--------- Horn. >> Yes, sir. Thank you. >> Yes, ma'am. You You feeling okay? >> Yeah, I sure am. >> I'm glad to hear that. Thank you for the call earlier today. Um >> Uhhuh. No problem. >> For those of you, uh, Commissioner
Tender is obviously on the phone with us today. She's a little under the weather. Um, so she's uh dialing in remotely, if you will. So, um, this is an information meeting only, so no need to to vote or anything, right? This is just a formal
workshop. Okay. Uh, we've got the other four members here, so we're ready to roll. So, yes, sir. Mayor, we'd like to uh welcome Dr. Jessica Graham today. She's going to give us an update on our living shorelines project going on in the city of Linhaven. um she's got an update for the uh wastewater treatment
plant shoreline as well as the Bayou Preserve. Um you'll see some stuff on your screen and you have some information here in front of you. So Dr. Graham, >> welcome Dr. >> Thank you so much for having us. Um appreciate the introduction. So today I'm just going to really talk about our
um two living shoreline projects. But before I do that, I kind of wanted to take a a go a little bit back in time and talk about how we even got here. So, this is a completed restoration project in our bay. It's um outside of
uh river camps that was installed by our friends St. Andrew Baywatch a few years ago. So, this is what we all like to see, a nice fun project, action done, results being seen, but there's a lot that goes into that. And so there's a
lot of steps behind the scenes. And so we can kind of break this timeline or continuum into three main sections of early phase, middle phase, and late. In the early phase, the first thing we do is we talk to people about what are
the issues, what are the needs. Then we get further into those identifying project specifics and then the feasibility assessment. There's a lot of projects that never move past this point because they are just not feasible. What we thought was the issue
was not actually the issue. What we thought the solution was going to be is not going to work. Then we if that works, the feasibility is great. We go into the engineering and design. And there are a lot of different stages to engineering and design as I'm
sure we all know. Then we get into the permitting which is always the fun process. We submit the application. We have a lot of conversations. Sometimes we resubmit the application, but eventually it gets approved hopefully, but most of the time we're waiting on
these permits for a long time, years sometimes. And then eventually we get to construction. And so, as you can see, there's a lot of steps into actually seeing the resultant project. And then what delays these even further
is the funding. So there's always every single step costs money and especially the implementation and that's what we were struggling to get into this area. We were submitting projects for all of the phases together and in the past
sponsors used to give funding for the entire project but because of that timeline and the permitting timeline they stopped funding the entire project at the at one go. So we have to now break things up. But we were still not competitive
against projects that were ready for implementation when we needed design and feasibility. And so that's really what started the scaling up nature-based solution project. This came after Michael where we were trying to get funding in trying to get nature-based
solutions when we saw that wetlands helped mitigate storm impacts more than seaw walls and were a lot cheaper to repair than the seaw wall was. And so trying to understand how we can do more of these projects
quicker and move them along that continuum. So the Nature Conservancy led this effort and they did exactly those first few steps of meeting with people, talking to people, understanding the issues, identifying projects. City of Linhaven was one of those partners that
we've been working with from the beginning. These they've been working through Franklin Gulf and Bay. and I engage in the Bay and Gulf because that's in our in our jurisdiction and we are seeing progress. So we are moving from the blue early phases into
the orange late phases. So over time we are moving along that continuum. There were 72 projects originally identified. We are adding more every day and so we're trying to move them further and get that funding in the door and be more
competitive. And today we're going to be talking about these two. So Linhaven uh wastewater pond, there's the eroding shoreline along there. And then the Linhaven Bay Park and Preserve. If you go out there, you can see there's some shoreline erosion as well that we would
like to address with installation of living shorelines. We are only at that feasibility stage very early. We want to get public feedback. We want to get feedback from y'all to understand how to move forward. And so I'm gonna hand it off to David Bell and Daniel Burr with
Jacob's Engineering. They were under contract by the Nature Conservancy to help with those early stages. >> Thank you, ma'am. >> Good afternoon, gentlemen. Come on up. shall need our IT guy to >> Harold. Technical assist center aisle,
please. >> Did this for me earlier and then he came in and touched it. >> No worries. It's It's called Murphy's law. >> Absolutely. The rule of threes, wrong, wrong, right. >> What can go wrong will go wrong at the worst opportunity. >> Hey, mayor.
>> Yes, ma'am. >> Just FYI, the person at the podium, I can't understand one word they're saying. >> Okay. >> I'm not talking. >> No, no, they're not. They're not
cigarettes. >> Yeah, Harold's Harold's doing an IT assist. Commissioner Tinder. >> Reaching for the hammer, miss. >> Yes, ma'am. It's not you. >> It's It's us. >> Yeah, we just had this working.
Hey Pat, >> how long would it take you to email this to me? >> I don't think the jump drive will work. Jacobs doesn't >> I can I'll email >> actually >> everybody bear with us for just a moment
for technical difficulties please >> your partner comes back with me >> want to grab that You two can always tag team in and out as you need to. >> Um, well, I'll get us started. So, good afternoon. >> You don't mind speaking?
>> Speaking. >> Uh, good afternoon. Good to be with you all. Uh, I'm David Bell with Jacob's Engineering. uh my colleague Daniel Burr. Um and uh yeah, we appreciate the opportunity to speak with you all and
and present on this. We've uh been lucky to to work quite a bit with this Sun's program over the last four years or so, really since its inception to take a lot of these projects going from that original concept design and some of them where there where there we do see the
opportunity to move them into further early stages of engineering um and getting some early preliminary cost estimates also um has been something we've been supporting and generating information that can make these projects more competitive for grant funding. So,
that's really been our focus. Um, and these are two that that that we uh developed some of that preliminary engineering information and costing um on uh these two sites were were brought to us by by Jessica and um Dr. Graham
and and and uh her team and uh really looking to address issues with with shoreline erosion. How can uh these living shorelines also produce some other co- benefits like enhancing um natural vegetation communities, oysters
um and and filter the water um improve water quality and such. So um what we're going to show is some of that early engineering design for these two projects um and show a little bit of that cost information. Um really the
idea with these two projects is, you know, nature-based solutions aren't intended to be the all-encompassing, you know, solve all of the potential erosion issues or the the challenges that they have, but they they very much complement
um and can add a um part of sort of a an additional insurance policy, buy more time, if you will, and be very cost-effective um compared to just going in and spending those higher capital dollars for things like a seaw wall. Um, and they have a lot of that community
benefit also um community participation sometimes in the types of materials that are placed um at these projects. And we'll talk about some of the materials that we evaluated um for these where there may be a potential for community members to be involved with the
construction, if you will, um kind of get more hands-on, get their hands dirty with the uh with the work. waiting for that for that to just pop up like >> Okay, >> I was able to hear much better yet.
>> Okay, very good. Thank you. >> You're tap dancing very well. By the way, >> I'm trying here. You know, >> have a joke >> or top hat McCain. You know the old school. >> What do you call a
uh What do you call a deer with no eyes? No idea. >> We call a deer with no eyes and no legs. Still no idea. out of
>> little of that naturalist humor, huh? >> Just a little bit. >> All right. Um, well, I'm looking at this figure here on the handout. It's got the two images. Um, page two. Thank you, Dr. Graham. Um, Lyn
Haven Bayou Park and Preserve. We enjoyed our time out there, um, today. Um, beautiful out there. It's amazing. Um the drone photo photograph was taken by u Mr. Daryl Budro um uh I think it
was in the last couple years but there's been even more erosion um since you know uh Dr. Graham and her team has done some some really good work um doing some analysis on the rate of erosion that is happening at that site and I mean couple feet per year is I think what you all
were estimating um with those rates of erosion change. So, uh, one of the, um, elements that we're looking at to slow down that erosion and and really, um, uh, reduce the the rate that that's occurring, um, is putting in these, um,
living shoreline breakwater structures, uh, offshore from about a,500 foot reach of shoreline um, extending from that McKitten's bayou um, down a little bit past the uh, uh, that that large dock with the two boat
boat boat slips. Um we looked at a few different materials um uh we looked at a few different materials um that could potentially be used to construct um these individual reef segments um traditional core stone
limestone. Uh we also l looked at a product um that are sort of these interlocking interlocking um concrete castles if you will or blocks. They call them oyster or um reef castles and then something called um
like generically it's a modular reef sphere or oyster balls. Uh there it's a pre-cast um product. They all have different um unit prices and different ranges of cost and different complexities related to how
you would get them installed. The um uh different types of vessels that might be required to bring in that material and place it. Um but we believe that uh this sort of alignment or geometry configuration of these reefs would
provide a substantial amount of benefit um in reducing wave the energy of waves um reaching the shoreline and and cause which is causing that erosion. Um so we're looking at at reef structures that are about 50 ft offshore. Um they would
be up out of the water about a foot above that mean high tide. So you would see them most most of the year and they're they're intended to um break waves, you know, at that mean high high tide, but also at storm events where
waves may be breaking a little bit above a mean high tide. So, they're not going to solve for like, you know, that big one in 25 year storm um or that one in a 100year once in our generation type storm, but they're really meant to complement and support potentially o
other measures um uh that you might take on that shoreline um and be sort of that additional layer of insurance, but they're not going to uh reduce all erosion there. So the the price range for those
material for the um looking at the different um materials I know we were looking at um the limestone rubble and there's ranges for for each of those three materials kind of baked into that 150 to 1.1 that is a huge range. I
realize that um so that uh limestone rip wrap we we cost that and have additional details in the presentation. There it is, Daniel. Um, and also additional details in a much more um, uh, expanded design
summary report that we provided to the to the estuary program with a lot more information and breakdown of these costs. Um, but the lime rock option 150 to 600K, the oyster castle blocks 200 to 800K, and the reef balls 300 to 1.1.
This is like a rough order of magnitude. it's like a plus minus 50% plus 100% you know range that we put on that and several contingencies. So like Dr. Graham was saying earlier, very very preliminary. Um, and we uh as the design
would progress and funding was was there to progress the design, those those numbers would tighten up a lot. But this sort of gives you a sense probably it's going to land somewhere. I mean, that's it's a half million
dollar job, something like that. >> Yeah. Um, as you can see in the rendering there also, um, there's some good references of marsh habitat in the vicinity, um, of that. And so we think that you can that there is that
potential for that marsh vegetation to come back also and provide that again another layer of stability, um, to to um, absorb energy from the waves. >> Want to go
Ah okay. So you saw sort of like the um early concept design where we've taken this um design at this point is is we've done a site survey. We've done a little bit of um evaluation of the subsurface conditions
to understand how much settling there might be. do we need to add additional materials underneath to um make sure that these things are supported? Um we don't get, you know, slumping and sloughing. Um so
what we've done is, you know, it's it's to the point where it's an early schematic design and we we're able to do takeoffs and quantities and get a better price for it. Um but still pretty early in the design phase. Um, so that's that's really about where
we've taken this project and that and that does support a lot the justification in the grant that you have taken it to something that is more design ready and again that helps with that competitive competitiveness in the grant um cycle. There cross-sections um with these also that are included in in
the design summary report that can that I assume can be provided. Oh, and here's sort of just a um more of a cartoon representation of of what that cross-section looks like. Um
and you can see it's meant to break break some of the waves um you know that are that are right at that mean high water. We think that that would be um you know balancing cost and performance is really what this is all about. You can certainly make them bigger, more
rock, higher level of protection, higher level of of that insurance policy that you want, but added cost. So, it's really about kind of finding that balance. Okay. And these are examples and some
images of the different u material types that we that I was trying to describe. um the lime rock or stone interlocking um blocks and the um modular reef spheres or oyster balls which is a
product if you'll go back for just a second looking at those individual spheres. I've never seen those before. Is that a kind of a new erosion control thing? >> Um great question. um newish in that I mean
I don't know this this is a particular this is a product called a reef ball um I forget where they are out of I think they're in the state of Florida um maybe in the last 20 years this kind of technology if you will has been has been
coming on and there they're many different products and vendors um they have different shapes um they come in different sizes you know the the arrangement of the the holes is is, you know, thought through in in how it
performs in attracting different organisms and critters to latch on to it. Some of this concrete material, you know, they've got like their proprietary mixture that, you know, only certain critters will come to it and it uh repels other ones. You know, you don't
want the predators coming and eating the oysters. Some of them like absorb um carbon and are like great for greenhouse gases and that kind of thing. Who knows? That's their proprietary um product that they're they're trying to sell. But there's a wide range of of
these products and they're um they're nice because they're pre-cast. You just sort of put them on a barge and and lift them up and and it's just their weight holding them down. They are expensive though compared to just Corey stone. But there is that added cost of trucking
that material, finding a local source um that is suitable and um costefficient which minds are changing sometimes in that the availability of certain kinds of material. >> Commission, any other questions thus
far? >> No. >> Thank you for that. >> Okay. Um we'll briefly go through I think the other the other um site. Thank you all for bearing with us. Jumping around a little bit.
>> Oh, I think we're to the be beginning of the PDF, please. Okay. Uh, next slide. And go ahead. Hey, Living Shorelines. All right. Go ahead.
Um, so, uh, two of the projects, um, I spent a good minute just talking about the Bayou Park and Park and Preserve, but, um, now we're going to be talking about the, um, the other project at the, um, the wastewater facility and, and looking at the refuge pond, the the
treatment lagoon. And again, like I mentioned, the the intent here is to um reduce some of that energy from um some of these waves really generated during those orientation of these in in the bay. They're really getting catching those
those winds coming from the northeast. um uh during the winter is when you know when we're really seeing um the u the annual um erosion occurring. Um it's not
these are not meant or designed to deal with like another hurricane Michael type situation. So next slide. Uh we visited this site um stopped by this site today also. Where's Mr.
