--------- Good afternoon. Welcome to the board of commissioners budget workshop number one. Today is Wednesday, April 29th, 2026. It is 2 p.m. City Clerk, would you call the role, please? >> Yes. Mayor Brooks >> here. Vice Mayor McGee
>> here. >> Commissioner Tagarini >> here. >> Commissioner Dylan >> here. >> Commissioner Gavay >> here. >> All are present. >> Public comment. Public participation is encouraged. If you are addressing the commission, step to the podium and state
your name and address for the record and the organization or group you represent. Please limit your comments to five minutes and do not include any topic on the agenda. Public comment on agenda items will be allowed when they come up. If you would like someone at the city to
follow up on a comment or question made at the meeting, you may fill out a comment card with the contact information and give it to the city manager. Comment cards are available at the black back table in the commission chambers. Completing a comment card is
not mandatory. Do we have any public comment? With no public comment, next on the agenda is discussion items. Fiscal year 2027 budget workshop number one. Finance director.
>> Perfect. I will take the lead on this. Okay. So, if you go to our agenda, let's just talk about the the things that we're going to cover and and really what what's the message that I want to convey here in this meeting. So we're going through we have at the
end of our of this uh deliverable the timeline and so we can cover that at the end of the meeting um the sequence of which will cover areas pertaining to the fiscal year 2027 budget. Right. Typically the what's encompassed is the
uh for expenses the capital we have capital expenses we have personnel expenses we have operating expenses and then we also budget revenues and other inflows and so in future workshops we'll be focusing on some of those areas like the next workshop we'll be covering what
we're going to be initially budgeting for capital related expenses across the city um and we'll cover kind of f in at the end of this meeting the future workshops and what we'll be focusing on specifically. Well, what are we focusing on in this meeting? So, we're not going
to be looking at down the line yet 2027, what we think we're going to be spending on X, Y, and Z. What I want to do in this meeting is just give you an overall kind of financial picture of where we're at today and first where we've we were at from our audited uh financial
statements from our 2025 results for the year end September 30, 2025. So give you an overall picture of where we where we were at the end of 2025 and then what we spent and what we've earned uh throughout this fiscal year in 2026 through midappril and that kind of gives
you a a decent understanding of okay where we are in terms of what our reserves picture looks like and how much cash and investments we have in the bank historically and through today. So that can kind of give you an understanding well what how much money do we have to work you know to work with for next year
right are we a $und00 million budget we have a $500 million budget we have $2 million budget so give you giving you some numbers historically and through today that'll kind of give you a decent depiction and also I want to do is just get let's let's just talk kind of basic
understanding of the different funds in the city and and kind of just a little overview of what these financial statements mean right so governments use fund accounting and within each fund they kind of serve a purpose and so we'll walk through what each of the funds do of the city and we'll look through those financial results and
that's what we'll cover a lot in the excerpts from the 2025 audit financial statements so we'll we'll start with the 2025 audit financial statements just a few uh statements that I pulled out of that report um we'll have a presentation from the audit partner at our new audit firm
Maldin and Jenkins at our next regular meeting and he'll just go through his presentation of the overall results to the audit. But for this one, I wanted to pull out some of the pages from that report and give you some of that historical perspective. Then we'll walk through just some
trending analysis, some three-year historical revenue and expenses, and we'll look at our reserve analysis. So, we'll go through what um those numbers and what they mean and what you can glean from that. Then, I want to talk about our outstanding debt. So, do we
have how much debt do we have outstanding? what is our current balance? I think that's important to know um as you look to as we embark on this next year um budget cycle. Uh and then also same thing with our cash and investments, right? Cash is king. How
much cash do we have in the bank between cash and our liquid investments um that we know it kind of gives you again a decent picture of what our funding options are for general operations to small capital projects to big ticket items.
