calling a pre-commission meeting at 8:05. Good morning to everyone. We'll jump into our agenda here. Looking at our consent agenda, just meeting minutes and then we have u
the grand amendment for fourth grand amendment for the floor improvements project. Any questions about that? Mayor, we have do have to add there are just a couple of things we have to add. just us being efficient and getting things in. Then
things come after we send it out and we just hate, you know, taking it down, the agenda, taking it down, then putting it back up. It just confuses people. Um, so we need to add um approval um of the commission to appoint Mayor Sam Peeles
as mayor prom under consent agenda. Now, do we have to do that? Would it be the Yeah, I asked that question yesterday because I we have a resolution provides for the turnover pretty regularly, but it does require the action to be done by motion. Okay.
And do you want me to tell you the other two things we'll need to add or get to that? Uh, you can go ahead. Okay. So, um we need also um approval of a resolution for a resolution for the uh
local mitigation strategy plan and it's a collaboration in the entire county and all the cities. You have it here. Um and to adopt it, we have to pass a resolution and then send it to the city.
A resolution of a resolution. Yeah, you're exactly right. You're absolutely right. Now, so this plan here is uh it includes all the cities within Bay County uh in to in terms of our strategy
for local local mitigation. Anyone on the commission against putting that on the consent? Made it to the consent agenda. And and um this one here uh will probably um not go on the consent agenda. It will go
on just your your regular agenda is the approval of resolution uh 2025456. And I'll give you this later um to uh for the the commission to approve us putting um on the trim notice the notice
of storm water rights. M that for number 20 that'll be under new business. So we issue new business. New business. Yes. Number 20. Any objections added in that for number
one? Um, looking at our old business agenda item 13, we asked city attorney to bring this back to us. Um, ordinance regarding recreational vehicles. It is a
significant revision but I think a significant simplification that addresses the key points I heard y'all discussing um at your meetings. So, it starts with uh your current regulation, um but allows in addition to the
backyard RV RVs, just RVs, uh to be parked in the driveway so long as they're not in any portion of the rideway, um they're maintained in operable condition and they are properly licensed and not used for living or sleeping purposes. If there was more you want to add to this, we certainly can,
but this is the highlights. Can you say backyard or sideyard? There was not there was not consensus on sideyard so it didn't can we talk about that? I thought the sideyard would be another because it's just giving them another option if they're in the rightway that
they can either park in the back or the side. I like the side better than the front. I Yeah, I just figure they should exhaust all option. If they have an option to put it on the sideyard, they're still in violation. That gets ticky tacky. You know what I mean? So, you're saying take
it off the No, just add the sideyard. Side or backyard. So, backyard, sidewire, sideyard, or driveway as long as not in the right way is what I'm hearing you say. Mhm. Now, sideyard, backyard, or driveway. Now, would they be able to put one in
each place at that point? Potentially. Yeah. And now, this only addresses RV. So, if they had a trailer that qualified as a recreational vehicle, whether it was a van or a big motor home, um if they had more than one, yes, this would allow them to park more than one. People just
have one. Yeah. The odds of multiple people having operational multiple operational RVs probably don't live in Lana. Maybe a handful. Uh one thing I noticed is um on page 23 it still says Panama City.
How about that? So, what's the definition of right away? Because I know I've heard like behind the power poles, they're not power poles. It's so many feet from the road. It's not always from the center of the road. I mean, it could be offset for
sure. Yeah. So, right. There's some some places that the center of the road is not the center of the um the rideway and you know, the road may be offset. saying we're going to measure 30 ft from the center line. That's not 100% accurate. Okay. That's rule of thumb.
Telephone poles is usually what we use as a guide or water meter. Or a water meter in the yard is the two that we would use. Amy, yes. So, rightways generally include they're not limited to a particular pave right away is the
point I want to make. They usually extend beyond it. um to include sidewalks, sometimes landscaping, sometimes ditches, culverts. Uh so y'all can define it however you want, but the point I want to make is that it's not just the vehicular paved right away. It
also includes some of the pedestrian and other rightway improvements or facilities that support that the use of the vehicular rightway. Isn't rightway just the area that the city owns. So you could base it off of your property if you're in a platted subdivision. Yeah.
Yeah. I'm not sure that that is that true for every city street. Is it marked off of is every city street marked off of a platted city subdivision or is rightway different in certain areas? Not not a subdivision but a plat. Yes. Okay. The 1911 plat specifies the
way in the historic part of Okay. So the rightway is defined then. Okay. Yeah. Um so they can or cannot see. So, so, so just the caveat there had to park on their own property. That's exactly right. You're exactly right. Correct. And outside. So, hold
on. Hold on. What What do we What do All right. So, it's right away. All right. Let the owner figure out what their rightway is or isn't, I guess, is what cuz everybody's rightway might be different. My concern is if you're putting an RV in a driveway and it's encompassed in the
right of way, you're going to put code enforcement. I mean, then we give them a violation of the right side or back. Side or back. Cuz it would have to be a really short RV to fit in a driveway where you're not
infringing on the rightway. It's okay. See the man. So, mayor, the one of the complaints um for many residents is that yes, long RVs were in the um I think you received this as well
um on sidewalks that they had to go around the sidewalk in order to walk. I I know you probably have received this this as well. And so that would mean that um that's part of our rightway. They would they have that option of parking on the side and the back. um
some rightaways the city has abandoned. So then that's different than what the city owns. So we need to just make sure we all understand that. I think cuz you know people are going to come to us and say um well what's the
right way? And since it's it can vary from property to property probably the best thing to do is just refer them to code enforcement and they can come out and take a look at it. They could just type in property and Bay County property appraisers look at their line. They could. Well, but it's not
those are inaccurate. That's actually not super reliable. You could say if you want to give some certainty cuz my survey may be different than it would. You could you could say 10 ft from the vehicular parks driveway so long as it's more than 10 ft away from the paved rideway. vehicular rideway used by the
public the travels and public not your driveway. So that way you keep a visibility window and if they if their driveway is long enough to support the size or length of their Yeah. code enforcement can measure it with a 10ft stick. Yeah.