Sure. Thank you um for your time. Um and so you know it's incredible to see how much loss of bank of that embankment um there has been in just a few years. Um I know that the the crew out there has
done several repairs. There's a um a chainlink fence that is falling in. You can see the um concrete peers that are exposed. um it's still actively eroding even with the uh the ongoing maintenance and and upkeep that they're doing. Um so
it's about a 300 linear foot um reach extent of shoreline. Um sort of off the picture you can see from the top left is the direction that the that the waves are coming. That's that the longest fetch um that there is in the in the bay there.
Um, so again, these these structures, these reef structures, we think are going to help buy valuable time um for that site so it can continue to operate as I as I understand other decisions are being made long term about what to do area.
Next slide, please. Very similar concept. Um, you're going to see, you know, again these sort of um crescentshaped reef structures. That's a very stable um shape. um looking at placing them a bit offshore. Um these
are intended to be a bit bigger than the other ones we just looked at just because of the criticality the the critical nature of that um pond behind it. Um we want to ensure that the structures are able to um manage larger
waves if you will um because that's a very important um asset behind there that we don't want. um we want a higher insurance policy, if you will, um for that asset. Um but again, uh four structures, four reef structures. Um
there's some good reference marsh, um behind um in the in the bayou behind it. So we think that there's an opportunity to get um some marsh habitat to to generate also behind those structures. You can notice the dark areas is the seaggrass.
And I think the opportunity for more seaggrass to come in and and fill in around the the reefs is is also a high likelihood. I understand there's really good fishing back there and Danny is not going to tell you exactly where his fishing hole is, but
uh couple of the s we really only looked at two materials at this site. I think given the that we wanted to go a little bit higher and given the energy um at the site the the sort of interlocking castles didn't make as much sense but so looking and considering the um quarry
stone and then the um the reef ball as uh as options. Next slide. Uh kind of that same schematic. You can see it's a little bit washed out there, but um the the arrow on your right, my
left, well, I guess it' be your left. Um it um is the top of the that embankment. And so the these will be up out of the water. Um but again it's that that sort of that higher insurance policy if you will to help um deal with waves that
that we did some preliminary modeling on to to understand what height what height is the water and how high are the waves that are likely causing that sort of repetitive erosion. So this is sort essentially designed to to that standard
slide. And again, just showing the how the design has advanced. It's it the site has been surveyed. Um there's been information gathered to support permit applications. That's true for the um the other site as well. Um so some of that
can be advanced a little bit um further or or more more quickly um pending funding. Um but again, you can see sort of that preliminary layout that's that's proposed. Um I think just one more slide looking
at cost. So again um bigger reefs they're higher but they're fewer of them. So it's overall less material. Um the rock somewhere between 150 and 550. The reef balls between 200 and 800. You know I'd put this one
right, you know, average right in the middle 300 350 something like that. But that would be further refined through through the typical design process to narrow up that. Um
I think that may be it. We're happy to take um questions. I know we went completely out of order, but thank you for bearing with us. Happy to take any questions. >> So has has there been any funding opportunities for the resilience Florida
uh money that's out there? Do you think this is a viable candidate for that? especially the wastewater treatment plant. Uh maybe not so much the Bayou Preserve >> possibly. So there's different buckets for Resilient Florida and because you need final design and permitting, you're
not at the implementation stage yet. They do allow the preconstruction, but the match is higher and you guys do not qualify for match waiverss. So it may not be the best pot to go after for the preconstruction, but
definitely construction. >> Do you have any recommendations on the most viable pot we have? >> So we did put these two projects in for NIW's National Coastal Resiliency Fund that was due last month as a letter of
intent. We'll hear back in May if we get invited for a full proposal. If that's the case, then we'll work towards the letters of support and really working it up more and then we'll be able to submit those. I think they're due in June, mid June, hopefully. Um, I think these are
right up their alley, but we did put these in previously and did not get asked for a full proposal. So, you just never know. >> And not to put them on the spot, but would it help if the commission provides a letter of support to submit in addition to? >> Absolutely. And that would be a request
if we're asked for a full proposal for sure. >> Any question, commissioners? >> So, let's say there's a possibility that we go and move our wastewater treatment plant at some point, right? >> Would this still be an area that you'd
want to add? >> Yes. I think your risk tolerance would go down. So, no longer having that asset there, you would be able to maybe have lower reefs because you don't have to break as high of waves in order to protect that asset. But this is an
actively eroding shoreline and whether that is there or not, it will be eroding. So, we did some analysis. It's in your handout on one of the pages that says shoreline erosion post Michael. You're getting a foot of erosion a year for that site alone. So, it is going to
erode whether that asset is there or not. So, I would if you turn that into a recreational asset, you definitely want to protect it. Chris, uh, correct me if I'm wrong, but if we moved the sewage water treatment
operations elsewhere, this would likely, this particular site would likely become a pump station, right? To >> Well, the pump station would be up towards um would be at the gate. So the area where the storm water pond or where the um reject pond is now would likely
become green space and we would turn into you know a park with an amphitheater or something like that. Um so we would still need to protect that shoreline. Um but the pump station would be up closer to uh Missouri. Is that Missouri or Montana the first street there? Lum, if you will uh work with our good
city manager here to draft a uh a letter of support, we can certainly review it. And >> absolutely. >> Dr. Graham, may we also hijack your presentation easels and display them in the lobby for a week or so for those the public that couldn't couldn't make it.
Um that way we can showcase that. >> Absolutely. So on these easels and in your handout, it's just some information. And so ecosystem services, it's beyond the protection of your asset, the nutrient storage, the carbon storage, all of that information comes from research we're doing in this bay.
So it would be happening here if these projects were to be installed. And then the other one just shows examples of materials. So we've worked with the city staff for a while now and some of the impact or some of the feedback they gave us was the limestone or the reef balls.
Just a few, you know, pros and cons on that handout when you're considering how you want to move forward. Cost is one. Adaptability is another. So, reef balls are less adaptable to things like sinkage or uh sea level rise or any sort
of changes. You wouldn't be able to top those off. And so, just things to think about um when you're going through. And we'll be looking to you to tell us what materials you want to do. We won't make that decision. They're your reefs once they get there.
>> Well, thank you for that. Commissioner Tinder, do you have any questions, ma'am? >> No. And just double checking with the rest of the commission. Any other questions? No. Would you Oh, I guess one more. Would you be willing to give a recommendation on what's material at
some point? >> We can. Yeah, absolutely. Okay. Well, we sincerely appreciate you, doctor, for you and your team. Sorry about the Murphy's Law with the IT presentation. You know, that happens. Um, but it is what it is. It was great
info. >> Thank you so much. And I just want to say thank you to the city staff. They are extremely great and have been very responsive to these projects and all of my requests, even when last minute. Thank you so much. >> Thank you, ma'am.
All right. So, that wraps up. So, so we have until 5:30 for our city commission meeting. And uh there are no other uh discussion points with this workshop. We'll ready break. >> Yes, sir. >> All right. Cool. Thanks every Part: 2
I switch seats. much more than that. Good afternoon, good evening everyone. We're going to call this meeting to order. First thing on the agenda tonight is an invocation by the Reverend Julie Thompson of uh First Presbyterian Church
of Linhaven followed by the pledge of allegiance. Good evening, ma'am. Invite you to pray with me. Let us pray. Almighty God, we come before you today with humble hearts as we gather for this city council meeting. We thank you for
the commitment of time and energy that each person here has made to be present here today. We ask for your guidance and wisdom for each council member as they make decisions that impact our community. Give them clear thinking, compassion for their constituents, and
the courage to act justly. Help them to make decisions that show a commitment to the common good. and surround us all with your peace as we do what we can to uplift and empower our fellow citizens and create a brighter
future for all. We ask for your blessing on this meeting that it may be productive and guided by your grace. In your holy name we pray. Amen. >> Amen. >> To the flag of the United States of
America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Thank you, Reverend Thompson. Appreciate you tonight.
All right. Uh, next up on the agenda, additions, deletions, and modifications. So, I think this would be the best place for us to go ahead and approve uh Commissioner Tinder dialing in by phone and participating tonight. She's under the weather, so she's dialed in with us
tonight versus in person. Um, any issues or concerns with that? >> Okay, good deal. Well, if that's the case, can I get a motion? >> Motion to approve. Second. >> Thank you, gentlemen. I have a motion and a second. Is there any public
commentary regarding us uh allowing Commissioner Tinder to participate via phone tonight? Hearing none. City our city manager, can you call the role? >> Commissioner Wart, >> yes. Yes. Commissioner Pero. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Peebles. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Tinder. >> Yes.
>> Mayor Lowry. >> Yes. The eyes have it. Thank you for that. All right. Next, we have a couple of proclamations up. Uh first, Child Abuse Prevention Month. Proclamation. Whereas Florida is committed to
protecting its most vulnerable and empowering our children to reach their full potential and lead healthy lives. And whereas each of Linhaven's children deserves a safe, healthy, and happy home where they are developmentally and educationally on a path for success. And
whereas child abuse, neglect, and other adverse childhood experiences can severely impact a child's lifelong health and well-being. Whereas children who are abused and neglected may suffer physical injuries, emotional and psychological difficulties and long effects of trauma. And research shows
that parents and caregivers who have support systems and seek help in times of troubles are more resilient and better able to provide safe environments and nurturing experiences for their children. And whereas every person should make children a top priority and
take meaningful action to support children and families in their communities. And whereas during the month of April, prevent child abuse Florida in collaboration with the governor's office of adoption and child protection, the child or excuse me, the Florida Department of Child and Families
and the ounce of prevention fund of Florida implement pinw wheels for prevention where pinwheels for prevention is a statewide coordinated campaign aimed to increase awareness of child abuse prevention efforts by encouraging healthy child development, positive parenting practices, and
community support. And the blue and silver pinw wheelel displays in this campaign are used to symbolize the health and wellness all children deserve. Whereas child abuse prevention month is an opportunity to encourage all Linhaven citizens and residents to put
children first and engage in activities that strengthen families and communities. Therefore, the city of Linhaven and residents of the city of Linhaven do hereby extend our support to protect our children and observe April 2026 as child abuse prevention month.
So that is our first. Our second one, we have a fire chief Johnson and some of his uh valiant men and women here to pres to receive this proclamation for international firefighters day. It's observed on May 4th to honor firefighters for their service
internationally, remember firefighters who lost their lives during service, and to commemorate firefighters killed in September 11th attacks. Whereas it was originally established after a proposal by female Australian firefighter JJ Edmonson was made on January 4th, 1999
following the deaths of five fire five firefighters fighting a brush fire in Australia on December 2nd, 1998. And whereas a soundoff occurs at noon local time on the first Sunday of May as
part of an International Firefighters Day. It involves turning on the sirens for 30 seconds and a subsequent moment of silence of one minute to commemorate all firefighters who were killed in the line of duty. The sound off began in 2002 and has continued annually ever
since. Fire prevention and the need for more intensive and thorough training is promoted through international firefighters day and a day is seen as an important opportunity to raise both skills and awareness. and the red and white ribbon or excuse me red and blue ribbon is a symbol used for
international firefighters day representing the elements firefighters work with the red and the ribbon represents fire while the blue represents water and whereas St. Floren regarded in the Catholic Church as the patron saint of firefighters is another
symbol of international firefighters day the saint's day as observed in the Catholic church of St. Floren is May 4th. Hence, International Firefighters Day is also absor observed as May 4th. Now, therefore, uh we the mayor of the
city of Linhaven and the city commission and residents of Linhaven do hereby honor all firefighters and commit to observe May 4th, 2026 as International Firefighters Day. So with that, I'm going to sign this proclamation
and we have a presentation to give. >> Sorry. Now, we also have a longevity award for Battalion Chief Joe Baba. Joe started as a certified firefighter with the city over 25 years ago on March 18th, 2001.
Prior to his start with the city, he worked as a cook, kitchen manager, deck hand, and assistant harbor master. He quickly impressed his leadership, working hard to complete his EMT training and certification and his AA degree. He later earned his BS degree.
In 2004, he was named firefighter of the year by the Lions Club and American Legion. Throughout his career, he has received glowing evaluations, each one recognizing his hard work, consistency, and leadership. His hard work paid off with promotions to firefighter, EMT,
senior firefighter, lieutenant, captain, and battalion chief. And he even filled in as our interim chief from May of 2024 to September 2024. To honor his exe exemplary work for our city, I'm proud to present our longevity
award to Battalion Chief Joe Baba. Um, if we want to go ahead and do moment of silence and then we will do the official sound off. everybody please. >> No, no worries. Thank y'all. Will To our brave men and women in the
firefighting uniform, thank you for what you do. It takes a uh special kind of person as everyone's running away from the fires to run into the fire. Thank you for what you do. All right. >> What's that?
>> All right. Next, we're on to the consent agenda. And we have 1 2 3 4 5 6 seven items on the consent agenda tonight. Uh the approval of minutes for April 14th, 2026. The approval of a 911 plot residential
incentive programs 2 on Louisiana Avenue. Uh appointment and then approval for three surplus items to be auctioned off on govdale.com. So um any discussion amongst the
commission on any of these items? If not um for the consent agenda, can I get a motion to approve? >> Motion to approve. >> Second. >> All right. Thank you for that. I have a motion and a second. Are there any general commentary uh remarks regarding
these six items? I love it when we've got just even kill. It's like buler. Buer, you may be on a roll again tonight, y'all. That would be an awesome thing. All right, hearing none from the the public. City manager, will you call the role? >> Commissioner Warick,
>> yes. >> Commissioner Peeles, >> yes. >> Commissioner Pero, >> yes. >> Commissioner Tinder, >> yes. >> Mayor Lowry, >> yes. The eyes have it. Mayor, with that I would like to welcome Miss Grand Prix as our new planning director.