And then the last thing will be their proposed we have an a proposed amendment that I want to um walk through with you all in great detail in this meeting. And if we're all in agreement on what the um the composition of the amendment and
what it's for and the amounts and you're comfortable with it, then I'll include that in the next regular meeting. It'll have to be um approved via resolution to formally amend our 2026 budget. The big amendment is an $18 million land
purchase that we made. We didn't contemplate that in the in the preparing our 2026 budget. So that's something we just need have a formal amendment for to increase our budget for that. That's one of the few examples that we have in the amendment and we'll walk through those in detail. And then as I mentioned this is just the
very this is our first workshop where I just want to kind of give you that historical perspective understanding what the different funds are in the city what the different departments are in the city and what that financial picture looks like on a fund by fund basis
historically through our last audited period through September 30 2025 as well as a reserve picture of okay here's what we spent through 2025 what have we spent what do we have available in reserves through essentially today through
midappril and then we um and then we that's what's the purpose of today and then in future workshops is where we're going to really dig into the um different aspects of the fiscal year 2027 budget that we'll present to you not all at once we start with the
capital we do personnel then we'll do operating revenues and then give you the full 20 the full budget u document in a later workshop we'll walk through what each of those dates are and what we'll be covering So that's the plan for today. How does that sound? Or sounds like Sounds like a
plan. All right. All right. Let's embark. Here we go. So I'm I'm now going to um page six. Okay. So page six, very important page. It's just our statement of revenues, expenditures, and changes in fund
balance for governmental funds. So the city has two different types of funds. It's got pro uh governmental funds and it's got proprietary funds and what we call enterprise funds. Our enterprise funds, those are on in a future page, we've got four enterprise funds and
they're all intended to be largely self- sustaining. They're they're funded by user fees and charges. Uh and then the idea is that the expenses incurred in that fund uh the the revenues um are available to at least match those
expenses. So largely intended to be self- sustaining and our governmental funds with also user fees and charges and and assessments. But then we also have tax revenues that can help fund um operations and even and capital related
items within the g within the governmental funds. But let's walk through what each of these funds are. So you see on this first page there's four, right? We have the general fund, the Archer Bald Park Fund, the building fund, and then we have what's called non- major governmental funds, which is
uh we have another page that I'll go through. We have I think five, four or five non- major governmental funds. We'll go through those individually. Um but starting with the general fund, the general fund is basically kind of like, okay, what's left over? So, we've got multiple different departments in the
general fund. Um, and we've got a variety of different revenue sources as you can see in the general fund. So you see the revenues up top that consists of taxes, permits, fees, intergovernmental charges for services, fines and forfeitures, investment income, and
miscellaneous. So if you look at the general fund specifically overall our operating results if I want to focus on just a couple number of some line items on this page I go straight to that excess deficiency of revenues or over
under expenditures that tells me where we were revenues minus expenses it's a basic concept right so I like what I see on the general fund we uh had actually positive uh change in in revenues over expenses signatures. Some of the big
highlights in the general fund, we had a a big number for intergovernmental at 6.3 million and then we also had a big number in general government expenses, 9.2. I think later on when you see our three-year trend analysis, um that's a bit of an aberration and that's because
we had the impacts of the hurricanes from September and early October of 2024 and then we've spent a lot of um a lot of money that we coded to called disaster related expenses account that hit the general fund um for all the
rebuilding uh efforts that we made. And then a lot of that was debris removal if you recall. So we had that was a by far and away our major expense of the city uh to the tune of millions of dollars maybe four plus million dollars to
remove all the debris uh out of the city. Great news is it didn't take six years for FEMA to finally reimburse us through this Florida D program on what's called these CAD expenditures. We got that funding advanced to us. uh
based on an estimate of what we felt like we were going to uh spend in the debris removal costs. So from a cash flow p uh basis, we actually fared pretty well in terms of hurricane related expenses incurred and reimbursements received. So that's why
that intergovernmental um revenue number at 6.3 million was higher than typical. And remember this is this is dialogue. This isn't just me uh spouting off for two hours. Please stop, ask questions anytime if you want to dig into any