Can you say can you say private property and then that would be private property versus uh not necessarily because the city may have an easement a rightaway easement a little I just just saying just it would
still be both private property at that point. So no yeah cuz we're talking about private property all together though right and the goal is to get it all entirely on the private property. Yeah, entirely on practice, but maintain that visibility window. My biggest concern is that we're not
sending code enforcement out all the time because people are over the sidewalk and that's where we're getting our calls from. So, I don't know how to clarify that. I guess the only way to clarify that is just not to park on the drive. You could say not in the driveway
or you could say not within that 10 ft that's closest to the paved paved right. here in violation. That Miss Vicki, that that is my concern of what we already are sitting on the 300 plus that are in
driveways and to guess the majority of them are going to be in violation. If we're talking the city right away into that driveway, they're going to be in violation. It's a yard or backyard. Unless you have a 12 or 14 mini light or
something like that, it's going to have to go in the sideyard or the backyard. So, I'm just making you aware of this because I know the size of some of these that are in the driveway. So, and there are going to be many instances where we're going to have to pay a surveyor to go out to market
right away because they're not going to believe that the sidewalk or the water meter is a water. I'm going to ask staff if you're going to speak, will you please come to the microphone because people who come back and listen to this can't hear the conversations that are going on. I'm just I I I'm will make you
understand that the ones that I know that are out there, the 300 plus that are in driveways are going to infringe upon the city right away. So, code enforcement will have to address this. And so that's why I want you to be very clear on this that if you if you're
saying the driveway then and and they can't go on the right ofway of that driveway, they're going to be in violation. So I mean a clear signal me personally would say to put it on the side or in the backyard and then you don't have that
argument because what Chris just referred to is if they object to it, we'll have to hire a surveyor to come out and find the exact rightaway where it sits. So, just be aware of, you know, where we're going the way it's written.
All right. So, we're we're adding side as as part of that. Do we want to keep driveway in there or then or just like, you know, sideyard as the alternative to backyard? All right, think about it. We'll come back to
you as you say yes to the sides. If you say yes to the side yard, isn't it the still the problem with the rightway? Wouldn't you have to clarify the rightway on the sideyard as well? Depends on if they're depends on if their parcel falls
onto a corner area. for example, over at like um Maine and 17th where 17th Street is unimproved. That's right away through there. So if they park on it's their sideyard because they face Main Avenue and I may have Main Avenue wrong and their side is on 17th Street. Well,
they're parking on their sideyard, but we do have rightaway that goes through there. So yes, that is there are some not for every parcel, but for some of those parcels, it will be very tricky to define exactly where their sideyard is in our rightway. We will spend a lot of
time having to survey or mark for those in question. Seems the easiest thing to do is to leave it as is. It just becomes more challenging. As is says right away, too, right? No, as is. Just like park it
in the backyard. which means you would find all of the driveways in violation. So all driveways are out of question. It's a liberty issue. I mean people could put something in their driveway if
they wanted if it's not in the rightway. All right. See so two on that 25 discussing possible resolution. you looking at the development agreement with the island?
Yeah. So, uh, two comments, two things I want to point out to you. On page 40, there is a blank that we need to fill in either today or at the public hearing regarding the dedication of public parking spaces. We are requiring, we the city are requiring, yeah, we need a year
um, we're requiring that upon completion of phase two that they dedicate public parking spaces. Um and so you the the trigger is upon completion of phase two of the project or December 31st, 2000 blank, whichever occurs first.
Um we don't I I don't know that we have a good handle on when they will finish phase 2. It may be that they do phase one and then the market tanks and they don't do anything for a while. If you put something that says I 2028, they're still required to dedicate those parking spaces and have them available even if
they decide not to go forward with phase 2. So that's the that's the analysis in terms of determining the state. Um it's to make sure they get dedicated even if phase 2 stalls for some reason. So do they have a timeline? Right now, they're
only committed, I think, to getting phase one done in the next two to five years. They're building roads and stuff first. Yeah. Amanda, the timeline for phase one is to get it completed within 2 to 5 years, right?
I'd have to look it up. I don't recall. Okay. They're doing the marina first is what I know. any but can pick any date you want as again the pressure point to make sure that if nothing else happens at least that dedication of public parking does
um so you don't have to decide right now but we do need we do need to fill in that blank before the conclusion of the public hearing on Tuesday and then the other thing I want to bring to your attention on pages 34 and 35 um I have added the language regarding
buffers and notices so page 34 the very top it requires ers the developers to give notice to all new property owners that their property where it does abuts existing industrial properties outside. Um that was the proposed language that
was on the table before you when you adopted the overlay district and this language was incorporated in the overlay district. On page 35 you've got the buffer language. Um again this is the same buffer language that we included in the uh overlay district. Um, the
attorney for Merrick has pointed out to me I have left out the world word industrial at the end of the first sentence. So, I'll be plugging that back in so that it matches exactly. Um, the attorney for Marina Island has indicated that not these inserts are not necessary
because they're already in the overlay district. Um, that may be true, but there's a lot of language here that's also in the overlay district. So, they're not asking to remove. So, I'll just leave that there. Better be safe than sorry. Yes. There's no dispute.
So we're pushing on with the right out right on the heels of the overlay. We're doing development agreement. Is this normal process or are we kind of pushing the development agreement? So generally the development agreement and they should there's no reason they shouldn't have run in sync. They just didn't get timed that way for this adoption. Okay.