>> Welcome El and congratulations. Very much looking forward to working with you >> and welcome to Florida by the way. Um, all right. So, we're on now to old business. We have a final reading number
14. Final reading of ordinance 1186 amending S.50.81 81 Linhaven Police Department ad hoc supplemental benefit and uh turning this over to you Mr. Jackson. Uh yes sir. This is ordinance number
1186, an ordinance of the city of Linhaven, amending charter uh chapter 50, personnel article 3, police officers retirement system of the code ordinances of the city of Linhaven amending section 50-81 benefit amounts and eligibility to
provide for an ad hoc supplement benefit providing for inclusion in the code providing for severability of provisions repealing all ordinances in conflict here with and providing for an effective date. Thank you for that. Any discussion among
the uh commission before we uh vote to approve? >> No changes since the first reading. >> Right. >> Correct. No changes. >> A motion to approve. >> Thank you. Got a motion. >> Second.
>> Got a motion and a second. Thank you, gentlemen. Um any comments from the the public tonight on item number 14? I love it when y'all just look up and you're good to go. That's amazing. Um, all right. Well, city manager, would you
call the role? >> Commissioner Peebles? >> Yes. >> Commissioner Pero? >> Yes. >> Commissioner War? >> Yes. >> Commissioner Tinder? >> Yes. >> Mayor Lowry? >> Yes. Thank you'all for that. Now, I realize there will be worthy discussions and questions and things like that on
some items, but uh my goal and the goal of the commission is to make these meetings as seamless and professional as possible. If we don't have to stay here for three or four hours, why should we, right? If we can get out and still have some daylight to go home and hug our families and throw balls with our kids
or grandkids or walk our dogs, I want us to be able to do that. So, all right. Moving on to item number 15. Discussion and possible approval first reading of draft ordinance establishing the office of the city clerk and the city charter. City attorney. Yes, sir.
And mayor, just as a aside for items number 15, 16, and 17. These are all proposed uh ordinances implementing potential uh changes in the charter that were u sent to the commission from the charter review committee. uh they are um
mostly on the agenda for a timing issue because we have to have this on if we're going to have the August election then it must be to the supervisor election by June 1st and so if we're going to implement the ordinance of the four then uh we need to get it we have one meeting to kind of skip if we need to we make
changes but these are all for discussion uh of the commission and uh basically it's time to put pen on paper for these charter proposals >> sir all right so discussion amongst the commission Oh, 50. >> I need to read it, sir. I'm sorry.
>> This is item number 15, ordinance numbered undetermined so far. An ordinance of the city of Linhaven, Florida, proposing amendments to article three of the city's charter, establishing the office of city clerk, and making uh conforming changes throughout article 3 and article 4
related to the duties of the city clerk. clarifying the procedure for appointment of department heads designated um all charter positions as whistleblower complaint recipients provided that the proposed amendment should be effective only upon approval of referendum as specified in the ordinance.
>> All right, thank you for that. Um I do not see uh there he is. We do have the uh charter review committee chairman Corey Langford and vice chairman Ryan Scra here that can discuss further as well if there are any questions among the uh the public. But all three of
these items have been discussed um significantly among the commission and the charter review committee. Uh we had a joint workshop a couple of weeks ago where we talked through and worked through these. Um and the credit for this really goes to Commissioner Jamie
Warick. He's been a proponent of a city clerk for a long time. Um, this makes a lot of organizational sense. Uh, instead of having a single point or focal point for goodness and failure both, you have a trust but verify and you have a dual
accountability now establishing a city clerk working handinand with a city manager. City manager handles most of the people in operations while the city clerk would handle the resources and administrative policy largely for big ticket dollar items. Both signatures
would be required, right? Um it's a trust but verify much like two nuclear officers in a missile silo. You can't turn two keys 40t apart from each other in complete sequence, right? Um, this would help streamline organizational
operations and give another peer direct report to the city commission. So, in order to approve this, because we're amending the city charter, it actually has to go by referendum before Linhaven voters, which we are looking to do on August 18th. Um, so that is the
discussion item up currently. Commissioner Ward. >> Um, Harold, would you mind uh sharing the PowerPoint slide? Um, I know at the uh town hall we had it was brought up that it would be nice to have a visual of of what it would look like before and
after. So I got three slides here and um this is what it currently looks like. So this would be before the move and um this is where the city manager is the city clerk and you also have assistant city manager which would be the
assistant city clerk and I uh put um on there um who they oversee on this organizational chart. Um the key distinction I'd like you um to kind of focus on is under the finance director um utility building director and
executive admin coordinator. That'll become more important on the uh the later slides. Go to the next slide please. So these are the ones I just talked about. Uh these are the positions that would move under over under the city clerk with one exception which I'll talk
a little bit more is the procurement manager. Uh go to the next slide please. And so this is what it would look like after the city clerk uh moved under the commission. Um you'd have a city clerk treasurer, you'd have a deputy
treasurer, and you'd have a deputy clerk along with the utility utility building uh director. Uh the procurement manager um I dec I I and as I'm saying this, this is just one commissioner how I envision this to look. I don't know how
the other commissioners feel about this. We can disc talk about that. But the procurement manager will still be under the city manager um operationally. However, um what they do that process will still go
through the city clerk/treasur city clerk for financial compliance and contract certification in order to keep those checks and balances. So, I just thought I wanted to put a good visual out there so that everyone kind of understood what that mood looked like
and hopefully that depicts that. Yeah, the procurement manager thing makes sense to me. You're kind of having the even though the city manager is over the procurement manager in terms of end of year reviews
and being their boss and everything, you kind of use this really the treasurer to validate that the work is good because they're kind of the expert if you will. So that makes sense to me. >> And it would be too hot to me it would be too difficult for the city manager to task the the procurement manager to do
what they did if they fell under the city clerk. >> Right. Yeah. >> Yeah. To me, it would slow the process down too much, but the the checks and balances is still there. >> Yeah. >> This allows you to essentially have the city manager focusing on operations
>> and the city clerk/treasurer focusing on resources, >> right? >> Together, they work on behalf of the city commission and support of the city. So to me the whole idea is by having the city clerk um under the commission with
treasurer duties um any revenue or expenses that are done would have to go through them which would be a separate entity you know um to me by having the city manager as a city clerk it's just too much authority for one person to have and there's just uh too many it's a
single breaking point and that's not what we want. We need the checks and balances in place. But I do have a question for the city attorney. Um, I know with the charter they define the duties of a city clerk and then in there they put language with additional duties
uh that could be assigned by the commission. Could we do this with it worded that way or do we need to put in specific language that they're the city clerk treasurer or can they be the city clerk doing the treasurer duties by us giving those
additional duties? >> So, so the way the charter uh ordinance proposed charter ordinance is drafted is to provide maximum flexibility for the position. It basically creates the position and defines the core functions as record custodian and the financial um
elections, the certification of elections. Other duties are assigned by the commission. You can do that by resolution. >> Okay? >> And so this entire structure could be set up by resolution it provided it passes and then if there's some changes in the future, you could make changes.
So it wouldn't be u this wouldn't be in the charter itself. >> Okay. And and I like that because originally I thought, okay, let's put it all on the the referendum, but I'd like to have the flexibility in case we need to regroup or something's not h not
happening correctly that we can uh make changes and have that flexibility. And once we get this established the way that we want, then maybe later down the line it could be another referendum question to establish that. That's the way I look at it. But
see what you guys think. Gentlemen, >> yeah, I agree with what you're saying because it's going to take some massaging over time to get right. I mean, if you put everything in the charter, then it makes to where it might have to go before the public to vote
again and you'll have to go through the whole process of educating those that don't know what the clerk does and that kind of thing. So, yeah, makes sense. >> Commissioner Pero, any thoughts, sir? All right. Commissioner Tinder, do you
have any thoughts you want to interject here? Ma'am, >> I don't know that I want to interject right now. >> Okay. >> I feel like putting finance together
with the court position. We're kind of doubling up, but u No, I'd like to give some more thoughts. >> Yes, ma'am. >> Oh, I'm sorry. Go ahead. And the only other thing I wanted to provide input on
was the um changing the confirmation for the department heads. Um I wanted to get your guys' thoughts on I know it says all department heads, but what are you guys' thoughts on where it's just the police chief and the fire chief? And the reason I say that is the
police chief and the fire chief are key are unique key leadership positions in the city that has a lot of public visibility of what they do. And it's really important to make sure we have the right people in those positions. And uh typically in other cities you
typically see the police chief having to come through the commission or council somehow. Fire chief I've seen some cities do it, some don't. Um, but department heads, I don't typically see that where it comes to the commission. So, I'm kind of a proponent of that. I'm
just kind of want to get your guys' thoughts on that. >> Go ahead. >> Can you I guess get a little Are you talking about with the whistleblower policy? >> No, no, no, no. Whistleblower. >> Okay. Um just you know like >> confirmation
>> just when we when the city manager hires the department heads how we did the confirmation with like when we hired >> that's what we did on the consent agenda with the planning director. >> Right. Correct. >> Well I can tell you as a guy with 20
plus years of HR experience um I think for any key senior leader position I think it's important for the commission to have that at the department head level. In fact, before I swore in as mayor, I actually spoke last December and I recommended to y'all that you confirm both the department heads and
the deputy department heads because the deputy department heads are literally one heartbeat or one lightning strike or getting run over by a school bus away from being the leader of that department. Uh, and you shouldn't have anybody at that level performing if they're not a bright and shiny,
well-trained, high performing individual. Right. We have a lot of great department heads and deputy department heads. >> That's my thought. >> Yes, ma'am. I I 100% agree with you
100%. I think u those people are only a heartbeat away and uh I think rather than giving all that decision making to city manager um I would think he
would want our support on the back of that. >> Absolutely. >> Thank you. Commissioner Pero, Commissioner Peebles, any thoughts? >> I don't know. This is what worries me is when it comes to us, it politicizes the
position. And so, I kind of understand that with the police chief and the fire chief because it is a high public visibility position. The other ones, I see that more as operations um because that's what we hired the city manager to do is run the operations.
So that's kind of where I'm at with it. >> Based on your lived experiences over the last several years, I completely hear where you're coming from. Ideally, and as we move forward, that should no longer be the issue. If we're doing our jobs right in an apolitical,
professional manner, and we're not doing grudge fests and having to deal with dumpster fires, politically speaking, this should be a lot smoother. And that's the intent. That's >> mayor. >> Yes, ma'am. >> Mayor. >> Yes, ma'am.
>> I also again again I have to agree with you because I don't I want to be transparent for the residents to know that we're not just hiring somebody's friend, >> right? You know, I mean, I think they
need to have the background and be able to back up what they say they can do >> rather than just putting it all in the city manager name. >> Yes, ma'am. So, this is not a we don't trust you, Chris. We hired you. Um, this
is a trust but verify and actually more bless. Trust and bless. And uh when you have the right guy or gal, it should be immediately obvious with the credentials. It's an addition. I don't see it as any kind of slam on you personally or
organizationally. >> It allows us to have input and a vote of confidence basically. >> So any other discussion on the city clerk treasurer? The only question I have is how much Commissioner Warick and rest of the commission do y'all see? I
kind of hear what you're saying and sounds like you're proposing leaving the treasurer title specifically off and just making it the city clerk to give yourself the flexibility. So down the road, the first one may be a triedand- trueue finance bean counter. The next one uh the next city clerk you may have
may be a 100% administrative person. As long as you have that rock solid deputy treasurer, um there should be some level of competency with treasurer certifications and things like that to do the city treasurer duties
unison with the deputy. But what you're saying is it gives you the flexibility without tying your hands to being able to hire nothing but a being counter for that job. Right. >> Yeah. So what I foresee is they would have the city clerk title but not the treasurer title but they would have
treasurer duties and then once we if we establish that and we think that's is working well and that's how we want to permanently establish that then we could make that a city clerk treasurer position. >> That makes sense. So and I I'm
>> that's just my thoughts. I mean I don't know how the rest of you feel but >> that makes sense. I'll throw out one real life example. So, if you look right down the street here at Tindle Air Force Base, you have a wing commander who is a fighter pilot. He or she is not a controller. They have a controller. They
have a finance person that does that, but ultimately the wing commander or the clerk in this case would be the final certifier and would still be involved with all the resource decisions and things even if they're not a CPA themselves. Right?
So, but organizationally, operationally, this divides, it allows the city manager to take care of people and operations, and it allows the city clerk to handle resources and administration. May >> mayor, if I can clarify. >> Yes. >> So, it sounds like the clerk language is
fine on the department head approval. Is there consensus of the commission to add the assistant department heads also or just leave it as drafted? It's up to y'all. I would actually like to add deputy department heads just because for continuity of operations,
you're number one and two leaders in each department. We need to know who they are and we need to know their qualifications. >> I don't want to micromanage, but >> I that's what I think it does. I think it micromanages it. And I think we're getting too much in the weeds by going do that. At what point do you allow the
city manager to do the job that they're they've been hired to do? you know, and I and I and that opinion may differ between all of us, but I just think that's getting too much into it to it. >> Yeah. And if let's say, God forbid, one
of the department heads leaves or, you know, dies or whatever, the deputy would only be acting anyways. So, if they were to be hired as the full-time, we'd still have to give our blessing. >> That's a fair point.
