you. I'm going to go ahead and make make a motion that we approve on first reading ordinance number 2025-9 budget amendment 2024-25.
And I don't think we read the ordinance into the record, so I will do that. Um, ordinance number 2025-9, an ordinance of the town Lake Placid providing for amendments to the town's budget, providing line item adjustments
to reflect actual expenses and revenue, and to remove budget projects that rolled over into the 2025-2026 fiscal year and providing for an effective date. >> Second. >> Okay, we got a motion, a second. Any
further comment from the podium? >> Yeah, I have a lot of questions, but I didn't get a chance to sit with Rachel and maybe go over them. So, I'm going to go over some highlight questions I think are important and then before second reading, if you'll allow me to sit down just to kind of go over some of the
other questions that I have. Um, is this second reading? This is second. >> This is first reading. >> Yeah. >> Yeah, this is first reading. Sorry, wrong page. >> Um, and Eva, just quickly to you. Was this First off, I'm glad to see this
because last year it was put in the consent agenda, which it never should have. It needs to be first and second reading. Was it advertised twice in Was it advertised in the paper? >> It will be advertised for second reading. This is first reading, the introduction. And then on second
reading, which will happen in December, the advertisement has already been scheduled. >> So we probably want to correct that in here because this is basically saying it was >> advertised two separate days in that. So just make sure that we correct
>> on the ordinance. >> Yeah, >> and that's just small thing there because I don't remember it. So you'll see at the bottom of the ordinance, it will tell you the disclosure that's been read on two separate meetings. Read on two separate
meetings. One being tonight, one being on the 8th of December. And then I will drop in the correct dates of the advertisement at the time of second reading. >> So there's is there two advertisement or just be the one because of the timing? >> We I mean it can be one, it can be two.
We try to do two consecutive weeks prior to 10 days minimum before the second reading. Okay. >> So, upon adoption is when the advertisements >> Yeah. I just take a look at that. Um can can I just ask a quick question
before you get started? I I just want to make sure I understand. Um the motion is to take the money that was not spent in the last fiscal year and simply roll it over into this fiscal year so we can then spend it this year. Is that
correct? It really pertains to the expenses because the revenue is what it is. So the expenses was a lot less or overstated than the revenue. So it just chewed it up. >> Okay. Thank you. Sorry. Go ahead. >> No, I think that's a good question
especially if somebody isn't familiar with budgets and forecast. So, we just finished the budget for 2526 and we had first reading, we had second reading, we approved it, and now we're a year later saying, okay, these are where
we came out. These are our actual expenses compared to the budget. And so, legally, we need to have those same readings so that now the amended 2425 budget is our actual spending. And
so it's that's why it's important that during the year that people look at their budgets and they try to bring them in alignment versus overspending. And in in some cases we have both. We have Allen who does a fabulous job as
does administration who's coming in under the budget. We have Harry who's a little over in his budget and we have the police department that's greatly over. So in the end of the day then we have projects that are under
and then you've of course you got your wastewater um and your enterprise funds and that and so that's what this is trying to do is to true it up overall it's an 11 million savings but when you look at the different elements of it
of the 11 million savings looks great right we saved to the budget but included in that savings is 1.6 6 million police department we didn't spend 700,000 pickle ball we didn't spend 761,000 for camp and conference
center 6537 for DP 700 for pipe bursting which I don't understand because I thought that's done and behind us and a million661 for the LPC3 construction
so 11259 on projects that we had anticipated which we didn't so naturally It looks like it's going to be savings to budget. Um and then then you have the different departments
that some are over, some are under. Um and and I think that the police department and Harry need to thank the rest of the people um the other departments because of um in this case
police expenses are 155,000 over the budget. So, it's pretty significant. You know, Harry, you can kind of explain some of Harry's and the cultural and the parks and that. Um,
but I just So, a couple questions, Rachel, I wanted to just for for general understanding. If you go to page and and again, I'll have a lot of questions, so I'll separately sit with you for those unless other people are always interested in
them. But if you go to page 69 of that chart right there, go to the top of that. I'm I'm interested in it comes from the is what is this general administration building rent, sanitation, wastewater, cemetery. It's like where we had anticipated
revenue coming in but nothing came in. >> So remember we talked about the allocation between departments as far as the enterprise can pay into the general fund but not vice versa. But it was one of those thing how we did the split for the enterprise. We didn't need it to do
the transfers. >> Okay. >> So it was it was split up in the expenses. >> It's in the expenses but >> it wouldn't show up here in the revenue, >> right? Because they paid their own expenses. So the revenue only show a
transfer in based on um administrative staff take doing parts of um for other departments like police department or the recreation um code enforcement or business tax. So they
kind of all factor into the other departments but we did not do it that way this year. And then go to page 70 at the bottom. General solid waste residential has a budget of 161,000 but no money came in.