raised an eyebrow on me is that hey, are we rushing into this development agreement without really looking at and putting all the teeth in it we need to uh well that's completely up to you. Again, the effect of this development agreement is different than the overlay district. The overlay district was policy. It has to do with the
development of land. This is a contract. It still speaks to the development of land, but the purpose it serves, this get this also gets recorded in the public records so that if they sell any portion of the property, that new developer gets put on notice of all of their obligations, but also this secures
their entitlements for 30 years, which is a big value ad. Yeah. And it helps them pre-ell, right? So, um, so what we're doing here though, but are we are we making sure that they're on the hook? I mean they they build the roads, they
build they build the the infrastructure. This does this. But I I want to also make certain the development agreement required by statute or authorized by statute only requires as its for its contents what the city is
going to cap in terms of height density use high density use and duration. if there's any timelines. Those are the statutory requirements. All of this other stuff we have added is more in the nature of a public private partnership and that's actually not what this agreement is supposed to do. It's really
just supposed to vest certain rights and obligations. Um it's a that would be a different document. We have built in some public necessity. Um we've required some timelines to make sure that the public facilities are dedicated or at least determined by date certain which
is your opportunity and window to do that. Um, we have agreed to cooperate them cooperate with them on the development of you signage and the rails to trails, but we haven't we haven't made really any promises on behalf of the city other than we're going to honor
these development rights. Um, with regard to infrastructure, we do require the infrastructure to be completed by the end of phase one or that um, we also require an escrow that them to put 10% of the estimated cost of that infrastructure. So on every phase, well,
we want we want all of it for phase one. We want all of the infrastructure completed by the end of phase one. We want the escros, but the next phase next phase they put 10% down to and when it's complete, well, the idea is that the roads and the utilities are in place by the end of phase one for all of it.
Yeah. So 10% is that normally the rate that you would ask? I don't say I don't know that there is a normal rate to ask for in this situation. This was something this was
to give the city something uh they pay mobility impact fee too the mobility fee. Yes, they'll pay the mobility fee based on the based on the entire project. Yeah. As
they build or in phases. Yeah. In phases as they build. Yeah. the only um should that be in there? Well, the one that we outlined the the impact fees that the city is weighing. That's exactly correct.
I guess that was one of my concerns was the 10%. I is that enough? And I I don't even know the answer to that question. That's a business decision, not a legal one. The fact that we're requiring escrow, I think, is a good recommendation because it gives the city some ability to finish and come in and
complete the essential infrastructure. However, if the project never gets completed, you may there may be no need to improve ghost town improve any infrastructure and finish anything. Yeah. So, there's a lot of infrastructure at play here. 10% is going to be a hefty number
when that number gets determined. Um it's still only 10% of whatever the number is that we think to build it. So, if you want to increase it, again, that's a business decision. Um I think the requirement for some money deposited for the infrastructure is um a good tool
to make the developer and future developers um understand the city is watching and that's important to us. Does the developer have any idea how much it's going to cost for each phase? That way we can get an idea of what the 10% is. They probably don't have an
idea, do they? I I bet as they I bet they don't yet. If they do, I have to partner with Amanda. Do they have any idea what information? Well, not the interest, but the project with the I only ask questions that the
city requires us to ask for the things they need like development orders or overlays, their business um thing. That's kind of like that I wouldn't ask their private stuff like they said they were so close to getting to the development phase. I just like
they are they are from from what they're telling me they are waiting to submit a development order once this is all gone through they anticipate submitting a development order within the next I would say 8 weeks. Um but I'm assuming I I I don't know whether that's going to
be phase one and or part of phase one and the marina because what they kept telling me was the marina was going to be first. So, I don't know if they're going to do the some of the other stuff in phase one with that development order or not, but I haven't asked them how much money they're spending on anything.
I mean, you understand what I'm getting at. It's like if we have an idea what the project's going to cost, we can get an idea what 10% amount would be. And would that be think that would be enough to cover anything if this went south? I can It's
never going to be enough to cover. It's never going to be enough to cover. It's enough to get the developers attention that this is a priority of the city and give you a little bit of leverage to finish up the most important parts that they may leave undone. I just want to um can I also just sorry can I also just remind you all that a development order
is only good for 12 months. So when they do come for a development order they have to have all that infrastructure in within 12 months. Thank you. I got one more question. Mhm. This is I just reading it over it. I mean, as
you're you know how Dr. Horton, we have that stipulation where someone could come in and build a bunch of homes and have their own inspections with the city with the with the state required that and they get a discount inspections.
Is is that a is that a good idea or a bad idea when they're doing this as far as because I'm pretty sure if they build at that at that rate, they'll probably have private inspections. So, are we going to want to put a caveat in there or something to say that we're
going to inspect it? I don't know that we can't do that. State law allows them to do private inspections. I don't know that we can mandate. I doubt they'll use a private for this type of development. Yeah, I think they're probably going to have trouble finding local people. Um, I
don't know who they use out on 38, but I think they're the kind of people that can be using to develop it. Um, and I doubt very much that they will be using local private providers to instead of going through the actual process because it's a different type of product. I
mean, that that's just you can always ask them. I mean I I don't know whether someone is coming um to the meeting but that's something that I can always ask them for you um you know try and get an idea of whether they were thinking about using private providers. I doubt it very
much cuz it's a high-end product. Right. Any other questions or suggestions for this? My biggest concern I brought up last time was the impact fees. Um I know we talked about it. Um, it's hard to gauge it
because I've never done this since I've been on the commission and um, I looked at the ones that you sent me and it's not really an apple comparison unfortunately. So, so like for storm water, they're not going to pay any impact fees. Is that is
that fair? And so one of the things I understand what they're trying to say. They're trying to say they're all the storm water is going to be on Marina Island, but also there's going to be the road the road, right? And the road that's going to be built from 390 to
Marine Island, which is going to add an impervious area. So, should it be 100% exempt from impact, you know? Yep. If it's going to be 100% exempt, they'll have to design their storm water to their storm water facilities will still be required, but
they'll have to capture it all as long as that remains private and there's no impact to the city system. Right. And they have to maintain it. That's right. But my question is the road that they're building from 390 to Marina Island, that's going to add impervious area and that's going to add storm water system.