So, I'm kind of a proponent of if you don't trust the city manager to do that, then why do you have them as the city manager? Kind of. It's kind of how I feel. >> To clarify, there's no trust issue with our current city man.
>> Yeah. I'm sorry, I should have been more specific. I'm talking about not just now. I'm talking about like for the future because we're making a charter call here. >> Yeah. Commissioner Pero, any thoughts? >> All right. So, we'll leave it with just department head drafted,
>> right? >> Mr. Jackson, do we need to read that ordinance tonight or should we just leave it as draft and do the first reading next meeting? >> We we read it already and and um I will assign based on the commission's input, we can assign an ordinance number and uh and that'll be
the first reading of the ordinance for public notice. So, there's no formal vote on this tonight, but I'd still like to open up general comment on this particular item for the public if anyone has any concerns or thoughts other than Mr.
Scay, who I know is going to come on up. Uh, and Chairman Langford, you as well, sir. If if you two want to speak to this to the public, please do. Uh, we built or you guys built this and sent it to us. We very much appreciate your hard work with this and love to hear from you
if you want to speak. >> Um, I'm not speaking as a committee member, just as a procurement professional of 16 years. While I was back there, I wasn't sure you were going to allow public commentary giving us a first reading. So, I sent an email just to make sure the information got out there. But the chart as proposed, I'm
neither here nor there on that. You guys can decide that how that looks. But if you do go with what Commissioner War's proposing, um, you left about two people that do procurement and purchasing functions on the wrong side of that line. There's a purchasing clerk and a
and a purchasing specialist. Purchasing fun functions and procurement functions are largely the same. You're uh, executing dollars and contracts and purchases, POS, all kinds of terminology that'll bore you to death. Um, but you're doing effectively the same thing.
you're buying something or services for the city. Um, so what I would recommend is if you do want to go that path, move those other two positions that are at the bottom of that line over underneath your procurement manager. Uh, that way you have your entire contracting shop,
per se, under one line and that line is all going up to the city manager. Um, operationally speaking, it makes sense for the city manager to be their direct report. That way you don't have other department heads trying to say, "Hey,
circumvent your process and I'll approve it." None of that. Um I don't know how many procurements the city manager um requests at their level. I would imagine that it's not a lot. Kind of like your example, it's usually done at lower
levels. Um so it makes sense there. But yeah, just make sure you're not splitting up those procurement duties into two different sides of the uh the aisle, so to speak. Just kind of leave all three positions where they're at now and move all the other financial over.
So, thank you. >> Thank you. >> Well, the good thing is we got a while to think about this because it's still got to get voted on in August. So, >> Sure. >> Good evening, Chairman Langford. >> Hey, good evening. Um, yeah, so Mr. Jackson hit the nail on the head. We we did not want to tie your guys' hands as
to how how you all decided to set this construct up. Uh we wanted to provide that maximum flexibility. Um and I think you guys you guys have already hit on it, but we did not include the word treasurer anywhere in there. So, you know, if that's the intent, you know,
that might be something that you guys want to discuss. We simply just establish the position of the city clerk. So, um I know that some of the responsibilities would, you know, align with that treasurer title, but I just think for, you know, legal purposes or
or words matter, right? So, um just kind of keep that in mind. Um as far as the department heads, um we did have the discussion on the committee as to, you know, well, do we want to do we want to have the you know, just the the police department, the fire department, do we want to have, you know, this department head or that department head? And you
know, we talked through this at length and we were like, you know, let's just keep it standardized. You know, why should we prioritize one department head as not necessarily more important or more visible, but every department head is equally as important? Um, if they weren't, then we wouldn't have a
department head. So, Miss Kiki over here is vitally important to the city of Linhaven, right? But Chief Blanchard has more public visibility. So, you know, it's that's kind of the lens at which we looked at that through. Not to prioritize one one over the other, but
really more of a standardized process. So, that's it. >> Thank you for that. >> Any other comments or feedback from the the public? If not, I guess we're good there for tonight for the first reading. City manager, did you have anything you
wanted to add, sir? >> All right. City attorney. Anything more from you? >> No, sir. >> All right. Well, let's move on to number 16 then. Discussion and possible approval. First reading of a draft ordinance amending the city manager residency requirements in the city charter. City attorney. Uh yes, sir.
This is ordinance number two to be determined. An ordinance of the city of Lindhaven, Florida, proposing an amendment to section 24, article 3 of the city's charter regarding residency of the city manager, requiring the city manager to establish permanent residency in Bay County within 12 months of his
appointment, providing that the proposed amendment shall be effective only upon approval of referendum as specified in the ordinance. >> And for those of you, we discussed this at our a little bit. We've discussed this at uh
the joint workshop with the charter review committee. We discussed it at I believe we brought it up at the last town hall and there was a third time we've discussed it in public with citizens at large. Maybe we discussed it
at the last commission meeting. I'm drawing a blank on the third one. Uh but we have discussed this a few times. Um and ultimately we had a lot of discussion with the the charter review committee uh in in proposing this. Well,
how far away should the city manager live in the city limits of Linhaven? Uh and as it stands right now, the city manager actually lives just a little north of here in Southport. He's 8 and a half miles from city hall to his house. I'm 6 and a half miles southeast of here
to my house. We're both within 9 miles of this radius. Um so he's not a city taxpayer per se, but he is definitely a key part of this city in his role. Um one discussion point that well
traditionally the city manager has lived within the city limits of Linhaven. Um but one interesting discussion point with the charter review committee and we have the chairman and the vice chairman here that can add some additional color if needed. Where else do you draw the line? Um we don't require the fire chief
or the police chief or the director of finance to live in the city limits. Um so obviously us commissioners and the mayor have to right to qualify to for these public seats. But among city employees full-time or part-time, should
there be a residency requirement or should they be a straight base county citizen? And what the charter review committee ended up recommending to us was a Bay County citizen from the city hall here. You
basically go chairman Langford, was it 22 or 24 miles from any corner of Bay County from here give or take, right? So you can be anywhere in Bay County to here in 22 24 miles. Now, if it's spring
break or thunderbeat or thunder bike week, uh it might take you two hours to get here, but um mileage wise, you're talking 20 22 miles. So, um that was the discussion at hand. So, any discussions
with this tonight among the commission you'd like to talk about? >> Yes, ma'am. I I just wanted to um let everybody know that since that meeting
uh I've had maybe five there five or six residents come to me and they all all uh wanted to see him live within the city limit and and Chris and I discussed the other day uh wanted to see him within
the city limit because he played a vital assessments, you know, things like that that are >> Sure. >> That's all I just wanted to throw that in. >> Yes, ma'am. >> So, I I actually um as you know, I I
always do research and uh I researched this and the philosophy for a city manager within living within city limits, the history has changed over time, not just for Linhaven, but across the nation. And historically, if they felt that if you're running the city, you should live in it. Uh because
you're, as Commissioner Tinder brought up, you're directly impacted by taxes, services, and infrastructure. So, they feel that they should have uh skin in the game, and it was about accountability and connection. Um and back then, and particularly uh with
smaller cities and local talent pools, the cities often hired local candidates and people already living in nearby. Uh so residency wasn't a bar a barrier. It was it was expected back then. Um and so before modern technology being
physically present mattered more. So for instance let's say before we had these things and and that you know um let's say we got to get a hold of the city manager and someone might have to go to the house you know because they can't get a hold of them. They have to be able to get to them quicker. Well I'm sure um
Mr. Lightfoot would tell you that there's a lot of times he brings his computer home with him, does a lot of work, his work from home. Sometimes he gets phone calls and he can he can take care of those things from home, you know. So you don't have that physical barrier like you used to. And uh so back
then managers were expected to be seen in the community and be easily reachable, but um with technology that we've kind of overcome that barrier. Um and um the the special specialized or
specialty of a city manager has changed over time. Uh cage managers have become more of a professional career field uh requiring degrees and things like that. Um so your best candidates may not live in the city and that kind of opens up
your your pool of candidates. Um, yeah. So, that's kind of I think that was all I had on that. So, it's it's changed over time in my opinion and uh I just don't see an issue with it.
>> Mr. Peeles, >> my thought process on it is really, really simple. It's that we appointed a um committee to look at this. they want to put it in front of us to put on the ballot, let the people that vote decide.
I think it pretty simple to me. Um, other than that, I'll let the I'll let the voting public decide. Commissioner uh Perno says, "Dit." All right. Um, again, this is a first reading, so there's no formal vote
happening tonight, but I want to open up the floor to any general commentary or questions from the public on this proposed item. >> We have one. >> And come on up, Mr. Basher. Or would you rather hear from uh the chairman or the vice chairman? In fact, Johnny, let let
me sit you back down on the bench for just a minute. Chairman Langford, why don't you come on up and articulate just on behalf of the comm the committee what your guys thinking was here. >> Yeah. And and again, I'm not I'm not here to defend what we presented before
you. I I simply want to explain to you all what our discussions were and how we got to where we got to. Um I believe at the time I I don't think that when we discussed this, uh the city manager maybe had just gotten hired. Um but I
think it was Mr. Mr. Debtweiler had had he been hired as the city manager, I think he would have had to move four houses down to be within the city limits of of Linhaven. So that was a that was kind of a thought point, right? So just kind of pin that. Um we discussed um we
discussed, you know, because there were there were some comments that were made, well, you know, if the if the city manager doesn't live within the city, then they're really not going to take ownership and they're not they're not going to, you know, perform the same way as they would. So kind of indicating well that if they don't live in the city
in which they work in then they don't care. Um and I believe it was Mr. Scra actually brought it up during the committee and Miss Jody Moore was at the charter review committee meeting and you know he pointed out well you know Miss Moore doesn't live in the city limits of Linhaven but she's very invested and you
know we're thankful to provide you know for her input and the things that she brings you know to either the charter review committee or the commission meeting. So, you know, just because you don't live inside the city limits of Linhaven doesn't necessarily mean that you don't care because we have people that live outside of the city limits of
Linhaven that actually do care. They they're here and they they provide input. So, again, these are all things that were discussed, right? We we we took in all these different inputs. We sliced and diced and looked at it different ways. Um, but that was kind of the majority of our discussions on on
why we got to where we got to with that. Thank you, sir. All right. Now, Mr. Basher, thank you for uh your patience there and letting him articulate that. >> Sure. First a question. You've got three draft agenda items on this. If it goes
to referendum, do each of those voted on separately to pass or do they all three have to be voted yay to to adjust the charter? >> No, sir. The the ordinances are not actually required for the referendum. The referendum will have a general ballot question about charter changes
and what the the the kind of general outline of those are and and they'll all go as one. >> Okay. So So if if per se I wanted to I was so opposed to one of the items then I would have to vote no and the other
items would be no also. >> Yes. Now the commission could could put those up individually too. So >> that's a clarif I don't know what the plan was for that. I always thought it was the individually. Three different referendum items. Yes. No. >> Yeah. Generally, it's just a charter
change, but but these can be presented individually. >> That that's why I'm asking that question because it is important. >> I would be a proponent to have them separated out >> at at the charter review committee meetings. Um, Miss Myers has separated out and done a ballot language with the 75 words for each each one individually.
>> Okay. I I I want to clear that up first. Um, to me the city manager living in L Haven is not a function of accessibility or how close they are, how long it takes them to get here. It's and I I know Corey talked about that they'll still
like L Haven still do a good job, but I want to know as a citizen that my city manager loves the city and wants to live in the city that he's running or she, whoever it might be. I feel that's important and should stay like that. And like Sam says, we can vote on it and
give it to the people and let them make the decision. And I agree with that to to a degree. But my position is I want to know that the person running the city one is subject to the same things that I'm subject to. That that the city services that I'm being provided, that's
what he's he or she's being provided. That the garbage is the same. Everything is the same. So they you can, you know, skin in the game. And I know things have changed, but personally, I feel like that that's important that that they be in there. Um, it's not a proximity. It's not about accessibility for me. It's
about that overall look that you want in the city. You want somebody that that, you know, loves the city so much. They want that's where they want to live. Um, and that's that's how I feel. Um, and thank you for clarifying the three items, too. Thank you.
>> Point well taken, Mr. Basher. Thank you for that, Mr. Mr. Gray, Miss Hodes, did you raise your hand, ma'am? Okay, you're next. >> Um, since Mr. Langford spoke as our committee, I'll just speak as me as a
resident. Um, I disagree with Mr. Basher. Anyone who knows anybody in Callaway that pays attention to what's going on in Callaway, ask them if they think Eddie Cook loves Callaway. Eddie Cook doesn't live in Callaway. Eddie Cook lives in Panama City Beach, but he
is the city manager of city of Callaway and he is absolutely passionate about that city. So there is no testament that people can live outside of the city and still care about the city enough to do what's best for the city. I mean, if that was the case, if you have to be
financially invested in the city to care, then there's a lot of people that come be in Linhaven that that are not financially invested in Linhaven. Um, for example, somebody brought up the fact that like, well, they don't pay city of Linhaven taxes. Well, I'm tax
exempt. I'm a disabled veteran and I'm tax exempt. And I know Mayor Lowry, you are as well. And if we either of us were city manager, would that be to say that we don't care about the city then because we're not paying the adorum tax? No. We're both very clearly highly
invested in the community. So, that kind of whole argument, it's it's an opinion. It's a subjective opinion and that's all it will be. The the only fact there is that it is a subjective opinion. Um, also I found a a picture of when the
city managers needed to ride or come in live in city limits and uh it's back when they were on horseback. Um, so that's where that came from, you know, when when people didn't have vehicles that could easily drive across the bridge or travel into our community.