specific numbers. Um, I have obviously this report available, but I also have access to our system if we need to dig in any specific accounts and look at um underlying transactions. I'm happy to do that. >> Andrew, may I ask a question? >> Yes. >> The inter intergovernmental um
um I guess the funds I guess there's not a breakdown in there. Is that all FEMA or partially like grants? And how do you how do you separate grants versus like FEMA and some of the other intergovernmental
um monies that are funneled to us? So yes, that not all of that was FEMA and those are question that's a question where I can certainly take quick 30 seconds and pull that and and see what all that consists of. Um,
and if you want me to uh do that now, I certainly can. >> Not not necessarily, but I think it'd be nice to just see how much FEMA was received, how much money's received from FEMA, and what were some of the other um governmental
uh funds that came to us. >> Okay, let me run that. And while I'm running that, I can continue the presentation that I can >> No hurry, >> stop, pivot, and uh and jump back into that. Okay. So, while that is running,
um I think that's the main the main thing I wanted to point out on the general fund. Um then in the other financing sources uses, you can see we had a big uh transfer in of 1.677
million and then we had a transfer out of 299,000. that transfer out was to the debt service fund uh for our debt service payment on the governmental fund borrow governmental activities borrowing that we have and
I'll get into that specifically on that one page where we go through all of our debt issuances. The 1.67 67 million is that administrative overhead that the general fund charges the other funds, mostly the um enterprise funds plus the
Archabald Park fund and the building fund. And those consists of both personnel costs borne by general fund departments as well as other utility related and other kind of uh broad administrative costs that are borne by
the general fund that other funds um benefit from. So for example, we charge the marina fund like the finance department charges the marina fund a a proportion a portion of salaries and wages to the general fund um for the for
the when the finance department uh salaries expenses incurred because we do reconciliation and reporting and audit preparation for the marina fund as well as the sanitation fund etc. So we have certain general fund departments that um incur salaries and wages and costs as
well as other like I said utility and um other related um operating expenses that we charge back to those funds. So that's the money coming back. That's not an external revenue source. That's why it's called a transfer in. So the total of transfers in to the general fund equals
the transfers out to from other funds. But we still consider it an in an inflow into the general fund. So that's where we got a change in fund balance of a positive $1.5 million, which is great. And that brought our fund balance at the end of the year from 17.4 million to
$18.9 million. Um I it pulled up now. So let me look at we're looking at intergovernmental. So let me Believe that might be character. Okay. Intergovernmental
revenue Okay. So of that total intergovernmental revenue 4,581,000 came was hit the account called FEMA grant revenues. And so that 6.3 million 6.33 million
about 4.6 6 million. Um was that and then some other things we also got um we get what's called uh state revenue sharing um that comes money comes from the
state. We also get half cent sales tax revenue that we that we record to the intergovernmental um revenue. And then we got money from Penllis County. Um I can see what that consists of as
well. Um probably from an interlocal agreement for um projects we're working on there. I believe that could have been from the maybe the Readington um EMS.
But I guess the main your main question is okay 6 point something million. And how much of that was really from the from that debris removal reimbursement? About 4.4 million of that 6.3. >> Do we get monies from like bed taxes? I'm sure we do. Is that included in
here? >> Um on bed taxes. So that's called the tourist development tax that comes into the county. So there's no city share of that. um that this that the city receives. So the
the TDT tourist development taxes that goes to Penllis County and is not shared with municipalities. So we do not receive bed tax aka tourist development taxes. >> Okay. >> But you can see how much of the tourist development taxes
were earned in Madira Beach versus other beach communities. that that information is publicly available and if you want to know that I can I can pull that up for you. >> Well, we we market our um our hotels and our industries so we can get some um
taxes um shared but a part of that needs to come to us. >> It doesn't it doesn't for the state. So the way that we get that money is through like when we our share of that comes in when we do events like the um
seafood festival, we get a grant from them towards um it's advertisement and I think music. >> So the bed tax is not something that we can get directly. No municipality gets
it directly. I don't know if that's that's a part of this meeting or not, but uh TDC usually there are a lot of people that are serving on that board. Is there anybody from Madura Beach that serves on TDC? >> No. >> Do we know?