We're going to be the ones right now. So, is it really 100% exempt? Well, do you want to build out? Um, shall not be. So, the the road for the the road is not within the overlay district, does it? Or
is it? No, I don't think so. I don't know. Okay. So, we can the the property only includes land within the overlay district. It wouldn't include that 390 property then. Okay. But you see what I'm getting at? I mean, even though I understand what you're
saying, it doesn't it's not on the property, the project itself, there's a little bit of the the city when it comes to storm water. There's a little nook of it that's in the overlay that's on the other side of the water. It's like
toward the end of 10th Street that's in the overlay that that last part of 10th Street going over and that affects, you know, homes that are already there. Um the overlay map looked like it came
out and over the bridge a little bit because they had they they wanted to build along that way a little bit. All right. So do you want to with regard to the storm water facilities they're meant to uh design. Do you want to require them to design their storm water to accommodate the new impervious space
they're adding to that 39B internship? No. I mean my that wasn't really my question. My question was impact fees. Was it impact fees themselves? Does that mean they should be 100% exempt from storm water impact fees of the water should not should it's
going to affect people that reside here already? Right. Well, I I mean I can take out I I don't I that was a question. It wasn't, you know, a statement. I just What do you guys think? If you're all concerned about that 390
road and the impacts to the storm water system, we can acknowledge that there will be some to that to that piece of right away for which they will not be exempt from storm water fees if you would like. I mean there is a way to address it if it is a concern. Let's
address time. All right. Any other I know commissioner has his thoughts any other input on a particular issue where all right you want to revise or leave it as I think we need to revise it. That's just my opinion. Yeah, I think we
should. Okay. Um the park and Rex one made sense to me. um law enforcement and fire rescue. My question on that was, do we want to put a definitive timeline on this or just leave it as a vague
statement of I think it's like after phase one or something? Well, I see it says 70% in phase one, right? Yep. Yeah, you're right. So, I don't know if that if that will fall in that 2 to 5 year time. I do understand what you're
saying. Or do we want to just leave it like that? Cuz they're not going to go to phase two until they totally finish phase one, right? You see, cuz like let's say they do 60% of phase one, like a let's skip that. Let's go start the
phase two. You know, they could you know what I'm getting at. I mean, I know what you're trying to be logical. It wouldn't make sense, but I mean, they could say, "Hey, we we built enough over here. Let's start on phase two, and now we're about phase one." They could give us the okey do like that,
but they would have to do a development order. Every time that they do something, you remember you have to approve it. So, can we development? So, let's say they so the development orders are by project, right? So, like project one, I have a development order. Then,
let's say they they send a development order for project two. Can we say now if we want you to finish project one first or want you to do at least 70% of the project? Usually the development order is by phase they may split it up to phase 1 a one 1b but it would be by
phase um and so it would come always always come to you first. So if they brought something to you for a phase and they hadn't finished the first phase I feel like and Amy you can um tell me if I'm correct in this. I feel like you could with justification not approve
that second development order if they hadn't met what you required on the first development order. Yeah. I'm going to add language to that effect. Yeah. But if we could put Yeah. Cuz it's going to we're talking 2 to 5 years. We're not going to be here. You may not be here to
remember. Oh yeah, we can do XYZ. All right. So, I think it would be good to put it on um to put it on paper and specifically if you're concerned about the law enforcement and fire rescue that, you know, you can't go to phase two until that's actually done.
So, whether it is the 60% party and they decide they want to start phase two, that you can't go to phase two until that's actually that's actually done. So, so I think I think that's the bigger concern. I don't care if you start phase two or phase four, but if that isn't
built, then we don't go to phase because that would because if I'm not saying they're going to do that or anyone's going to do that, but that's possibility. But let's say they did, it could really put our our um fire and law enforcement in a predicament where it's
like, wow, we don't have another spot over there for a fast response. Yeah, that's kind of where I was looking at that with that. So, and um and then the water and wastewater collection, it says reimbursement shall
be capped at 50%. Um I want to explain what 50% you can come waste water and wastewater collection. Which page are we on? That is number four. The cost reimbursement agreement. Oh yeah. When they oversize
something. So, I doubt that will come into play here, though, because very likely they're going to run their own dedicated force main probably across the bayou from from what it looks like. Um, so I doubt that anybody in the future will be able to tie into it, but it's the same thing with what we did for um
Jake's Landing um where they upsize and in the future, you know, they can get credit back for anybody that ties into it in the future. But so when it says reimbursement, she'll be capped at 50%. Right. You don't reimburse them for 100% of it. Is that 50% of the entire property? 50% of what is upsized. What
is upsized? The cost difference. It's 50% of what you collect on the upside. Right. Right. I can explain it. 50% is reimbursement through the impact fees. If somebody ties on and they pay 2,000 impact fees,
then a,000 would go to the developer. it would be under a separate written agreement on what the total dollar of reimbursement would be. Okay. Let's say they needed a 6 inch line. We ask them to put in a 8 in. That extra capacity is
basically reserved for us. Okay. So we say go from 6 to 8 in then it would be capped at 50% for that upgrade. Correct. Just the additional upgrade, not for the whole line, right? Just the extra cost.
Yes. And remember again, that's a different agreement. I think I sent you um um example one, the cost recovery. Yeah, that would be an agreement that we've done that several times. Meal Bayou, Jake's Landing, Marina Bay.
So, okay. Appreciate it. All right. Uh, and I know Amy, you highlighted here on page 40 for us with completion of page two of the project or a date. Did we want to put a date in there or do we want to leave
that to the completion of phase two? I think a a date would be good to sort of give everyone a projection what should be done or progress in development with the date. I don't think we need to leave any
blanks. Yeah. So, is there a suggested date December 31? Should we first are we going to have anyone from here on? Is anyone coming on Tuesday that we could ask a question? Yeah, but but the purpose of the state
is it's something that the de it's not within the developers control. Yeah, but we could kind of pick their brains on what they actually think it's going to take and then, you know, read the room on if they're lying or not. I'm just going to Well, and just pick a date that makes sense for the city. I mean, if you're going to continue to do a Fourth
of July fireworks show out there and you know you're going to need parking and you want that parking no matter what by date certain. Yeah. say what that date certain is and the that gives predictability to the developer that if he's got if he's constructing the marina at that same time he's going to have to make arrangements or get that marina
constructed so we can dedicate those parking spaces and there's not conflict right if we're creating a tension on purpose yeah right but it is nice to talk to the people and see we can ask them but they're going to still give us somewhat an ambiguous answer cuz based
on the market the money right he'll want something at least 10 years from now so that there's not an early trigger, right? Um but it's in I think the city's best interest to have an earlier date as opposed to Julie cuz how long have we been talking about this project? I mean I know before commission. So that's what
we're saying like this has actually been 8 years now 2017 and then before that they were trying to work since 2015 I think getting property from the air force. Yeah. Yeah. So it's taking 8 years just
to get to this piece of paper. So yeah, why after phase two? Why not after phase one? Just out of curiosity if they're doing the marina first. I don't remember the genesis of that. Um phase two may have been what
they asked for. Um and I may have countered with the Okay, I want to date certain uh but I I don't remember. I I don't remember. I think sounds like to me we need to get more information from the developer as far as their timeline. That's the calendar I was
getting. I know that it's for us to force, but if they truly think it's going to take like 10 years to get through phase two, we wouldn't want to be like, "All right, 2027." I mean, we've signed a what a 30-year I mean, we're signing a 30-year agreement. So, that's
their their long range projection, so it could be 10 years. I mean, we can ask them, but you know, 30-year agreement, they're looking at they're going to give us the longest date possible. Um, I once I make these changes, I'll have to send all the parties a new version of this agreement so that they are aware of it.