Um that's really when those like Mr. or Commissioner War said, that's when those um requirements for city managers to live within the city existed. Um great example about having to before the cell
phone that we all host all have before that came to be, right? You called them on the phone. If they didn't answer, you went knocked on the door. You know, maybe you knew where they like to hang out. So you'd go check there to try to find them in an emergency. or you have a delegated structure of other people you
could call if he's unreachable. Who else can you call? You have an assistant city manager. Hey, for some reason they're unavailable. Then you go to the next in line for the problem that you have. You know, if you have a sewer problem, are you going to go straight to him or are you going to go to the person in charge
of sewer? You know, that's why we have structures. That's why things exist. Um, you know, it's just the residency requirement is something that limits the pool of potential candidates and that's all it really is in modern society.
Thank you. >> Thank you, Mrs. Hodes. Just as a historical side note, as Mrs. Hodes is coming to the podium, uh, out of the 98 or 99 applicants for city manager, uh, none of the final five lived in Linhaven. one lived like uh someone said
four doors down from the city limits. I think that was Mr. Gray. Um or maybe it was Chairman Langford. Uh but regardless, none of them lived in the city of Linhaven. So anyone selected of those five finalists would be dealing with this requirement um at this point.
>> Yes, ma'am. and I'm just here as a citizen, but since there is the issue of the city clerk, should res should you all consider residency for that position as well? I don't know if it's done uh for the charter language or by
resolution, but to me that would be an imbalance because of the way those would be two those both would report to the commission is to consider residency of your potential city clerk. It's actually an interesting point.
Thank you for that. I don't think any of us had even thought about that. >> Thank you. Any other comments or questions from the public on this issue? Hearing none. Okay. All right. Third and
final uh of these three discussion and possible approval. First reading of draft ordinance establishing non-avalorum requirements in the city charter. Mr. Jackson. Yes, sir. This is ordinance number two to be determined. An ordinance of the
city of Linhaven, Florida, proposing amendments to section six of the city's charter to establish requirements for non-avvalorum assessments. Requiring a referendum for proposed non-avvalorum assessments, setting forth the elements of required ballot language for proposed
non-avalorm assessments, limiting the duration of non-avvalorum assessment programs, limiting annual increases, providing for management, use, and oversight of non-avvalorm assessment funds. providing that the proposed amendments shall be effective only upon the approval of referendum as specified
in the ordinance. >> Awesome. Um, do we have this these seven items? Do we have this slide by chance that we could pull up? >> We don't have don't have a slide of it, mayor, but I could read them >> if you would. So, uh, let me give a
quick background for those of you that may not have watched. We actually had this up on the the screen and discussed it ad nauseium at the joint uh city commission and charter review committee workshop. Um and this is basically seven
points uh seven data points that going forward anytime the city of Linhaven uh city commission was going to establish some type of nonadvalorum tax there are seven data points that would
need to be shared with the public in a very public way um and from like start to end time uh how much it was going to cost what it was for and I'll let the manager read that. But this is a standardized moving forward. Anytime
there is a non-advalorum tax assessed to the residents of Linhaven, we would owe it to all of you and us as taxpayers uh to do this uh provide this basic information. City manager, would you read that
please? >> Number one, a defined start and end date. Number two, a brief description of methodology of assessment. Number three, estimated specific cost per year by property in parenthesis
rate. Number four, total project cost annual and overall. Number five, specific statement on usage of funds. Number six, a limit on annual increase. And number seven, specific compliance and oversight requirements.
>> Thank you for that. Um, and I'll start off the conversation here with I am a very big proponent of this. I believe this is nothing but inherent transparency and goodness. Uh, we basically tell you what we plan our work before we work our plan. And before we,
the city commission ask the residents of Linhaven to pay an additional non-avalorum tax assessment. We owe you exactly how much it'll be, when it'll start, when it'll end, what we're going to do with those funds, how much it'll cost. Um, all of those things, frankly,
as a person paying the storm water non advalorum, just like the rest of you that live here in Lin Haven, I feel like this is basic governance, transparency. Um, and if we may not like it, but when there's an inherent need like storm water living at sea level and it's
needed, then we need to have those clearly defined swim lanes or as Jimmy Buffett would say, the navigational beacons, right? Um, that's where we're at with this. I think it's good. And I think it's transparent. Commissioners, what are y'all's thoughts?
>> I have a few uh thoughts. Um obviously I like the seven points. We talked about that. The transparency, the buzzword of transparency rings true here for sure. My question, I guess, would be for the attorney. Let's say theoretically this goes on a ballot and
it is voted down. Does that mean storm water is no longer funded? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. >> Well, no, no, sir. So, so there already is a nonavalorm ordinance and code section in
our code that deals with these type of issues and um that is nonaval goes through the four statutes and where our code requires every year and is renewed and has to follow those processes. So, this wouldn't repeal anything in it went
on the ballot and didn't get approved. It wouldn't repeal anything that's currently ongoing with the city. >> Okay, great. And my other thing, thank you for that. My other thing is I do think uh rather than just saying
um that there should be a limit on how much it increases, I think we should give a specific percentage of how much it it can increase because um it would kind of it would help us kind of set the boundaries or the guardrails.
Now I don't cuz if you just say you need to put the amount I mean you could theoretically say uh it can increase up to 90% every year you know if you if people if a certain group of commissioners in the future really wanted to do that and then you know
let's just say worst case scenario and then it's not promoted properly or whatever and it passes and then I mean theoretically you could almost double the increase every single year. So, I'm thinking maybe we should put in the
verbiage somewhere an actual number maybe like 10% or something like that. >> Talking like a contingency fee if something breaks or cost overrun kind of thing. >> No, in one of those seven items it says that you need to list um the increase
that's going to happen over time. I think we should put an actual specific percentage cap kind of like we do with the um homestead exemption, but I would say that I'd like it to only to follow the homestead exemption to where the cap is only on
homestead homes and vacant land, not the rentals or or the uh the businesses. So that way you have an incentive to um be a resident here rather than come in and buy a bunch of homes and rent them out.
for >> so what I ask this what is the purpose of the charter >> what's the purpose of it >> your core governing document to certify your current requirements organizational structure
>> and functions that lie within your core bedrock functions >> and that's what I worry about with this because the purpose of your charter is the structure of your government the roles and qualifications of key officers and who has authority. So, it answers
the who, but it's not supposed to answer the how. So, this to me, this is about policy making. Policym isn't supposed to be in the charter. That's what we've been charged with when we were voted into office. So, you know, policy debate
debate policy decisions are how things are done. Policy decisions are procedures. policy decisions are financial rules and operational requirements. I just I feel like, you know, we're going to
start putting some ordinances in there, too. I mean, cuz that's what we've been charged to do. And I feel like this is overstepping the bounds of what is a charter supposed to be. So, I have no problem. I'm all about transparency and the and the seven points. I have no
problem with that. But as far as the how, it doesn't belong in the charter. That's policy decision making. That's supposed to be done by ordinances and resolution. That's what we've been charged to do with. That's the way I feel about it. >> I will just say and then I'll turn it
over to Commissioner Perno and Commissioner Tender if they want to add anything is I have much professional love and respect for you, brother. uh we we will disagree from time to time and this is just one of those things I feel like to ensure maximum transparency
moving forward. This is one of those things that's important enough to by golly put it in the charter and it will just establish any chart until a future commission changed it uh through referendum any time we go to the people
and ask them to pay more non-avalorum taxes we owe them these seven things. We're not curtailing the authority. >> Yeah, I have no problem with the seven things. I just think this is one of those rare exceptions where it's important enough to basically put it in our operational organizational charter
or functional bible if you were right. Make it bedrock as permanent as a tattoo or say, right? >> Mhm. >> Commissioner Tender, do you have anything you'd like to add, ma'am? >> Uh, yes, Mayor. I do. But I just I just
want to say that I think uh there should be a limit on the increases. I think they should be capped so that we can't just continue to go up every year. And um that's basically what I I wanted
to voice. I think however this ends up, whoever is making it up or or whatever or if it's a combination of two groups or one group or whatever, I think capping it so it does not continue to increase, you know, I mean, we this
could just get way out of hand real quick. But that's that's my only comment. >> Yes, ma'am. >> And we can do that by ordinance. We can. So to me, if we approve this, we're approving that we should put procedures in the charter. That's what we're saying.
>> This is a foundational um transparency requirement in my mind. That's the difference. >> Commissioner Pero, >> I can see the seven points right here. Plain as day. I could see future
assessments guided by the seven points that would have to bring a a cap or so to speak or you when you're establishing the assessment
following these guidelines we would do exactly what we're saying to do in the charter. So in in a in less words, I agree with Commissioner Ward is that we've already we're setting the skeleton for it for the future and when we're
faced with the next assessment. I hope we never have one, but at that time following these seven points, you're going to have to put a cap on it. You're going to have to state the the annual increases. You know, it's what we're telling people. It's going to have to have a beginning. It's going to have to
have an end. So, you know, the seven points take care of itself and we're not overemphasizing a certain percentage increase or a dollar amount that may or may not fit the assessment at the time. We might not
be here, might happen in another lifetime. So, you don't put stuff in the charter, you know, that's going to be contradicted in the future. I mean, I know we talked about this before where we we're unsure what's going to happen with property taxes,
right? And uh this and I I'm not for assessments. I don't want people to think I am. I'm hoping that the storm water assessments the only one we have for years and years to come. Um it's it's not fun. But what if we do this?
What about what's the next thing we put on there? we're going to put on utility rates because essentially it's it's wherever you're getting your tax revenue from or where you get wherever you're getting your revenue from from those enterp for those enterprise funds. So if you want to put your utility rates on
there then or if you want to put on this on there then you might as well put on your utility rates too. I mean where where do you draw the line? Well, and if it's the percentage of rate increase, if that needs to be rewarded
in some because I hear you and Commissioner Perno both talking about a concern of a a limitation there that, you know, we might be shooting ourselves in the foot. Um, I am all about the transparency piece as much and I think we're in
violent agreement here that that we need to share as much of the seven points as humanly possible with the public when we roll out, hey, here's the nonavalore and here's the need we have for it and then any educated, you know, citizen at that
point can make a decision on I agree with you, I disagree with you and obviously there'll have to be forums and workshops and feedbacks and stuff before any of that things happen. But here's what here's why we're here's the why. Here's why we're proposing this and here's all seven key data points on
that. That's just transparency and good governance at its basic. If the limitation if the main concern is just that increase piece then let's let's sit down with Kiki let's sit down with the charter review and let's let's discuss that and and if
we have to rearticulate that in somehow fine um let's do that let's get the seven points and I frankly I feel like we owe that to the economy right so if there is a concern there let's let's delve into it
while We still have time before we need to get this by the 1st of June. Correct, city attorney. >> So, August 18th is the uh the referendum. We're putting it on the the Bay County wide uh ballot at that point. And this saves us it won't cost us a thing. Uh and otherwise, this would cost
us $20,000, give or take, if we were to do our own referendum. So, we're basically using a great opportunity to piggyback and put this forward uh for Linhaven voters to give yay or nay on these three items which will be done individually as Mr. Basher helped us
clarify. Um any other discussions? >> Mayor, I' I'd like to clarify uh Commissioner Peele's question to make sure either I understood it or to cover the reverse. So my understanding was the question was if this doesn't pass does it repeal the storm water current storm
water and I don't think it does the question the other reverse of that is if this does pass as drafted does it repeal the current storm water and I think there's a possibility that it does and we will look into that because the way the ordinance is drafted it requires a
referendum to approve any storm water um assessment and so our storm water assessment we'll have to go back and look at the ordinance maintance, but it generally is renewed every annually at the part of the budget process. And so the question will be for us to look at
is whether this charter amendment would cover that referendum and would effectively stop it until that goes till it's passed by the voters or if the one that was provided by the commissioner before can continue to the end of its time.
Just to clarify you, city attorney, um this nonavalorum, the one that we have, the nonavalorum for storm water, it gets renewed or not renewed by the city commission once a year. As long as that stays in operation, that's effectively a
grandfathered in. Or are you saying because it has to be renewed each year once the seven points, let's say, gets passed, then it would have the the the annual renewal would drive the
new process. Is that what you're saying? >> What I'm saying is that this the charter amendment as proposed currently requires voter approval of any nonavalorm assessments. And so the question is, and this is something the commission could resolve as part of this process before
we get there, is our current storm water assessment, is that going to continue without voter approval or do you all would it require voter approval? And my recommendation would be that we deal with this upfront so the commission knows and we can put it in the charter
language. >> So Commissioner Warick brought up a good point and we've talked about this. I talked specifically about it in the town hall on Saturday. We don't know and Commissioner Wars already mentioned it. We don't know what's going to happen at the state level with Avalorum taxes. Uh
South Florida has a lot of user fees to fund their fire and police. So if homestead exemptions across the board go into effect, we lose we as the city lose about a 30% of our operational budget.