>> Yeah. Thank you. >> Okay. And so then on the Archabal Park Fund um you can see the revenue sources there. the um the charges for services number that's typically our for our parking fees at the Archabald Park and
the and those for those parking meters. Uh we have intergovernmental revenues of almost a million dollars. That's for the beach uh growing um uh restoration project. And you can see then where that translates also to the capital outlay. that $3 million is probably all or most
if not all exclusively for the uh each growing renovation project. And so then that did result in a pretty large deficit which then brought down our remaining fund balance in the Archabald Park Fund
to 663, so 3.7. So certainly the the Archabal Park Fund was able to absorb and we did have a prior year transfer in from the general fund to help absorb this beach growing restoration project. But now you can see
that ending reserves in the Archabald Park fund are really skinny down. Yes, that that each growing renovation project was partially uh funded by the state, but there was uh a um a match requirement from the um from the city of
Madura Beach. And so that's hence you see that big $3 million uh outlay in the current fiscal year or fiscal year 25. So then you've got the building department. Um this one again concerning in terms of
the ending change in fund balance of 9957,000. So we had a pretty healthy reserve going into fiscal year 25 of about beginning fund balance of 1,27,000 964. You see I'm just looking at the building
um the building department fund in that column. Uh now our ending fund balance is almost $70,000 as of September 2025. But this was expected, right? We didn't quite know what the full impact would be when the decree was made that we would
uh withhold permit fees for uh structures, properties damaged by the storm. Um but it it did significantly reduce our um permit and fee revenue. You can see it was 376,000.
Um, in a future page you'll see if we do our 4-year historical of revenues, and that's just on page 10. If you flip to that just real quick, you can see total building fund revenue 418,000 in 2025
versus more like 1.1 million in 24. or a little dip in 23. So, it's typically more expected to be about a million plus in permit revenue annually. And we've recognized uh half of half that less than half more than half that
uh in 2025. So, more than half a reduction. >> Quick question. So, in terms of this is everything ending in September of last year >> for one year. Yep. So, this is the year end. So that means October 1 of 2024 to
September 30, 2025. So these audits are done annually based on the fiscal year of the city beginning October, ending September. >> So all the building permits that we've been doing for the hurricanes that have been coming in since September are going
to be in this fund, next year's fund >> in 2026. Yep. And so I've got a page, a future page that shows what our actual inflows and outflows were year-to date 2026. So you can see um where that 2026 revenues is coming in at as well. But
this was expected that we were going to take a big hit on our permit fees in 2025. So the numbers don't lie and that's what they depict. Um that was about almost a million dollar loss for the building fund in 2025.
and that's a blip on the radar. That doesn't concern me because we knew that that was going to happen. Um, I do have some concerns for 2026 based on the the year-to- date results. I'll withhold that discussion until we get to that reserves analysis page and I definitely
want to pick that up. But I think we knew this was just a a kind of a a given go at 2025 would have a loss um due to the decision made to um to uh withhold uh permit fee uh charges
on those those properties. And then the next is the non-governmental non- major governmental funds. So let's move on to the next page and this is the breakdown of your non uh non- major governmental funds. So the first one is called a local
option sales tax fund. This is a what we call the our penny for penelis our discretionary sir tax revenue that we receive. Um I think those are in monthly installments and those revenues came in at 667,000
in 2025. And then we also have some from our available cash balances in the local option sales tax fund. We also get some interest income. So then I go down to that threeyear or fouryear historical analysis
on page 10, the local option sales tax fund. That's pretty consistent, right? So total revenue 787,000. Last year in 24 it was 783, 759, 686. So that's about what we can expect to earn
in the local option sales tax every year. And historically, while we have had in past budgets a rather ambitious uh proposal of capital improvement projects that will be fund by funded by
the lost fund. Actual results didn't hasn't really played out that way in the past number of years. And so you can see that fund balance beginning and ending. We've been accumulating reserves in the lost fund. So it was 2.5 million. Now it's September 30, 2025. Add another
662,000 to that because we we didn't really spend much in 2025. I think we were so focused in 25 just repairing and rebuilding that that kind of pushed off some of those um intended capital u capital related improvement projects. So