I'd like to go ahead and put a date in there so that they could be ready to respond to it on Tuesday night. Oh, I see what you're saying. Pleasure. What do you think? 10 years? I don't know. 2025. Say 2030. 2030.
Give him something to work towards. Five years. Okay. Okay. What do you think, commission? I'm fine with five years. December. Okay. Five years. Okay. December. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Any other? The only other thing I have was under the law
enforcement fire rescue I forgot was it says um the developer and city agree that fire station when the project will be necessary as a project development. The developer agrees that a minimum of 1 acre shall be set aside to the use of fire station built by the city or developer. Right. So the timeline as
provided no development order shall be issued for phase 2 until the facility is constructed. that may force a conversation about who is in a position to construct it and with what funds. Okay. So, that can still be negotiated then. Yeah. We don't hammer that out
now. The date or it'll be like middle. Yep. That's true. Right. Well, I mean, if they if they can't get a if they can't get development orders for phase two, they'll be highly motivated to come to some resolution, whether with their
finances or if there's some way the city can bond or get reimbursed. I mean, it will force a conversation to see that that facility gets constructed, but we don't have to have the answer as to exactly when and exactly how, right, but we're but also we're saying that they're
not totally responsible for building it either. We're not letting them off the hook entirely. They may they may if they if they want their phase 2 development order and they can't get it until that facility is constructed, they may it incentivizes them to problem solve with the city as to how to get that
constructed. Can they do it with their crews that are already mobilized out there? Um does the city go through its do you cost share it somehow? You'll have to problem solve it, but it gives you the ability to force that conversation. Does that work to our advantage to do that that way? Assuming
having the facility constructed is the most important thing, it forces that conversation. It may if that is the most important thing, it also may force the city to find a way to pay for it. But we're giving your alternative though is to amend this if it doesn't require them to build it. It's a 30-year agreement
and some of this as the project gets started, you may decide doesn't make sense and you want to change it or make it stronger. So, what are you thinking, Commissioner Fel? I said we're giving them concessions on giving them concessions on impact fees. So you think I think we should language it where they
build it. Plus they they want the they want the aesthetics and the facade. What if we build an eyesore out there? They'll be done. You know this is true. Yeah. Going to make money. We're in a position. We're in a position now to
build ask for the moon. That's why I, you know, like Commissioner Vander was bringing up, I was trying to prevent another penalty situation. Yeah. Yeah. Got to build the roads
infrastructure in the in the annex. They'll want to do it by the developer. Does everybody want it by developer? Okay. them giving them the options. Now we have victory whatever they pulled right
like a little shack. Well, they'll get a development order. But um I was just going to I I I actually had a question because there's a lot of units going to go out there. It's going to bring a lot of taxes into the city. So the city um is responsible pro for
you know health and safety. So ordinarily we provide fire services to the city. Um they're going to bring in a lot of tax revenue. We're still responsible for providing like health and safety is our primary that's why
we're here as a city is for health and safety. So my question is about the taxes. Does some of the taxes that that tax money that we get does some of that go to health and safety, fire, that kind of thing? Do you have a fire assessment? No.
No, it goes into the general fund. It goes in the general fund. Okay. But we still kind of have that. So, I know they're building all that stuff out there, but the city is going to have to pay insurance and there has to be a a response time by the buyers buyer and police in order for them to keep their
insurance down for everybody. So, it's on the developer about as far as I'm concerned. That's what he's saying. Thank you. Yeah, they are going to build. Yeah, they are. But the other question I have is do we get to determine what it's going to be designed like or Yeah. It says right now the size design location
shall be determined by mutual agreement of city and developer. We can leave it there. So yes on the hook to build. Yeah. All right. You want to build? Yes. They want to word it. Don't say hey
we'll negotiate. It already has the language already says that developers shall have the option to design and construct the fire station. They would like to control the process, but the city wants to control the timing of things. Right. Yeah. That's all we're trying to when it's bid. Yeah. I thought it I thought it was
worded as such that we know that we were going to have to come to them and say, "Hey, I didn't think we were the way you were talking. It didn't sound like they were on the hook to build it. They're on the hook to at least dedicate the land." Again, my fear is that they they start
phase one, they never finish it. And so I still wanted the city to be able to get the dedication of land even if it the project failed. Well, let's word it so they're they know they're building it. Okay. I hate to make you burn wood, but Well, no, it just it we change it from
the from the developer has the option to design and construct to the developer has the obligation um to construct. That was all. Sounds good. That's enough. Um, any other No, that's good stuff.
Anyone else? All right, moving on to it 15 uh point to the city's adjustments 937 or any questions for Amanda about
that? Who's responsible for appointing this one? It's my turn. Okay. Yeah. He gave my turn away. I thought this was still seat one because it was Miranda who appointed the last one and she he did seat one already. It was it was it was seat two's
turn and I gave it to and he gave it to Judgement to Miss Judy. But one of the people going out one of the seats you already appointed sets down, right? So wouldn't it still be one of you two? Well, my question is is that Miranda was brought in before we had the news or she
was on the sweetheart. All right. Then yeah, you're next. Okay. All right. You have any any suggestions that you want us to consider, Commissioner?