Is that correct? Give or take. Kiki 30 >> 7 million out of 20 million. >> Okay. So that's uh about a third actually. >> Mhm. >> So that's significant. So the
non-advelorum becomes the the emergency or really the only other tool other than some special user fee that would be created to fund police, fire, those kind of things. That becomes your tool of last resort, right? Um,
so if I guess what I'm saying is we there is some hesitation to tie your hands before you know how the the state is going to play this regardless of the the resolution piece. Do I think this should
go before the the citizens and vote? Yeah, I think that's a great idea. um regardless of whether we send it to a referendum for approval and there have been historics on this when people have done this. Georgia actually does this
quite well and 80ish 75 80ish% of the time folks actually when they're given this information have voted to approve and not by two or three hanging chads seriously by healthy margins approve the the non-advalorum tax increases for a
specific time for a specific purpose um regardless of that if we can go back and relook at it if there's a concern among the commission I think the seven points We need to codify seven points uh of information for any non-abalorm moving
forward. I feel like we owe that to the citizens. How we do the other piece that I you know in terms of the requiring the referendum to approval not knowing what the state is going to do with adalorum at this point. I understand the concern
of tying our hands. Um, and other than reooking either relooking at that or segregating the seven points out from the referendum approval, I don't know what else we can do at this point while we wait for the state to figure out what
they're doing. Any other thoughts or discussion points here? >> I have a question for the city attorney. I don't know if you can answer this or not, but am I off about what I talked about earlier about charter being the what the charter's purpose is for
government framework, not policy. >> Generally, that's correct. Yes. I mean, the charter is like the constitution. >> So, it's generally broad general powers and restriction on general powers that you would want on a on a large kind of a large basis. you typically don't put in
the charter stuff that can be passed dealt with by ordinance because charter binds the future commissions and also kind of sets out the foundation and the framework of the government overall. >> And that's what I'm worried about is if we put that in I don't I don't have a problem putting the seven points in
there that's required to do an assessment fee. I think we're all in agreement on that. What I'm worried about if you if you put these all these requirements in well two things really. If you put all these requirements in, we're we're going to set a bad precedence for the charter and people are going to and and and it's going to
be utilized for things that's going to be more for policym as opposed to government framework. That's what I'm worried about >> for this specific uh seven points of what effectively a professional tattoo
of what we are putting on our skin per se as a permanent any future tax increases by this commission or any future commission until they change the ref or the charter will be required to give these seven points of data to the public at large.
In your professional opinion, it could be an ordinance, but could it not also be a common something you find as a core governing swim lane in a city charter as well? >> Yeah, it's I mean it's up to the commission what they want to put to the
voters to be put in the charter. Um so I mean both are appropriate. Uh and if there if there's you know charters generally have restrictions on power and so a notice requirement would certainly be something that could be in the charter. um
the voter approval of of taxation um you know that's sometimes required for like the uh sales tax issues but the nonorum because it's a user typically user fee and assessment typically is not required for voter approval that would be something you could put in there too
obviously it is but it it can bind the future commissions >> the way I structurally Mr. Mr. Langford, I'm going to ask you to come up or chairman Langford, I'm sorry, come up and and speak to this a little bit as well. Uh on behalf of the charter review committee, I see a non-advalorum as a
tourniquet, a shortterm, and I think you've actually used that term yourself, as a shortterm triage situation. It's not supposed to be a long-term indefinite non sunsetting kind of thing. Um so, can you give us a
little bit of uh a little bit more color here in the background? >> Sure. And if you don't mind, I'd like to address you as chairman of the charter review committee, but then I would like Miss CJ to start my threeminute clock after that, and I'd like to address you
as Corey Langford, a taxpayer, if that's okay. Um so regarding the charter committee um first of all after the joint workshop occurred and what you all decided during the joint workshop this
ordinance should have been updated based on what you all wanted. Okay. What you're looking at in front of you is what we submitted to you all as we voted on. Okay. >> The original. >> Correct. The original. that's that has the the ballot referendum for voter
approval of non-abalorum assessments etc. You all decided during the joint workshop at least what I got during the joint workshop is the only thing you all wanted to take out was the seven items. Okay. So at that point that ordinance should have been updated and that's what
you should be looking at in front of you right now. So, I hope that that clears that up because right now you're looking at what we initially submitted to you all before the joint workshop and during the joint workshop you all removed 90%
of that and wanted to pull out the seven items. Okay, so that's point number one. Um, point number two, we did look at it through an authority and a powers uh limiting government powers like Mr.
Jackson had had discussed. Um it's not the way in which we looked at it was not on an operational granular level. It was looking at it through a limitation of power by elected officials which I think Mr. Warick hit on the authority. Um what
we had proposed said that you have the authority to do this. Um now someone could look at that and say well that's an operational level that's this or that's that. That's the that's the lens in which we looked at it. So, >> thank you for that clarification
sincerely. So, we just to be clear, we are talking about only the seven points the city manager read out tonight uh as uh permanent tattoo if you will in the charter to make to have to share this with the public before we can tax them
for these things as a non-avalorum tax assessment. What I would recommend is the commission instruct the city attorney what the ordinance should read based on our our findings during the joint workshop because remember we we we
drafted this original ordinance. We provided it to you all. We had a joint workshop and said, "Hey, here's how we got to where we got to." Okay? You guys can take out of that and and and cherrypick or or whatever you want, right? Add to, take away, whatever. At
the end of the day, it's your guys's ordinance that goes to the ballot referendum. Now, we're going to come up as citizens and say, "Hey, this is what we think, you know, you all should do with what the charter review committee submitted to you all." And that's kind
of where I'm at with that as the charter chairman. Does that make sense? >> Sir, commissioners, any questions for the chairman? >> Thank you for that. >> Yeah. I'd like to take my charter review chairman hat off and address you as
Corey Langford the citizen now commissioner Peebles mayor Lowry initially and commissioner Tinder I want to thank you for advocating for a annual cap on how much it can increase um
Commissioner Warick hit on it authority what what I didn't hear when he was describing the charter was the people's document the charter is the people's document. This is not the commission's document. What goes in the charter and
what changes in the charter will be voted on by the people and the taxpayers in Linhaven. Okay, so that's point number one. Point number two is it is a limitation of authority and it is appropriate to standardize a percentage
in the charter. It's limiting authority. It's telling the commission you have the authority to increase this annually by whatever we can throw out numbers 10% 15% 20% whatever the percentage is right what the charter review committee provided you all was a copy and paste
from the fire assessment which is in Florida statute Florida statute says you can only increase the fire assessment in this manner right so the law says that's what applies to the fire assessment right so we started there right you can
go you can go and and and put a percentage on it, 10%. But bottom line is this. If I'm paying, let's just throw out some easy numbers here. Let's say I'm paying $100 a year on my non-avalorum assessment. All I'm asking for is the city to tell me, Mr.
Langford, we can only increase that 10% every year. So, I know next year the most that I'm going to be able to going to have to pay is $110. And then it can increase 10% after that or whatever that percentage is. Okay? And it's not just for me. It's it's the
retired individuals that we have living in our community that are on a fixed income that are trying to figure out how they're going to pay their taxes, how they're going to pay whatever non-avalorum assessment the city decides to come up with and increase it however much they want to increase it.
At least if you told them that we're locking it in to this percentage increase every year, they have something to to rely on. Okay? You all have had 100% authority since 2021 on increases.
At no time in the past 5 years has anyone said, "Hey, we owe it to the public to say we can only increase it this amount." There is no cap. You can increase it 500% if you want. Okay? It's all we're asking for is allow the voters
to vote to say we want to restrict the powers of the commission through the charter because this is the people's document that you can only increase it by x% every year. I think that's fair to the public. I think that's a realistic request. I don't I'm not trying to
defund storm water or defund anything. It's just provide some sort of standardized approach. That's it. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Langford and I guess that's where the administrative disconnect happened. We were reviewing the original submission uh from a draft
from the charter review not postworkshop draft. Sure. >> And then that's fair. I'm I'm not casting stones or casting any blame. I'm just realizing where the disconnect was. So, so the process is is that if you all
are happy with what was proposed, the the older version, we can just go forward with first reading and continue. If you want to make changes to to this and narrow it down to the seven that was previously discussed, we can make those changes. We just need some direction
from you and we'll bring it back for next meeting for first reading. >> Let's do that. and city manager, city attorney. I'm going to ask you two, gentlemen, to uh to run point on that. Um get inputs from the five of us on the commission. Um I think we're all in
agreement on the seven points, but whatever other inputs or tweaks you want otherwise for that, go ahead and submit them and let's take a look at this as a combined new first reading at our next meeting. We have the time. Let's go ahead and like General McQueen likes to
say, let's not rush the failure. Let's do another first reading of the revised reook at our next meeting. >> So, you all have the the ordinance there in your packet. If you would just redline it and email it to me, we will make sure that the changes are are made.
>> Thank you, sir. And uh my apologies for the disconnect there. I did not realize that no update function happened after our initial joint workshop where we met for what two two and a half hours. There was quite a bit of goodness and discussion between
the commission and the the committee. So, Miss Moore, come on up. >> We've already talked about you once tonight. >> I know my name came up. Um I just want to say um I I see what Jamie is saying though. um something might be a good
idea but that doesn't necessarily means that that it needs to be in the charter. So I just want the you guys to really think about what you're doing. I belong to um you know several groups and there's policy and then there's um the
bylaws is and that's kind of like the charter. So you know the constitution is you know a short document you know compared to a lot of other places. So again, something might be a good idea, but you don't want to be too unwieldy. So I'm not saying that this is a bad
idea, and I think definitely um in some ways limiting government and how much can be spent. And you know, I think that that's a worthy cause. But again, I think y'all really need to be careful to um you know, to don't throw so much in there that there's um too much. you want
it to be something that can um be, you know, um over an overwriting kind of thing and not so detailed. So, just to comment, like I said, I I see I see what Jamie saying, too. You don't want to cross the line when something is supposed to be a function of the
government. But I also hear the citizens here, you know, they don't want to be, you know, paying 500 bucks for a water bill. You know, I know that's an exaggeration. >> Thank you, ma'am. M Mr. Gray
seeing congressional hall as a sponsor of this bill. No, as a sponsor of the seven items, um I wanted to clarify some of my intent as I brought this forward through the process and through the um the committee and through the workshop.
Um, the reason we didn't put a cap in there on how much the commission could put on that line item of the seven items is because that's for the legislative body to work with the city to figure out what that needs to be when you pitch a nonadvalorum to the community. Um,
whether that's 3% or following the fire assessment protocol or 10% or saying, "Hey, there's no cap because we don't know what we're, you know, how much our needs would be. I don't know what items would require no cap, but maybe there's a no cap. Just like in the workshop, we
talked about start and end dates and we determined that some nonadvil alarms, should they need to be created, I think of two, fire and police, for example, maybe there's no end date. And that's the way you pitch it to the city is there's no end date because we don't want to get rid of core services like
fire and police in the city. And so as a citizen, you hear, okay, this is for no end date and this is what it's for. Okay, I agree with that. And then I don't have to come after y'all at the ballot box saying, "I didn't like that person. Get rid of them." You know, um I
left our workshop understanding like Chairman Langford that you guys had scrapped almost everything out of there and left only behind a few key pieces, the seven items and some some key other very small other pieces like related to oversight and stuff like that. Um so my
understanding was it was going to be updated for y'all. So, I appreciate that you guys are doing that. Um, but yeah, I think you nailed it that you can't sit up there and say you're for transparency if you're not willing to at least via an ordinance or resolution or whatever, not
ballot box, but via that say, "Hey, the city needs to do this advalor non-advalum for this purpose and here's all the information you as citizens deserve to hear." For example, if I want to go over to my side of the community where we have no sidewalks, if I wanted
to spend the time to go doortodoor and find out who would support a non-advorum for sidewalks for say 10 years, um I could go do that and I would come to you guys and say, "Hey, I have a list of petition signatures. 80% of our community is willing to pay $100 a year
toward sidewalks in our area." And as we learned on the committee, you guys could pass a non-advalorum just for our properties that the rest of the city wouldn't have to pay. Um it's like mil bayou could do that for their lights. You know, you could pass a non-advorum just for their lights. Um so that's kind
of to answer your question, Commissioner Peoples, why we're not putting, and I know Commissioner Tinder had that too, why we're not putting a cap in the charter is exactly like Commissioner Warick said, that's not the place to do it. The place to do it is right there when you guys are setting up nonadalorums.
>> Thank you, Mr. Basher. >> I'm with Commissioner Warick on this. Um, y'all set the budget every year. You vote on the millage rate, whether to raise it or not. Do you want the voters to have a say in if you're going to raise taxes via the millage rate? I
mean, this is a if you really really want this, pass an ordinance. do it today or not today but do the first reading next time pass an ordinance incorporating just what y'all are talking about the seven items and everything else you've got that power to do it right now you don't have to go out
and let the citizens say no we don't want this or yes we want this you have that authority currently to put that in place do it I mean it's to me it's that simple if if you put it in the charter you're handcuffing yourself or
handcuffing future people on what can and can't be done and if that's your intent, state it and say that's your intent and that's okay. Um, but as a citizen, I don't think the charter is where you need this at. I think just like Commissioner Warick says, you can
do it today. You can it's an ordinance. You can do it by ordinance and that's I agree it's something that needs to be there. What there was a lot of misunderstanding about the storm water assessment, how those funds were going to be spent when I was going door todo. That was I heard that time and again. We
thought y'all were going to do projects with that money, but no, you're not. That's there was misunderstanding and it wasn't communicated well. An ordinance incorporating seven things. Yeah, that would solve that problem, but that is within your power today to do that. um you don't have to wait for work. And if
if let's say you do go forward and and put it on a referendum and the voters say no, we don't want to do this. I would encourage you to pass an ordinance anyway if you haven't already incorporating those seven things. Um you just have that power. There's no reason
to put it in the charter at this point. It's it's a procedural thing in my opinion. Thank you. >> Thank you, sir. Any other comments or questions? Miss Miss Parker. And while she's coming up, city
attorney, just a point of clarification for ad valorum taxes. Um there are state limitations on how much those can go up per year. Kiki, you might as tie into this as well, but those same requirements or limitations of a
percentage of increase are not in place or there aren't any of those corresponding on the non-avalorm site. Correct. >> So on advalorum, it's set by the constant constitution at 10 mills is the maximum that you can issue is any government can issue on nonaval, it's
governed by statute and there is there are some limits on what you can do. The property has to have a benefit. It has to whatever the fee or assessment is has to benefit the property and the fee has to be proportionate to the benefit that's provided to the property. So that's why the city will typically get a
study that shows here's the properties that will be affected. Here's the cost of what we're trying to do and here's how we're going to just aortion that either at a percentage you know 50% 20% or 100% whatever. But there are there is a limit. just can't you couldn't just
without a study um just say hey we're going to charge everybody an extra uh 500% or something like that. There are statutory limits under the Florida law. >> You have to back it up with justification. >> Yes, but there isn't the same millage
percentage limitation as there is on a >> it's not a hard cap and the ultimate limit is whether it's a tax. So taxes have to be approved by the by the voters and this is not Avalorum assessment is technically not a tax and when it gets closer to a tax then it could be
challenged legally and that has happened in the state before. So that's why there's the assessment and a study that shows that this is really just a fee. It's not really a tax or services whatever you're trying to uh assess.