Which line are you looking at? >> Right there. You were there down at Go back up. Right there at the bottom. Right there. 409 343 401. So 106 We budgeted 161,000 revenue to come in for garbage residential, but nothing came
in. >> I think it comes in because we have an line item P&L. >> This isn't the P&L. This is actually >> I check on it to make sure that it didn't get put in with the I don't It should go there because that's where the revenue is coming in.
>> Yeah, I'll get I'll >> Okay, get with me. I mean, I mean, nobody else has any questions. It's just me on go. I mean, I'll look for some more. We can go back and forth if Yeah. I to reiterate,
I always have a trouble even on the monthly statements to find out where a particular department is. And I don't want to pick on the police department, but it's the easy one cuz we all know the $1.6 million cuz you can't tell how they're actually running on their
day-to-day operating budget when the 1.6 is in the total. If I always have to do the mental gymnastics to back it out. If you could somehow break out projects from operating daily
operating in the future. >> Okay. Okay. I think um I think another reason that the police department was so far over budget this this year and it should not be I'm sorry was over budget last year and it should not be this year was
because the um overtime funding for special events was not in the budget last year but it is now in the budget this year. So it should be a more realistic uh picture this year. So actually it was in the budget last year. So, on that note,
>> I don't think it was not um >> on that note, special details was 10,000, >> but it wasn't the amount that >> it came in at $45,000. This year, we're only budgeting 30. So, right out of the shoot, there's going to be some issues there.
>> Yeah, but that's 10 versus 30. It's a $20,000 increase. >> Okay. >> Agreed. But the cost this year, $45,000. He's raising his hand. The discrepancy you're talking about there was disaster pay for hurricanes that was put into
special detail. That's where it was pigeonholed at 17,000. If we subtract that 17,000 from the 45,000, it brings us down under the 30,000 that I budgeted. >> And and then you have um revenue coming
in for special detailing. Is that >> Yes. What is that for? >> That's for the people who pay for the special details that we do. >> And who is >> not all special details have the fees waved by council,
>> right? So who do who pays us? whoever contracts with us. >> Such as well like if you have a birthday party in in the park and you just and you want uh special detail to cover that birthday party, then you will pay that
to the town. You as the organizer of >> as well as churches who want details on Sundays to ensure that their congregations are safe. >> There's um football details on the weekends that the um Highlands Youth League does. they will pay they will
contract with us. Um there's multiple people who contract with us for that. >> So council member Iard to your question and and I share the same and and have asked the same that and and so I separately have done my own spreadsheet
to back out capital expenses because capital expenses are different than operating expenses, right? And we should be and capital expenses unless it's over, you know, but we should be managing that separate as a bucket than
the general operating departmental budgets. And so I actually have that for 5 years of each of the departments to be able to track, you know, of how which departments expenses have been increasing substantially.
And so I know that Charlotte has mentioned, you know, budget accountability is important to her and it's important to me because, you know, last year the county as they got three months before, it was three months before the end of the year, they saw that they were going to overrun the
budget and they cut out travel, they cut out training, they put in some effort so that they just just didn't overrun the budget. So I agree. I and that's what I've asked different times of how we could rearrange
the financial statements even what we see in the packet so that it's easier to interpret and I know that Rachel and Charlotte said they've been working on that. I'm I'm glad to help with that in any way but I think it can display it where it's easier not only for the
departments to track their expenses but then also for council. But we got to take into account that when we doing the budget or we doing the financial statements, we have to be fund accounting. So we got to stay within each fund. So even though you have to operate, you have your capitals, you
have we have a capital for grants. So that's a grant capital just strictly capital, but some of these capital projects is within your operating. So it'll still have to reflect within your fund. >> No. So, I can probably separate line items for me for you, but I can't
separate the capital operating from your regular operating. Okay. >> I'll I'll show you how the spreadsheet that I do if that's helpful in any way, but um for sure. I mean, I I I understand to keep those buckets separately.
>> So, we got a motion and a second. >> Yes, sir. >> All right. Is there any other comments? None. Take the audience. Bring it back. Pull the council. >> Council member Worley. >> Yes. >> Council member Hayes. >> Yes. >> Council member Charles.