Um, I I kind of Yeah. Well, I mean, I know Cory. I know Miss V, but when I got to um um Miss um I Miss News. I I didn't talk to her yet,
but I saw Wesley Lockwood and I saw his his resume and stuff. So, I gave him a call this morning and he's already called me back, but I was on my way here. But his his resume looks pretty darn good as far as I mean, is he the one that worked for the Department of
Transportation? Yeah. And he's got a and he's he's in construction and so I mean that's who I'm leaning leaning toward. But I'm going to talk to everybody before Tuesday. So, but just to give you a little snip
of where I'm going. He said he said who is that person again? It's the last application. All right. On paper, he looks good now. Yeah. I want to meet him. I don't know if he's like, you know, could be an
elementary student. Who knows? Number 16. Um, this is in regards to signing an amendment to the contract with Rain South Solutions. Any questions for the director of public works and utilities?
Yes. So, I know it's 10 cents per gallon. How many gallons are we typically right now? So, right now we're hauling about 80 80 to 100 loads a month at 6,500 gallons of truckload. Are we
doing it the old way now? So, we're back to doing it the old way. So, the center fuge is down again. So, did we spend a bunch of money? We did. We did. So, it's like I was talking to Mr. Walker before the meeting and the best analogy I can use for this thing is that your
grandmother bought a Ford Pinto brand new and drove it for a few years and parked it and then the grandkid wants to drive now. And so, you put a bunch of money into it to get it going, but every time you drive it, something happens to it. So it's every time our center fuge gets up and running for a few months
with a for if you get rear ended it blows up. So the center fus is down. It's back in the shop. We are hauling liquid as we did before. Our our sledge hauler has a
belt press they can bring in. Um this is not to save a bunch of money. Um, so don't anticipate that this is going to be a huge money savings by approving this amendment, but it helps us operationally keep our head above water, no pun intended, but it keeps us able to move the sludge as it's supposed to and
keeps the plant operating. Um, as we come into the hot months of the summer, we have to waste a lot more sludge and so the sludge production will drastically increase. So, is this going to eventually get fixed? So, the interview, it's in the shop. They're going through it to determine exactly what it's going to
cost again to keep it rolling. Uh but we also when you approve the midyear budget, we put money in the budget for a screw press. Um waiting on some numbers back from that, see if it's feasible to purchase one. Um and then we'll present those options. Best alternative in the interim. Yes, sir. All right.
Thanks for the good news. Got to ask. So I mean you're spending a little bit a little bit more than what you're spending to haul right now to to to concentrate more and more. Basically that's what this this little Yeah. So do
what the centipede would do. So hauling in liquid form. So you fill a tanker truck up 6,500 gallons. Yeah. They drive off and 4 hours later they come back and you haul another 6,500 gallons. This belt press sets up and it runs 12 hours a day dewatering the sludge and it can
fill up like one dump truck or one bed of a truck is about four to six liquid truckloads that it takes you to get right. You're not just you're fighting yourself in circles all day. So, um, now the reason I smiled at you
was if if we if we got, you know, if we got years down the road and we closed the plant and had the other one, you wouldn't even be worried about this right now. Amen. And it wouldn't be a cost city, would it? Be built in on on building and
services. Yes, sir. Just want to see. Yes, sir. 17, discussion of the comprehensive plan. Um, and we do we are looking at also adding not for this meeting. Um, but within the next meeting
or so um also adding some discussion towards the uh universal or the unified land development plan as well. start to discuss that in coordination with the uh the comprehensive plan in addition to our ordinances that we're working on
too. So, a lot of a lot of things for us to uh to consider in the next um in the next few meetings. But in regards to discussion of the comprehensive plan, we I know that we given staff um the direction to go ahead and submit what they needed to submit or we as a city
needed to submit to the state. Um they received that back. They're making those changes. So now we have our time frame in which we can begin looking through the comprehensive plan um as as well. Is there any direction um or suggestion
from staff city manager on how we should be proceeding at the beginning of our discussion? So Amanda and I actually uh and Bobby met yesterday with a couple of um bullet points we want to share with you. Amanda, you can come up.
Thank you. Um so I think that I have actually a copy here for each of you of the required and optional elements of the comprehensive plan. Um so I think the first thing that I want to stress is that um the only reason we
have a comprehensive plan is because we have to have one by the state requires us to have one. Um what goes in there on the whole is what the state requires us to put in there. we so there are things in there that we have to have in there.
You are able to put other things in there but there's a format by which you need to um follow. Um it also I've highlighted the um areas that are the things that we have to have the required elements as you go through here when you
see a little bit of a highlight that's because they're the things that are required. Um on line 8 it states it is not the intent of this part to require the inclusion of implementing regulations in the comp plan. So the comp plan does not have the rules for
actually implementing things. They are in the uldc. So the you can change it's local level. What is in the comp plan has to be implemented through the uldc but we can
also put our own stuff in thec so that if we want to give a variance on it we can or if we want to change it we can at your level at the local level. Anything that's in the comp plan that's in the DC you cannot change at the local level. You cannot give a variance on. So just
bear that in mind. Whatever you want to put in there that isn't in there, if it is approved by the state, you then have to apply it to everybody. You cannot give a variance. You cannot change it. You cannot add conditions. That's the main thing. The comp plan stays the
same. It's state level. Anything we put in there, we have to support by um surveys. It has to be based upon uh relevant and appropriate data. may include but not limited to survey,
studies, community goals and vision. So and usually it will either fall into one of the elements that is already there or we will create a new element which will have to have its own goals and policies and objectives. My recommendation is
that the person who is assisting us now with the changes that were required by the state for the ORC report that once you kind of you know get going with what you would like to see in there is to have him come in. He used to work at
that at that state department so he knows it inside out. He still knows people who work there. So, and he is always writing comp plan stuff for cities, but now he's on his own. He's cheaper. He used to work for Wilson Miller. Then Stantech took over Wilson Miller. So, he worked for Stantech for
years, but he's on his own now, so he's cheaper. Uh, my recommendation is that at some point you have him come in and do a workshop with you or look at what it is you've set out. It's up to you whatever stage just to assist you um
help you focus and also he can take charge of actually writing it so it's formatted in the way that the state will accept. Thank you. So, one of the things we did talk about was that um you may want to go in and
insert some things in there and they may sound good, but when we bring in this person, they may say, you know, that just will not work for this particular uh comp plan. So, um here's another way of working it or taking it out. So we