>> Good evening Miss Parker. >> Hello. Um, I'm actually live streaming from Bernie Thompson, so I'm going to read some comments from him. Um, he said, "All all cities should fund essential government functions out of operational general fund. Instead, they shovel millions to their consultant and
contractor friends. Then they create additional revenue streams for priority issues. Then they cry poverty." The real issue is that the storm water assessment should be for an urgent need. it's not for creating a permanent storm water department.
Um he also said that Cory Langford is the chairman of the charter review committee and he's pushing hard for limiting annual increases for taxpayers. He should get more support. Thank you. >> One tidbit on that. I did mention and I don't want to belabor the point any
further if we I don't have to but at the town hall on Saturday I actually mentioned that um and there we among the board all five of us love Linhaven uh we don't all agree on the best way forward with the storm water long term um I'm of the opinion this is an operational
department just like fire and uh police we live at sea level it's always going to be an issue it's there's always going to be a need there this is not a tourniquet kind situation. Uh however, comma, there are millage rate limitations and I think that was why
ultimately the city commission went the way it did prior to me joining in doing the storm water assessment as they did. Um moving forward, that's a discussion we will continue to have philosophically and how do we do this best and I I don't
know that we've got the best solution at this point. has changed multiple times and I suspect it will continue to change until we strike that just right balance and thread the proverbial needle. But thank you for that, Miss Parker. All right, any other questions on this, Mr.
Garmin? Good evening. >> Uh, I definitely don't want to belabor the point anymore as far as is it a limiting factor or otherwise. Um, it would be probably instructive as you're going forward and going with the new draft and talking about this to really
look at if we're going to compare it to the Constitution. Well, let's let's do that. Okay. In the Constitution, you have limits, but limits sometimes are just Congress has the power of the purse. Okay. But Congress does not promulgate individual
taxes, tax rates, effective tax rates, those things. that is done by policy, if you will, through the IRS, through rev rules. Okay? So, if you're using the federal government as an example, it would be less proper to put specific
caps in. Um, but that's really again that's I think there's been enough on that. I think something that you should consider. Let's rewind to 2018. If we are saying that any assessment must be approved by the voters, what happens if
a cat 5 rolls through? I think you should heavily consider having an emergency. Hey, the commission can act on their own for three months, six months, whatever it might be, and then a referendum would need to be upheld by
the citizens. But if we have another hurricane, Michael, the last thing we have time to do is call the voters in and say, "Hey, can we help fund?" Especially if Adalorum is gone and especially if more than a third of your budget is already wiped out. So again,
am I saying let's have no voter input? Absolutely not. I'm just saying there are certain times when you must govern as a govern as a governing body without the input of the citizens. But it can then absolutely be be upheld later. I mean, and that doesn't have to be a year
down the road. That can be 3 months down the road, 6 months down the road. We wouldn't have even had a place to vote on a referendum for months after Hurricane Michael. So just from a governing standpoint to not tie your hands in a way that you might
not consider. I would really think about okay what about an emergency and make sure that's clearly laid out. >> Thank you for that Mr. Garmin. That was very thoughtful. Um and just to clarify as we move on to the next discussion item, um the what was submitted in the
package was the original charter review committee's draft which we then discussed at Nauseium uh in a joint two and a half hour commission meeting uh commission and committee meeting uh and it did not get updated. So what we had
before us tonight was the original submission, not the pieces that uh we basically kind of all agreed with and said yes, we will move forward with this. So that was a disconnect. It was an inadvertent disconnect, but it was a disconnect. Uh and we will fix that and
we will run that tape again at our next meeting in two weeks. So my apologies for that disconnect. All right. Unless there's any other discussion for the good of the order here, uh we will revisit the seven points which I think
is fundamentally a local bill of rights if you will for non-advalorum taxes moving forward and what we owe the citizens before we could tax them on the non-advalorum is we got to tell you what's coming and why we need it and here it is. I think that's very fair and
transparent. Anything else beyond that, we will have a another look at it in uh in two weeks. All right. Um moving on. Number 18, discussion and possible approval of resolution 2026-04-545 awarding Bay Park Lawn Care Services to
GrowPro LLC in the amount of $121,800. City manager. A resolution of the city of Linhaven, Florida, approving a 5-year agreement with GrowPro LLC relating to the provision of lawn care and chemical services at Bayou Park and Preserve in
an amount of 128 $121,800. And mayor, we're currently spending around $150,000 annually. So, the bids came in cheaper. Um, so we will be saving a little bit annually on this expense. >> Awesome. And what's the ballpark of the savings?
>> About 30 grand. Okay. >> Is this funded through the money we got for the buyer? >> It currently is. I mean, it's a 5-year agreement, so it could be run into where it's time for us to to pay it out of pocket. Um, when once this agreement's over or by the time the agreement's
over, >> it's $30,000 less. Is the scope of work the exact same? >> Oh, same scope of work. >> Yes, sir. Same scope of work. I'm sorry. >> Okay. >> All right. Motion to approve.
>> I make a motion to approve. >> Yes, ma'am. >> Second. >> We'll give that to Miss Tender and seconded by Commissioner Perno. Um, thank you both. Um, any discussion from the public at large on this item?
Hearing none. Y'all have been very graceful tonight. Thank you for your patience as we work through this uh and the robust discussion on the three CRC items. Um hearing no inputs, Commissioner or excuse me, City Manager, will you call the role? >> Commissioner Tender,
>> yes. >> Commissioner Pero, >> yes. >> Commissioner Peoples, >> yes. >> Commissioner Warick, >> yes. >> Mayor Lowry, >> yes. All right. 50. Thank you. Now, item number 19, discussion and possible, excuse me, approval of resolution
2026-04-546, amending the fee schedule. Deputy Director of Finance, >> a resolution of the city of Linhaven, Florida, amending chapter 70 of the fee schedule in appendix A of the Linhaven Code of Ordinances and providing for an
effective date. >> Good evening. Uh this is just a change on it's on page 124 of the agenda uh attachments. It's really a fee that the city collects on behalf of the county or really kind of the pass
through. So to collect it and then pay it through to the county. >> So this is just one change in addition to the fee schedule that was already updated earlier this year. >> Yes. But it's not really a fee that the city keeps. We collect it and then we
pass it on to the county >> collect on the beach in particular just our >> retail water um connection fees >> and mayor this would be if like on the east side of the city where we are a wholesale customer of Bay County if somebody were to build a home they would
have to pay the Bay County connection fee because they are getting the water through the city but it's from the Bay County wholesale side. So that's what that's for. Not every lot in the city pays this just the ones that are in that service area. Understood. And like you said, this is a pass
through. There's no significant changes. Uh any questions from the commission? It seems pretty straightforward. >> Yes. This is what very much just a formality really, right? >> Yes, sir. >> Motion to approve. >> Second.
>> I have a motion and a second for Mr. >> Mayor. If I could just make one suggestion to add in language on the um asterisk in the fee schedule that it only applies to >> uh properties that are serviced wholesale by the county. >> That's a good input.
>> Motion to approve that. >> Motion to approve as amended. >> Second. >> Got a motion to approve as amended, recommended by the city attorney. I got a motion from Commissioner Pero. A second from Commissioner Warick. Uh, any discussion from the public on
this one? Okay, no problem with that. Uh, city manager, would you call the role? >> Commissioner Pero, >> yes. >> Commissioner War, >> yes. >> Commissioner Peebles, >> yes. >> Commissioner Tinder, >> yes. >> Mayor Lowry,
>> yes. Thank y'all for that. All right. Item number 20, discussion and possible approval of resolution 2026-04-547 approving additional services for the 10th Street utility project. City manager, >> a resolution of the city of Linhaven, Florida, approving an agreement with
Deubberry Engineers relating to additional post design services for the West T West 10th Street utility improvement project and the total amount of $95,250. And mayor, this is just finishing up the the CDBG project. Um, we've done the
change order for construction. We did the contract amendment for the record retention. Um, this is finalizing Deubberry Services for the project to close it out and finish the CI. >> All right. Awesome. Any questions among the commission? No. All right. If not, can I get a
motion in a second? >> Motion to approve. >> Second. >> Thank you for that. >> All right. Thank you. Uh, any questions from the the public on this one? Okay. City manager, would you call the role? >> Commissioner War? >> Yes. >> Commissioner Pero?
>> Yes. >> Commissioner Peebles? >> Yes. >> Commissioner Tinder? >> Yes. >> Mayor Lowry? >> Yes. Thank y'all for that. All right. 21. Discussion and possible approval of resolution 2026-04-548 approving a contract for GF Coast
Utility Contractors for storm water repairs in the Woodram subdivision. City manager. a resolution of the city of Lhaven, Florida, approving an agreement with GF Coast Utility Contractors relating to Woodrun subdivision storm water repairs and the total amount of $64,649.
And mayor, this is just some storm water repairs. Um, if you saw in your packet there on page, I believe that's uh 144. You can see that pipe is completely rusted out. I believe we got our money's worth out of that one. Um, staff did reach out to three different vendors. um
GF Coast Utility Contractors, uh Davis built and I believe the other one was BCL and GF Coast Utility Contractors is the lowest uh proposal and that is below the $100,000 threshold for our
purchasing policy allows us for the three quotes versus engineered design and bid out. Okay. >> All right. Any discussion among the commission? >> Make a motion. >> All right. Motion to approve. >> Second. >> Got a motion and a second from
Commissioner Tinder and Commissioner Pero. Um, any discussion from the public on this item? >> Hearing none. City Manager? >> Commissioner Tinder? >> Yes. >> Commissioner Pero? >> Yes. >> Commissioner Peebles? >> Yes. >> Commissioner War? >> Yes.
>> Mayor Lowry? >> Yes. Thank you'all for that. Item number 22, discussion and possible approval of resolution 26-04-549 approving a piggyback contract for Atlantic Pipe Cured in place pipeline contract. City manager,
>> a resolution of the city of Linhaven, Florida, approving an agreement with Atlantic Pipe Services relating to pipe and manhole renewal and rehabilitation services for the city's storm water utility at rated stated more fully in the body of the proposal. Mayor, this is
a contract that was bid out in St. John's County. Um it's to line the storm water collection system piping and storm water manholes. We've been working on this a couple years actually. Um the first project we will have them do, we budgeted in the storm water department
uh to line the 36-in corrugated metal pipe on Vermont Avenue, the 1100 and 1200 blocks. If you ride through there, you can see several different cave-ins throughout people's yards. Um it's time to rehab those pipes and this contract will allow us that opportunity. Okay.
Any questions? >> I make a motion to approve. >> Thank you, Miss Tinder. Uh, any questions among the >> I'll second. >> If not, we got a motion from Commissioner Tinder, a second from Commissioner Warick. Um, any discussion
from the public on this one? Hearing none, I love the chuckles, light hearts. Uh, city manager, would you call the roles? >> Commissioner Tinder. >> Uh, yes. Commissioner Warick, >> yes. >> Commissioner Peoples,
>> yes. >> Commissioner Pero, >> yes. >> Mayor Lowry, >> yes, sir. >> All right. 50. Thank you'all for that. Item number 23, discussion and possible approval of resolution 26-04-550 approving a piggyback contract for Core
and Maine water meter installation. City manager. A resolution of the city of Linhaven, Florida, approving an agreement with CORE and Maine LP relating to the purchase and installation of advanced metering infrastructure for the city's water and reclaim water utilities at set unit
prices. Mayor, we've actually been working on this one about 3 years as well. Um the city of Panama City Beach mentioned in our last two strategic meetings um was working on a contract uh for their meter conversion to the AMI, which is the radio reads. It's where the
meter readers no longer have to go out and physically touch the meters to read them. It's all read via satellite. Um, this we've got about 2500 or so u water meters left. We are piggybacking off of the beaches contract to be able to complete that project. >> So, it's basically some excess capacity
that they have to help us knock down the installation of units we still have. not excess capacity they have, but we are able to utilize the the bid that they submitted uh to be able to piggy back off of that for pricing and be able to utilize that for the installation.