only 125,000 spent in fiscal year 25 in the lost fund. So 3.2 2 million a good healthy reserve um as of 9:3025 then the impact fee fund so I don't recall quite the fiscal year when this took place I think fiscal year 2023 at
some point was when we started we issued we um passed an ordinance to collect impact fees cityorn city impact fees for uh transportation parks and recreation and public safety
And so that impact fee revenue, you can see there 168,000. I can then go, yeah, let's look at our four-year analysis and sorry to keep flipping you back and forth, but back to page 10, you can see on that impact fee
um fund, and we started collecting impact fees in 2023, but we didn't create a separate fund. We were just including those impact fees in the general fund. But then
uh we we created its own impact fee fund. So we can you know for full transparency show in a separate fund all the impact fees collected and then the impact fee related expenditures um beginning in 2024. And so you can see
243,24 and 189,000 25. And we have yet to spend any money out of the impact fee fund. And we can look at what those reserves looks like um cumulatively when we get to that reserve
page, but we have yet to spend impact fee fund money. And there's strings attached to that in terms of um statutory requirements that must be met um to be able to to properly spend impact fee funds on um it's
basically on the expan the footprint expansion as a result. That's why we charge the impact fee and that's why it those capital related expenditures have to meet those requirements. So we have to be careful on how we spend impact fee fund dollars. um not much on the gas tax fund or the
debt service fund. It's a very specific revenue source. So, some of the gas tax monies we receive and then we have um ex uh transportation related like you know street maintenance, light maintenance expenses. It's pretty
consistent year to year. And then the debt service fund is strictly for that 2013 um debt obligation um that we'll show in that in that debt schedule upcoming um where we just get the transfer in from the general fund to fund the debt service. There was our
299,000 that we spent in debt service payments and then the change is essentially what the debt service fund is earning in interest. And the next page is where I'll go through the proprietary funds. Any questions on the governmental funds
before I start proprietary? Are we so far so good understanding the the nature and purpose of these funds and what these operating results indicate to you? So far so good. Okay. So, we've got the sanitation fund, storm water fund, marina fund, and parking
fund. So, I really like what I see on the sanitation fund. I believe it was fiscal year 21 to 22 is when um we made a concerted effort to evaluate our sanitation fee that hadn't
changed in a number of years and we were seeing some concerning operating results in the sanitation fund um where our change in net position was either flat or declining. And of course, we have future capital needs within the sanitation department, mainly on the purchase of new trucks
that unfortunately just don't last that long. Um, so in light of our our future capital improvement plan and where we were seeing our our operating income or loss, we decided several years ago to increase our sanitation fees. Um, and
here in these results about 2.2 2 million in operating revenues and then inclusive of depreciation about 1.6 million of expenses. So that's about a $500,000 um operating income which is great. We
do want to bring some operating income into sanitation fund reserves because again we do have capital requirements in the sanitation fund for a lot of the vehicle turnover. Um so we want to have a reasonably healthy fund balance. I think we're good now. Um, as I talked to
our city manager about this, costs keep increasing, right? We have personnel costs, we have raises, we have waste disposal cost that increase, the landfill costs continue to increase. So, we could take the stance of, okay, whatever that proportion is, let's keep
adjusting our sanitation fee annually. Um my personal opinion is I think we're good to kind of hold firm based on the operating results that we're seeing just over the last three years and the slow buildup of our reserves that I'm comfortable and we just got to keep an eye on on operating results each year,
each quarter, etc. um and to and once we start to see that those costs are eventually potentially coming to match or even outpace our sanitation fees that we charge customers, then we got to take another look at it. But I don't think we
need to continue to change or update our sanitation fee annually. I think we're in a good spot here. But of course, I'm happy to have that debate deliberation with with with you all if you feel differently. But I like what I'm seeing right now from the sanitation fund. I don't think we're at the point where
we're grossly overcharging customers based on what I'm just seeing here from 2025. Um I think we have a good amount now that that'll help fund our future capital needs with um trucks, vehicles, dumpsters, etc.