don't want to hold you up and we want you to go you move forward and start you know making changes where you think we need to make those changes and then this person can come back and give you guidance as to why you can or cannot do those
things that that was our thought process if you want to do something different surely do it. Um, I think we'll go through it and then once we completed it, have a workshop with that individual or whatever else you all would suggest,
um, then tailor it from there. I know I won't be involved, but in in reading it the last couple of days, you can tell it's been written by different people. I think it needs to be consistent and
it's a lot of it is grammatically incorrect. I know that's the school teacher in me coming out, but I mean some are just giant run-on sentences. Uh, some are broken down into shorter sentences. Some areas are listed
and some start with verbs. The other one starts with an adjective. You know, it's just grammatically incorrect. Now, that's not even talking about some of it's outdated. Okay. Yeah. Would you like I
mean I know you're you're rolling off the commission, but you know, we could commission you to make grandma for No, you can commission me to go home and be with my grandchild. Well, we're not going to be there all the time,
right? But I do agree with her that it probably has been written by several people. You can hear the voices. And so having that one person after you have suggested your changes to come in and do it, I think is going to be very consistent and um probably a lot more
explicit if people understand it better. All right. Um so are there any other questions about the comp plan? All right. Yeah, for the grammatical way just copy and
paste in chat GPT and say fix all the mistakes or just have AI just rewrite the whole thing. AI. Did we skip over the long term one at the end? No, that's going to be added for number 20. Oh, okay. Yeah. Um and uh
of course we'll just be discussing the non-binding referendum for question two concerning the library the northwest regional library. So uh non binding referendum question number one failed uh or got nos and then question two got
yeses. So, as I'm reading that, yes, we want something, you know, to go to to read books, but we don't want, you know, to have to build building in excess of $2 million to do that. Uh, and we also want
to have something in coordination with North Coast Florida um regional library as well as part of that. So, um, so yeah, there's a a no and a yes with that. I guess our question, you know, although it's nonbinding and we can say
it's nonbinding, there's an expectation there um for us to do something moving forward and providing a space for our community to come together and in a library type setting that's connected with the Northwest Florida Regional Library.
So, city manager, any any thoughts on on how we move forward with that considering that? Um, so Northwest Florida Regional Library has reached out to us again to meet and I think you may they wanted um the mayor to actually be
at this meeting as well. So I I was going to wait after today to set up a meeting to just chat and talk about so we could hear and then discuss with the commission as well. Um you know I do feel like um that we've already put the
infrastructure in place here at the s senior center. around me. That was one of the reasons we put that infrastructure into place there to utilize that that other area um as part of a build building um to accommodate um
a media center there. I think it it it works well. Um would there probably be some additions or just a few additions or to to make it work uh even better? probably, but I don't think it's going
to be um astronomical cost. Um and so if you would allow us just to do uh some estimates, pull together some estimates to see what that looks like and then bring it back to you.
Um I've had a lot of input from various seniors as uh because of the disruptions for example the voting but then they also threw in about the idea
of using it as a um a media center. Um they the seniors are very opposed to it. Interesting. and uh you know just I'm I'm just throwing out ideas. Okay. Yeah. Mhm. Uh what are
we using the old building for right up here? Um offices and uh really that's the commission area there once it gets finished and it's not very large to accommodate any type of Yeah. I
think really what we need to know is the scope of the size that that's that's what Yeah. Whatever. So before we make any type of decision, we need to know what the size is. Cuz if it's just like a small 15 by 15 room with some computers and then they order books that come in, we have a ton of options. But
if we are looking at a large scale thing, the options do real quick. And I I I definitely understand the senior's concern. Um this the seniors lease that place from the city. Um
that I mean that's a lease but the city actually owns the building um there and um just remember you know if you try to find somewhere else then you're going to have to put in infrastructure infrastructure for for that particular one is already done
um and um the seniors come Monday, Wednesday and Friday and so it may be something like we we had set up before um with the library you know Some days it was a short amount of time that was open or
it's set up after the seniors leave. Um or those days that they're not there, it opens. The library actually was like that had different hours. Um and so um I would just say you allow us to kind of do some investigation of that and as you
said bring it bring bring it back to you. the original library. Somebody was telling me that it was the money was donated or there were some restrictions as to the use and that's
the reason it was not connected to the county library because I don't have you remember that I mean I remember hearing that I think I remember Mr. Walker mentioned that previously is that we weren't connected with Northwest Florida Regional because
of the parameters in which we received the receive the receive the library for that. Um, however, I know the plan has been since since I've been part of a commission has been to reestablish a library on that that lot as well as
connecting with Northwest Florida Regional, which is why we could have a smaller library in scope. So, it was always meant to be smaller in scope um than probably what the original library was or at least have fewer um resources there. I think we're talking about maybe
15 to 20,000 or around 10,000 um on site before because of the connection with Northwest Florida Regional Library System. So, and if you remember, the finance committee did ask that we not spend money on rebuilding an entire um
library. That was their vote as well um that we brought to you all. So, yes, it's always had the idea of really a more of a media technology center more than anything because we can get books easily from Northwest Florida, Northwest
Florida Regional Library. So um we can do some um research and pull together something that we can bring back to you all. Yeah. But yeah, today there's no decision making, just discussion on how do we want staff to
proceed going forward as we're looking at those different options. All right. 19 discussion regarding chemical and lawn services. You know RFP for that? Yes,
I'm sure if you noticed the uh price, I'm not sure if it was even included in there. The price has uh gone up approximately $100,000, a little bit more over the last contract. And for me to explain this, I want to take you back for a second to our last contract that was awarded at the end of FY22. It was
for $153,000 and incorporated three property locations. It was mowing and chemical treatment on the mediums on 77, the baseball fields at Kane Griffin, and about 75% of the sports complex. Now,
aside from that, we have locations that we also need chemical treatment such as City Hall, Sheffield Park, Kinsaw Park, um various areas around town. And what we wanted to do this time is include those properties in under this new
contract. Um, in FY23 for those separate properties we spent about $28,000. FY24 we spent $45,000 and as of today for those same properties we're about 38,000 and we still have several months left in the year. So post 2020
it's just the cost of living everything is going up. So if it stays on the same trajectory that it is on those same properties in FY26, we will spend a little shy of 70,000. So I want to incorporate that into this contract.