>> Yes. >> Council member? >> Yes. >> All right. Do we have any action agenda? >> No. >> Nothing. Okay. All right. We'll go to our attorney. You got anything? >> No, sir. >> Okay. Staff. Not much staff here now.
So, I'll go to our town manager. >> We we are in conversation with the camp and conference center and we believe that there may be additional information just putting it on your radar. If we get it early, we will send it out. However, we've been working with our town
attorney and also with um their attorney and they may be bringing forward an additional request in our December meeting and they will have to turn that around kind of quickly. So, we have asked them to prepare what that will look like. So, there'll be more information to come. Hopefully, by the
end of this week, we will be able to at least get that into your email. That way, you can um have time to be able to look it over and ask us any questions before the next council meeting. So, just an update. Thank you, >> Joy. >> Deborah,
>> happy Thanksgiving everybody. Have a blessed holiday. Yeah. >> Yes. Happy Thanksgiving everyone. And um is are we going to talk about the December 15th meeting at the December
8th meeting? Because I'm concerned about that December 15th meeting. >> Actually, that's a good catch. Thank you. We do probably need to address that now so that Eva can advertise so that the public's aware that we would cancel that second meeting. Yeah, I would I don't know if we need a motion to do that, but I mean there are
a lot of us that have Christmas plans that might preclude us from being able to attend. So to not have a meeting on December 15th and only have one meeting in December, that would be the 8th and then move everything else to January. >> Everybody in agreement?
>> Yeah. I mean, just to clar because I thought earlier there was even something on December 22nd. >> That was a mistake. Oh, that was okay. So, December is only December 8th. Yes, ma'am. >> Sounds good to me. >> Okay. >> And I'm off all next week. I'm only coming in on Wednesday for the Thanksgiving. So, just letting you all
know that I am taking a week off. >> Okay. >> For you. >> Okay. >> Yeah. I have just a few few items. Um, Amazon update. I thought we were going to get some Amazon update because I think there's confusion on their hiring or not hiring or anything like that. Is
there is there they are hiring? My understanding is they have brought staff that wanted to transfer to this area. That's who's currently working there. And I don't know if I I'm looking at Gibby, but he may not know, but they reached out to Jennifer at the chamber and we're scheduling to be able to have interviews there. So, that's
forthcoming. I'll I'll let you know when I know, but they haven't made me aware of anything outside of that. >> Are they open? Is it am I they're think everybody's asking is what is >> I was I was told they're doing like a soft open very soft >> nothing they're not they're not up to
full speed because they don't have staff. >> Okay. Okay. But I I did see movement on the barrels over there today which was encouraging to me. Every time the barrels moved I get excited you know. >> And ribbon cutting in February. I do
know that of ribbon cutting and everything is in February. They're looking at dates. Um, and so I'm waiting to find out when that will be. >> Okay. >> Um, and since our next meeting won't be till December 8th, and Chief, I'm talking that way, but it includes you,
is um, Christmas parade, uh, the parking plan. We had a discussion the year ago and we agreed that we want to not have parking this year on both sides of the road and we kind of gently talked about how are we going to do that? Do we have
any updates so that we could I know a lot of the business owners were not supportive of just no parking all day versus at a certain time because no parking all day is a hindrance to their business. And however, we've done it in the past where kind of those
ropes are up with the no parking after 4:00 or something like like that seems to work. So I just just want to know do we have an update? How are we going to do that? And then we need to I think Charlotte with the you know the new Facebook and the next door
communications that's going on it'd be a good good idea to start communicating out early for those that just want to run up there and put their vehicles all down you know the street and and also um before you even get a breath there chief
but not only the parking but but when they leave you know so okay I would just say about that because it's come up before. Um Phil did Phil was the one that actually closed said no parking
on one side. Um the public's very involved in this. Um of course again a lot not in town but um the public if we're going to bring it up I think it should be an agenda item even >> it was last year we it came up and we
voted on it and we agreed to not have parking on both sides of the road this year. >> Okay. >> Yeah. I was going to say well not last year it was like January February or something. I brought it up and then the chief brought it up after because he said somebody one of his officers almost got
hit when people are leaving and all of that. So I mean we as a council already made that decision. The process is what I'm interested in is is are we good to go so that we can pull the trigger this year and not have the
parking. It was me that got the one side um restricted and he rest he didn't restrict my side and that's I really I'm the one that did it and then um the other police chief tried to do it and he had so much protest he he uh took out
all the signs and let everybody park everywhere. It's just it's just been very contentious. I've always agreed because of the dangers of running out between the cars and people are sitting actually in the parade. So I don't have a problem with I'm just telling you it's a big issue.