Don't quite feel the same way in the storm water fund. So let's talk about that one next. So you see there's one line on the storm water fund charges for services and fines. So, we charge a storm water fee to um to the residents and the property
owners of the city of MadiRaa Beach. There's typically two ways that a storm water fee can get assessed. One as a as an assessment on your tax bill or assessed on your utility bill. City has always goes the utility route. So you'll
see a storm water fee charged uh you know your bim monthly um utility bill and that's based on um a certain amount on eru the equivalent residential units. That fee has not changed for a number of
years. I think this is one that we can evaluate and probably should look at um because you can see our revenues are 680,000 and what I would like to see is that it can cover our operating expenses
or come close to covering our operating expenses inclusive of depreciation. I can't I'm never going to suggest that we need to have a storm water fee that's going to cover one year of 3 million of this infrastructure project. That's absurd. But when you take that $3
million infrastructure project and depreciate that over 30 years, right, that's what we recognize as our annual depreciation expense. I would hope that the storm water fee could cover um at least a decent part of that. And you can
see right now we're re recognizing 680,000 in storm water revenue. And our total operating expenses inclusive of depreciation is 1.4 almost 1.5 million. So, there's definitely a deficit there um that I think merits a conversation
and future discussion on when was the last time we updated our storm water fee. If we made a change, what could that look like? Um and potentially a workshop item to to to ponder and deliberate uh in a future meeting. >> Andrew, how much are we charging right
now for er per eru? >> Do you have that? >> I've got access to that. It probably $10. >> $10 per year. You Yeah, and I can pull that up and confirm. >> Yeah, I think it's $10 right now.
>> And how how does that compare with other beach cities? Do we I I don't I don't know at this point. >> Okay. >> And that's that's a a great question and a common the typical question I would ask is where what's the comparability?
So, we could certainly do some analysis and do some some comparisons of of beach communities and and other areas to see what what is uh what's typical and where and where we fall in with our peer group. >> All right. Thank you, >> Andrew. One of the one of the questions
I had coming in was what what is the storm why is the storm water funds uh negative? Uh and is that what your response is going to be that we need to consider increasing fees? Is that because I'm looking at page uh I guess it's your page 11, my page nine.
Everything is in a negative for the storm waters for the last few years. >> So, first to confirm the .edu rate, I said eru, it's edu rate that is $10 per month for each .edu. Uh and then
>> uh what's edu u is residential unit develop uh unit >> equivalent equivalent I think it's dwelling is it dwelling >> equivalent dwelling unit equivalent >> yeah r is residential d is the dwelling so equivalent dwell dwelling unit y
>> and so your question commissioner tagini is just on seeing negative balances is >> I think you addressed it by saying I was going to ask later about this the the negative balances in page 11 for your historical overview um all those are
negative except for 20 25 is is this going to is this the resolution to that problem by a discussion about increasing storm water fees >> yes I think because that's that you know that net change right is negative each
year. And maybe it should be negative each year because we can't we're, you know, we're we're going to partially subsidize these major storm water projects with ador tax revenues or parking revenues or other sources. And we get that. Um, but
I guess that is that's that's the million-dollar question is what what do we feel is the proper storm water fee to charge to account for our what I think is a good barometer is our total operating expenses inclusive of
depreciation meaning all these completed projects and then they depreciate over time and depre and the depreciation expense is going to go up dramatically because right now we have this gets into accounting terms we have what's called these projects are called construction in progress, meaning we're still working
on it. So, we haven't finished that project, placed it in service, and then started depreciating yet. So, depreciation expense is only going to get higher as these area 3, area 5, area 9 projects get completed. Then that operating total operating expense number is going to increase rather
significantly. >> So, you don't you don't see any alarm bells by seeing those uh negative things. you say based on the the ongoing projects that it's should we address this or >> Well, you know, it's it's known, right?