So if I hear you correctly, it's cheaper to contract it out as opposed to us doing it. We're not capable of doing it. There are some restricted use pesticides. We would have to get licensing plus equipment. And honestly, we would probably have to hire another staff member. But it doesn't just include chemicals. It means mowing the
lawn. Well, the only thing there, the only thing different with lawn maintenance is we're adding the gymnasium and the boys and girls club to the mowing portion. Everything else would be chemical related. So, that's the only part that they're mowing. Then, we mow the rest. We mow the rest. Everything else we mow. They're going to
continue with the medians, with Kane Griffin sports fields, and then they will do 100% of the sports complex. And so the reason that there's one only one company that has the certifications necessary to Did I
misread that? No. I think what ended up happening is when they first came in, we had a scoring committee that scored and there were three that were considered responsive at the time. Um, one of those three was the company that we terminated their contract for poor poor
performance. So now we were down to two. Um, but when we started looking at licensing, there were some ambiguous stuff and we turned it over to Amy to try and clarify that. And Amy, I think based on requirements of the bid documents that precluded one of them.
When's our current contract expired? Uh, we we don't have a current contract. We we terminated their contract. I want to say it was at the end of December, possibly. That's right. Oh, yes. We staff has been I'm down two people right now taking care of those additional properties. So, all right. So, you you
were taking care of the stuff that they weren't contracted to do, right? Yeah. From a chemical standpoint, if you drive around, you can tell. Um I didn't see the the park in Bair. That's that's not in there yet.
It's not even constructed. It'll probably be a year out before it's finished and we can always add that. What I try to do is our our high visibility parks where we have huge events. Sheffield, City Hall, of course, the big field at Kinsaw. Um, to give you
an example of the price of this, last year, year before, last, we replaced $16,000 worth of sod on two baseball fields due to mole crickets. So, just the mole cricket treatment alone for the sports complex, I got quotes a month
ago, 11,000 to $23,000 just for one treatment. And we have to treat anywhere there's turf because m crickets eat from the roots. And you don't realize it until it's it's dead. Half as quick. And last year we had to treat Sheffield twice.
So you think this is a competitive price? Well, I mean, we can always put it out to rebid, but this is the cost that we live in today. The world we live in is where costs are increasing. Did we not include the scores in here? We only ultimately had one that was
responsive. Okay, just one. But we can surely My question would be so so I guess the second one the way I read it just meant like that they didn't provide some type of certific pro proof that they have some type of certification. So with a bid response
you had to supply the licenses and the personnel who had the appropriate licenses to carry out the work at the time you submitted the bid. So it's not something you can have to require. Um, and so there were two different sets of licenses that we got. They were not the same set. And so we had to dig into what
this type of licenses, what the scope of this license permitted you to do and what the scope of this license permitted you to do. For lawscapes, they were they had the lensure that allowed them to do everything in a commercial aspect by contract on their own property, for turf, for maintenance, all of it. Um
whereas what the other bidder could do was limited uh particularly what they could do under contract and they didn't have I don't recall now I think they didn't have the turf maintenance piece. Um I may be wrong about that but there was one piece of the turf maintenance and chemical management that they didn't
have and they couldn't do on all of our properties under contract. Okay. So they just want to make sure it wasn't oh I forgot to submit this and they actually have it. Well, even if they forgot to submit it, it would be non-responsive because it was required to be fully responsive. You had to submit it with
your bid response. So, this shows from I understand if you do that, it could show that you're showing bias or favoritism and why you don't do that. Right. Anything that's in bid docs that we require when we open those big docks and um we do digging and sometimes, you
know, we miss it, we go back and we could, you know, make sure that um everyone has what have what they need. But they have to be able to send everything that we require. If it's a requirement, let's just giving you an example. If we say all these required
documents drug-free, they don't put that one in. That's nonresponsive because that is a required document. You have to put in at the time you submit. So the history is five submitted, three may met the requirements initially. We
thought one of them was the terminated contract. Second one didn't actually meet requirements, so we're down to one. Okay, that's a great thing. Sam, can I ask a question if the other bids were competitive or close to this? Um, I I think the next lowest bid to that one
was about $18,000 cheaper. And if we put it out for rebid, then it might do that much damage. Well, you you figure because of the cost of this, it has to be advertised for 21 days. Then we have to score it. We have to go back
before the commission time. We got other areas and it's and we're we're already in the fourth of July. Yeah. Yeah. We're already in the time in the Yeah. We have put stuff out stuff back out to rebid it has come back at a
higher a higher bid. Even Oh, it does. It has. Even by those things. Yeah. Like that company say okay they'll come back at a higher bid today. Right. Okay. All right. And uh we have that new agenda item adding number 20.
Well, I didn't add I know I added it, but I didn't put 20 on there. So, I'll just I'll just go with what Yeah, just this just go with it. The local mitigation. That's just we we've already talked about that one.
Okay. Yeah, that's simple. Yeah, that's the TR. So, we're talking about the training warning for the storm water. Yes. Um Thank you, mayor. Um, so, um, we did reach out to, uh, Stan Tech because
we do understand that there has to be a public hearing even though you have already accepted um, the um, fees, the storm water rates, we still have to put that on the trim notice. And in order to do that, we have
to have a resolution of you telling us, yes, we can go in and put it on trim notice. And remember that you will still have a public hearing in September, one of our budget meetings um to do that final adoption of the storm order. Got it. Any objections to having that
resolution on ready to go for Tuesday. Amy and Kevin are working on and what it does that resolution just recaps what you've already uh passed. So it it when you change the rates or your methodology, it's a two-step. So there's an initial resolution that is almost a
directory resolution to memorialize the change in rates methodology directing it to be advertised. Um it it's an extraordinary notice opportunity to make sure it gets on the trend gets published. Um things that are not necessarily required when you
keeping everything the same. So all right sounds good. See y'all Tuesday.