>> Right. Any questions? >> Motion to approve. >> Second. >> I'll be glad when these are done. This is going to be uh great uh upgrade for the city. So, >> absolutely. >> All right. So, I got a motion by Commissioner Tinder. I've got a second
from Commissioner Warick. Any questions from the public on this item? Hearing none, uh, Comm City Manager, would you call the role? >> Commissioner Tinder? >> Um, absolutely. Yes. >> Commissioner Warick, >> yes. >> Commissioner Peebles, >> yes. >> Commissioner Pero,
>> yes. >> Mayor Lowry, >> yes. Thank you'all for that. 24. discussion and possible approval of resolution 20- or excuse me 2026-04-551 approving acceptance of the cyber security grant city manager
>> a resolution of the city of Linhaven Florida approving a state funded grant agreement with the Florida Department of Management Services for development and enhancement of a cyber security risk management program authorizing the city manager to execute the agreement and
providing an effective date. Mayor, this is a grant that um River the has been working on for about a year now. Um it's a non non-monetary grant. It's a services grant. Um it's capabilities based. Rather rather than issuing funds
directly to the city, the state of Florida will purchase the cyber security tools and services and then deploy them for the city's benefit at no cost. Um significant cost savings once this is completed. uh delivering an enterprise level protection for city systems and
data. So this is unrelated to the cyber issues we've had in the past uh but it will help significantly with some issues we have and no cost to the city. >> Motion to approve. >> Make a motion to approve. >> Nope. I beat you. >> Second.
>> Commissioner Tender, I'm taking yours motion as a second there. Commissioner Peeles beat you to the draw, ma'am. >> No problem. >> All right. Thank you for that. I have a motion from Commissioner Peebles. A second but from Commissioner Tinder. Uh any discussion among the audience on
this point? Hearing none. City manager, call the role, please. >> Commissioner Peebles, >> yes. >> Commissioner Tinder, >> yes. >> Commissioner Pero, >> yes. >> Commissioner War, >> yes. >> Mayor Lowry, >> yes, sir. Well, thank y'all for that. We uh let's see, that was the one last one.
Item number 25, discussion and possible approval of resolution 20-20 or excuse me 2026-04-552 approving Florida architects additional services city hall construction and final invoice. >> A resolution of the city of Linhaven, Florida, approving additional service
services fee request from Florida architects relating to the city hall police/EOC project in the total amount of $27,916.25 25 and mayor. This is just closing out the final invoice to Florida architects
for the design and post-design services of this building. >> Any discussion or questions from the commission? If none, can I hear a motion to approve? >> Motion to approve. >> Thank you, ma'am. Do I have a second?
>> Second. >> Got a motion and a second from Commissioner Tinder and Commissioner Warick. Uh, any questions or discussion among the the audience tonight? Hearing none, city manager, would you call the role? >> Commissioner Tinder, >> yes. >> Commissioner War,
>> yes. >> Commissioner Peebles, >> yes. >> Commissioner Pero, >> yes. >> Mayor Lowry, >> yes. Thank you'all for that. That brings us up to the the final glide slope, if you will, um, for tonight. Public commentary item number 26. We had no one
sign up for tonight. We've had some very good discussions. Yeah. You believe that or not? It's a whole blank sheet, man. >> I want to frame that. Um, any additional Come on up, Michelle. >> I just want to inquire about the um
fundraising policy that's holding up the I can bike thing. >> It was passed last meeting. >> It was. >> Yes, ma'am. >> So, I can start raising funds. Yes, ma'am. >> I've never seen you grin so big at a
city commission meeting. Just for the record. >> All right. Any other general commentary tonight? If not, thank you'all for that. Uh 27, Mayor's Report. It's been three months since I joined this team. I appreciate
the opportunity to serve. I'm proud to serve with my four commissioner teammates. Uh I really think we're going in the right direction. Uh the whole tone and tenor has changed for the city and I think in the better way and a very good way. Uh but we have a lot of work
left to do and proud to be here with y'all and thank you all for engaging and participating with us. We all love Lin Haven and we all want to do the very best for our city that we possibly can. So that's where we're at today. And uh with that, I will start off uh on my
left with Commissioner Perno and we'll go to the right. Commissioner Pero, your report for tonight, sir. >> Um I don't have a bunch to report. I just uh the town hall was good. The two gentlemen in the back. Thank you guys for participating with us and being there Saturday morning. I like the
Chick-fil-A and the donuts a lot. That was good. Um, I did get a call from my lady regarding the um the water man break, but I think we covered all that through the town hall and whatnot and honestly believe that things are getting
handled very nicely. Appreciate everything. Um, I just want to thank everyone who comes to the meetings and our employees of the city and our first responders. That's my report. >> Thank you, sir. Before we go to Commissioner Peebles, thank you
Commissioner Pero for reminding me. We have two of Linhaven's finest in the back. We have newly promoted Lieutenant Patrick Broen and uh Captain Brian Bllelock. I want to say thank you both um for being here tonight and congratulations on your both of your
well-deserved promotions. We're proud of you. So with that, Commissioner Peebles, the floor is yours. >> Thank you, sir. Uh, I think the reason that they keep bringing the gentlemen back up in the back is because they were kind of the uh unofficial MVPs of that
meeting because they fielded at least 30 questions it seemed like. So, thank you for that and answering all those questions. Um, so in case anyone here didn't know this, we had quite a few workshops over the past week or two. We had a zoning
workshop. Um, I attended that via phone because um, my wife had just had surgery. So, thanks for keeping her in your prayers. Um, we had our town hall, which was great. We talked about that a lot. Uh, before this, um, commission meeting, we had the living shorelines
workshop with the estuary program. And, uh, so, just wanted to point out that we had those. Um, also, the tree giveaway was awesome. Uh, I have a I've been I've been getting trees from that tree giveaway for years now. One of them is
like this thick. It's pretty awesome. It's great. Um, growing great. And so, it's a great program. Uh, try to promote it the best I can because, you know, a lot of our storm water problems come because we don't have trees anymore. The tree canopy being gone and being able to
suck up all the water has really been a factor for our storm water issues. So, uh, if you can plant trees, please do. And then finally, uh, something that I start kind of started that I think is going to be kind of fun is everyone
knows, and if you talk to anyone that's not from Linhaven that lives in the the area, they'll tell you that Lin Haven is known for its parks. So, I figured I'd do a little fun thing where we'll have a park tournament in the in the in the spirit of it being baseball, travel ball
season with all the tournaments going on. Um, so if you want to, um, every week I'm going to have a this or that type poll where you can vote on which park is your favorite in a bracket style. Doesn't have to be which park is your the best, which park is objectively
the best or in your opinion the best. It could be you had a a great memory of attending it when you were a child. It could be that you like taking your grandchildren to it. It could be um, for example, we have the memorial park. It could be cuz it has a historic significance to you. whatever that is,
let's have that tournament. Uh, right now, currently, Sheffield Park is beating Memorial Park. So, if you really like Memorial Park, go vote for it. But, um, I'll just tally the votes every week. We'll move along the bracket and we'll have the championship, see which one wins. So,
>> awesome. Very creative, sir. Thank you, Commissioner Ward. >> I don't have a whole lot. Um, I uh last week I had the pleasure of watching two new police officers get sworn into Linhaven and um you could
just tell the uh the atmosphere is totally different now. Um our police department's in good hands. I'll just say that. So, um appreciate all that they do. Um and the fire department and and all the staff. So,
um, we've come a long ways. I know we got a lot more to go, but I feel like we're we're going the right direction. So, thank you. >> Yes, sir. Thank you. Certainly last tonight, but not least, by any stretch, our commissioner caboose for tonight,
Commissioner Tinder. >> Hey there, Mayor. Uh, I have a few things. Uh the first thing I want to I can't say enough good about a gentleman who works in the entire department.
um Lamar Ron is the inspector for businesses and let me tell you something I would have taken a whole different road but this has the patience of Joe and uh she's dealing with
businesses that want and want and he keeps trying to give and give and remain professional. Um so my hat goes off to him. We have a great fire department. Guys, I'll tell you, if you ever have to do business with anybody who has
anything to do with uh the laws and Lyn Haven, this is the man you want to deal with. I have really up to him. The other thing that uh I wanted to bring to attention, we talked about this also
in the um city Saturday. And that is the ball thing, the Olympers, the lineups, the way it's all run and all of that. I know Sam is well into she
didn't talk about it. I really couldn't hear. But uh Sam's got a lot of kids who play well and I think we have a great program. We need maybe tweak it if there's any way to tweak it
and share to everybody. Um, other than that, I've been dealing with those particularly um Lamar. If I ever get the opportunity to meet you, please
um I have a lot of respect for you. Anyway, it's been a great meeting. Thank you so much to the uh I'll be there when I am. I'm only going to be tied up a couple more days and then I'll be back to work. >> You rest. >> Yes, ma'am. You rest up and I hope you
feel better soon, Commissioner Tinder. >> Thank you. I will. >> Yes, ma'am. We need to update this. CJ, this is just for you in the future. We need to update this. Uh the interim needs to come off of the city manager report on 29.
So mine, but okay, no worries. Uh permanent city manager at least for the next few years. Uh Mr. Lightfoot, what have you got for us tonight? >> So um Mayor CJ will be reaching out um asking everyone some available dates for
May so we can get budget workshops scheduled. Um so be looking for that, be thinking about that. Um, but I'm going to ask her to reach out to you all um, so we can get those dates on the books. And also we can make this an agenda item for the next meeting, but just would
kind of like to hear some feedback from the commission of some direction for James Rogers Park. We do have the money in the budget this year. However, as everyone knows and Miss Roman is about to give an update on our um, disaster recovery fund. It is in the negative. It
will be coming out of the general fund. Um, but we are getting a lot of questions from the public on whether or not the city is going to be moving forward with that project. Back in August, you all fi approved the final design. So, it's ready to be bid out. Um, but we just need some direction from the commission. So, like I said, I can
add that as an agenda item for the next meeting uh for discussion and kind of approval of which direction you all want to go. Um, but we need some direction so that we can provide an answer to the residents who are inquiring about it. If you want to talk about this after
Kiki gives us a debrief and at least have a first flush thoughts and discussion on it as we wrap up tonight or table it for the next meeting. >> I say meeting >> yeah I agreed let's table it to the next meeting.
>> Kiki for the first time tonight's got a big old smile on her face. She's looked like she's had an Irish wake all night. Thank you. >> Good evening. >> Good evening ma'am. Um, page uh 304 unfortunately is incorrect and I believe
Miss Rushing has given you a corrected uh checklist. If you have questions or comments, I happy to address them. Now, I also have additional uh copies for the public if they would like to see these as well. uh the the error was made after
the agenda was already published and for confusion's sake we didn't want to um have two drafts out there. So do you have any questions about the updated checklist?
Right. So, as uh was mentioned, I'm going to give you a brief update on the disaster recovery fund, Hurricane Michael, uh commonly shorthanded as fund 101. We have had some information from FEMA.
They are working on the insurance allocation. And I believe that I've described this to you in the past that FEMA is specifically assigning dollar amounts to each and every project.
Based on those allocations, they have made some determinations. They are doing what they're calling unallocating $33 million. So, in the past, I have told you that
when everything shook out at the end of when we go through final closeout for Hurricane Michael, the city would be in the hole about $18 million. Unfortunately, I am adjusting that number. It's going to be closer to 22 to $23
million. The debt service does not change. We are still paying the bond till 2033 at 2,7 a year.
Today, fund 101 is in uh in a negative cash position of approximately $900,000. That's today. I'm going to make a payment uh August 1st of about $2.3 million. So,
I'll be taking that out of general fund in August. Again, when everything is said and done, the general fund will be impacted by about 22 to $23 million.
Uh, further update is that FEMA's not done. They are reviewing additional projects. There may be additional adjustments to come and I will keep you updated on that as that information comes along.
Nothing has changed as far as the debt goes. Uh the only thing that has changed is the receivable amount from the feds that has diminished. Can I answer questions for you? Do
>> you anticipate any other sizable drops based on what's still outstanding? >> I know for sure there's going to be one for about a million dollars. >> So, we're realistically looking at a drop of about six million then in total. >> It's possible. They're still reviewing
the re continue to review the insurance and they're reviewing our application for legal fees. Um, I'm not sure where they are with that. You might be aware that because of the partial government shutdown. FEMA is
one of those agencies that is working on partial staffing. So, I know that we do have money coming, but it's very slow in arriving be and they're attributing that to the partial government shutdown. I will keep you updated as news becomes
available, but unfortunately it's not going to be it's not going to get any better. >> And that's why you've looked like you are at an Irish wake all evening, the bearer of bad news, but it's it's
honest news. So, >> Well, I assume you'd rather know beforehand than after the fact. Sure. Thank you for that. Uh and just a side note on FEMA funding. It looks like uh the Senate is pushing forward with a
reconciliation bill. It looks like uh just a national bit of news on FEMA funding. It looks like the Senate is pushing forward with a reconciliation bill to get that through that's not subject to the filibuster. And I believe what I read in the news yesterday was they're looking to fund um
all of DHS for the next three years. So if that gets funded in the next FEMA as part of DHS gets funded in the next couple of weeks fully funded, I don't know how quickly that would trickle down to what we're waiting on here in terms
of audits or reviews left. >> There's about $700,000 that's ready to go. It just someone needs to pull the lever on it. So, I would imagine that that would happen rather quickly. Everything else will go in government, federal government time.
>> Um, at the speed of Christmas or molasses, right? >> Gotcha. All right. Any questions from the commission for Miss Kiki? >> No. >> All right. >> Thank you. >> Well, with that, um, our true caboose
tonight is our city attorney, Mr. Jackson. Do you have anything for us tonight? >> I have spoken way too much tonight and I have no report. >> Well, for the record, we appreciate you, Mr. Jackson. Ladies and gentlemen, I really appreciate y'all tonight. I'm sorry we couldn't get you out of here in
a minute or an hour 16 like last time, but truly thank you for writing this out with us, for being part of this. Y'all have a great night.