And and we you know, we we issued $15 million back in 2019 to fund a variety of different storm water projects. Now, to fund that debt service, we also increased the millage rate, right? We haven't touched the storm water fee. Um,
and I just I think those are all a great question is okay well what is how does our storm water fee compared to you know our our our peer group in this area. Um, we spend we're spending a lot of money on on on storm water and drainage
improve street and storm water drainage improvement projects. >> I see. >> And you know let's evaluate all the funding potential funding sources around that. This is just a fee that's been very stagnant over a number of years that we haven't increased it and I don't know how long that's, you know, remained
at $10 and what is the right number ultimately? >> I've got a question in terms of I'm new here to this stuff. How do we have such a high depreciation and even if we change the fees, if we double the fees, it's still not going to cover it. I
mean, you know, 680 and it's $10 a month. So, if we go to $20 a month, it's still not going to cover this. And I'm sorry, I can't, you know, I I I as a new person here, I cannot see doubling the storm water fee, but but basically, so
the depreciation, I mean, you know, and I guess I don't really understand that because we've done one I think we've gotten half of our city developed with new roads and drainage. Mhm. >> We're in the process of doing another
quarter of it, so we don't have that much left to do. Um I mean, you know, so I guess the big question almost a million dollar in depreciation. I just don't understand that, >> right? That number is going to go higher. Well, we're trying to measure what is the cost of all these projects
that we've already done and that we're that we're doing now that are going to be complete. How do we evaluate that in terms of an annual cost, right? just the pure outlay in a particular year isn't the best barometer because one year we're going to spend $6 million, the next year we're going to spend only a couple hundred thousand, the next year
we're going to spend 5 million, right? But if you kind of annualize that, that's what that depreciation number reflects. And as I said, it's 970,000 now and it's going to get higher as these projects get completed and placed
into service. And then we just have to ask ourselves and I don't have the answer is how much how much of that total operating costs the personal services right the storm there our storm water team members some are full-time
some like our public works structure that a part of her salary we allocate to storm water some of the minor operating costs but the big one as you can see is the depreciation how much of those costs should be subsidized by our storm water
fee versus other sources. And I'm not I'm not coming with answers. I'm just coming to you with it is a bit of a disparity. 680,000 in revenue, 1 almost 5 million of expenses. Is that something we want to look at and maybe at least just kick the can around and
and uh or do some initial evaluation of of some comparative analysis around this area and maybe potentially beyond of of what uh others are charging. Okay. But then let's end on a high note.
Marina and parking uh great positive uh change in net position there. So Marina at uh almost 350,000. Uh I think if you go back prior to 2020,
um those numbers did not look anywhere near what they look at now. So it's a true testament to how the marina operation is running. Uh since I've been here, it's been profitable and it continues to be profitable. We see, you know, net position beginning of the year 4.2 million. Now it's going to be almost
4.6 million at the end of 2025. So that's great. Of course, fully self- sustaining. Um, and three, like I said, 350,000 and that's included the 186,000 you see that
186,000 transfer out. That's what the general fund is charging the marina fund for the um kind of admin overhead. um costs incurred by the general fund for the benefit of the marina fund. And then the last is parking. Again, a
major revenue source for the city. You can see where parking revenues um fell um for fiscal year 25. And this is great. I know we'll move into the four-year trend analysis next because we had a lot of grave concerns like the
city shut down after the hurricanes. We're not going to, you know, how what is this impact going to have on revenues? So, we're going to see how revenues stacked up for marina and parking in 25 compared to previous years. So, interesting analysis there,
but that's another big one where and parking used to be a part of the general fund uh until it became its own fund. And so you when we do the four-year historical overview, we have no data in
fiscal year 2022 in the parking fund because the parking fund wasn't even created until 2023. All those parking fund parking revenues were included in the general fund. Okay. Well, now I guess it's time to go through that four-year historical kind
of trend analysis. Any questions on the fiscal year 25 results before I begin? Perfect. Okay. I know I already we've already cheated and kind of come to this page for in a few different times on some of the um 25 numbers on like building fund
and the loss fund, but this kind of shows everything. Um, what jumps out at what jumps out at me? I think especially on the on the general fund, you see higher expenses in 25 compared to um 24, 23, and 22. Again,
those are the the um hurricane related costs, mostly the debris removal costs that were in the millions that we didn't incur in previous years. But then we also have the revenues to show for it. Hence total revenues of 18
million um compared to 14 million and 24 13 million23 um again I already showed you the building fund revenue trend significantly down in 25 that's hurricane related um