Currently, we are going to use the same plan we used last year where there are designated sitting spots for pedestrians and the rest of it is open for parking. >> Say that again. >> We have designated spots that'll be closed. They'll be marked no parking. It
is generally on the north side of the road and along Main Street so that people aren't out into the road. There'll be areas where it's designated no parking and people can bring their chairs in and sit if they like to. The rest of it will be the way it has been for years where they can pull in their
trucks in and sit on their truck beds. >> Um, >> lake as well. >> Yes, inner lake is the one where we have the majority of the problem. Main Street is not much of an issue. We have the median there that people tend to congregate in and sit. So, they're not actually in the roadway. Interlake
becomes an issue because when you park the trucks, people like to sit out from the backs of the vehicles and as they come out from those vehicles, the roadway narrows and narrows and narrows. And when you're trying to get these large 18-wheers through there with large trailers, they have to make these turns.
If people are sitting in the road, the tractor trailers cannot see them. So, it becomes a safety issue. So, we're trying to keep people away from sitting there and push them back up on the curbs. and our officers will be out there doing that this year trying to keep the path safe. >> So, can you clarify? So, you're saying
they still in certain parts of Inner Lake will be able to park their vehicles? >> Yes. >> See, that's not what we agreed because what happens is when the parade's over, people are walking everywhere and those trucks and cars are trying to get out and that becomes a safety hazard. So, I
guess what I recall was we were going to close Interlake after a certain time for parking on the south side of the street also. >> If that is what council wishes, we will go ahead and close the south side as well. But right now, it's just planned
for the north side. There was never a definitive decision made by council or direction for us to move forward on. So, I am doing it the way it was last year. If you would like, we can close it to all parking on Inner Lake at And usually we close it around 4:00 p.m.
>> Yeah. Yeah. that sign is usually late the string going on has a >> sign on it. I mean that's what I recall because of the whole safety issues not just of >> kids running between car you know that like you said it's tight there and then >> and I believe the discussion you were
talking we were talking about pedestrian barricades putting police >> well I know that came up and I was opposed to that because that's expensive it was more or less do what you do on the south side yeah because what I think what you do on the south side's pretty sufficient That's what my recollection was is that
we were going to explore the opportunity for barricades and then we had the conversation that we were unable to afford the barricades. Then we were asked to explore and ask if we could borrow from somewhere and so we looked at all of that but then we also have to keep in mind that we are limited with our police department and so that's the
reason why the chief was trying to just follow suit. >> And so where are we? We are Are we going to Did we ever say that we're going to not allow any parking on Interlake for the parade? Did we say that? >> We did not say that.
>> I believe we did say that, but we can check. >> I think we did. You think we didn't? I'd like to >> I think we did because we talked about closing it all day and then it was like, "Oh, that's not a good idea." And >> this time it's going to be me. I want to prove that. This time it's me prove that.
I want to see the minutes that say that. I don't believe there was ever ever actually a vote put forward on it. It was discussed and multiple things were said, but there was never an actual vote or guidance. >> I mean, we could have had one. I don't
remember it because the controversy. I thought if we'd had a vote, it would have been >> heavily attended. >> So, it would probably have been January or February meeting, right, of last year. >> So, my request is that let's pull that meeting. Let's pull those minutes and
see if the vote was actually taken and if so, what was the result of the vote? >> Then I have um do we have any update on the two foreclosures 213 Gladiola and 421 South Main that I think we approved at the
June meeting? >> You did and that one's on me and I'll bring it forward. We have some issues with amounts due. Again, that's on me and I'll bring it forward. >> Okay. You're going to put it at the next meeting. >> Yes, ma'am. >> Okay. Thank you.
>> Either that or have the lawsuit filed, one of the two. >> I'm just looking for an update. >> That's a fair question and I have to stand tall on that one. And and the other question that's come in um is people appreciate getting all
the updates, but it seems like there's a lot of water main breaks like almost every week or every other week is another area that has a water mane break. Is there something we council need be need to be concerned on? >> I don't think so. But B Warner has left.
So >> yeah, that would have been a question. >> Yeah, that would have been a great question for him earlier. >> Okay. >> Okay. He he will probably say that we have aging infrastructure and in the plan that we all received you will see that in there and so we will continue to see
that until we increase and improve in our infrastructure. >> That's all. >> Okay. Is there anything else to come before council? Everybody have a very happy Thanksgiving, a good safe one, and we'll
see you