but local option sales tax didn't see a huge hit on our our penny for penelis collections despite the um the devastation from the hurricane in 25 we were pretty flat uh from that aspect
even same thing with impact fees we still were able to collect impact fees in 2025 some bigger than normal expenditures and archabald park and a lot of that's that beach growing um the beach growing rehabilit ation project that's been
ongoing. >> Then if we move to page 11, >> could I could I just ask a question about that one first? Just what's the main reason for the spike in uh in expenditures? Revenue from 24 to 25 looks like 3 million increase in revenue
and 8 million increase in expenditures. Is it just a bunch of things or is there any one thing that you would >> and in which fund? You talking about the general fund? Yeah, >> I I I that is my takeaways is that is largely due to the um
>> well I mean I'm just looking at the bottom the bottom where there's so it's >> oh the total number from like 16 to 24 million. >> Yeah, it it would be nice to have like a net result of all of those years to see
where we're positive, where we're negative and we certainly are very negative for 2025. Yes, this is a very condensed depiction and if you want me to dig into specific numbers now I can. We also have a a what's called a financial transparency site that's publicly
available and so you could dig into general fund and specific revenues and we provide all that information budget actual by year that is is publicly available but I'll do my best to pull detail um now like on the general fund
that 18 million of expenses um let me look exactly what our disaster related expenses are >> Andrew as we go through our budget process in our in the months to come. These questions about the specifics because today's kind of an overview of
where we are, where we've been. Um won't th that type of information come to us in future meetings where we will dig into those. So if you look at your budget document
last year and from workshops in our full budget document, we have every single account from every single fund in every single department that contains like prior year budget, prior year actual, current year-to- date actual, current
year, what we call annualized, what we think the ending balance will be at the end of 206, and then what we're budgeting next year. So you'll have all of that for every single account that we can dig in to the individual transaction or individual accounts and say hey tell me more about this one account. Um and
you have all that you'll have all that in future workshops. Um I wanted to give you just kind of a high level not intimidate you with a ton of numbers and a ton of individual accounts but certainly you know so for to your question commissioner tagini disaster
related expenses that was in in a general fund. We didn't have that account in 2024 earlier. That total actual expense was $5,187,457. So that made up for a a major amount that was not incurred in 24 over 5
million that was not incurred in 24 that was incurred in 20. >> So So most most of these are one-time expenditures, not budgeted. >> Correct. >> Okay. >> Technically, we did budget for it through an amendment. We didn't budget for it when we go went through the 25 budget because we didn't know the hurricanes were coming and then we did
an amendment to in to increase the budget to account for >> future meetings we would see the what's what's one time and what's budgeted. >> You'll be yeah we'll be able to see that that that disaster related expenses account will exist. It'll have a big prior year balance but we'll have zero
budgeted for next year because we're not anticipating a big disaster and spending. Got it. Thank you. And so then on the next page is for our enterprise operations. So looking just looking at oper uh uh
operating revenues for uh sanitation, storm water, marine and parking. Um we can see remember in 2022 there was no parking fund but starting in 23 you can see our parking revenues and there was a bit of a dip but it wasn't that
bad right so we really eventually I mean remember back in the fall of 2024 uh November December you know uh fiscal year 25 I mean we had just a bunch of sand in our parking lots right so eventually start opening these parking lots up and we had a lot better spring
break and summer that we recovered. So, um not a huge dip in parking fund revenues going from 3.5, we had just a great 20 fiscal year 23. Um a tiny bit of a dip in 24 and then another dip in 25 that
was really hurricane driven, but it wasn't as the financial impact wasn't as devastating as I thought it would be. And same thing with Marina, right? Marina was definitely out of commission as well. Um, and then it recovered
nicely that you can see from 3.7 million in 24 to 3.2 million in 25. Not bad at all. Um, and then again sanitation, you know, up uptick there. It was at 1.8
8 million and as a result of our um implementing higher fees about a $500,000 uptick from 22 to 24 and then a little bit of a decline which we kind of anticipated um that I think some
some residents that were displaced could opt out of their uh sanitation u bill but it wasn't that significant that we stayed somewhat flat with 24 on the revenues. And then expenses, you can see that by fund. No major jumps there. Same thing
with nonoperating. And then you've got your your net that we've kind of already blabed a bit. Good good trending on the marina and parking.
Um same thing. Good trending on sanitation. And then storm water. we just know about um uh that we've already touched on that recurring losses. >> Back to the storm water in 22, I mean it
was two two and a quarter expenses but a million and a half income. How did that change so much from 22 to 23? I mean, you've got a income of one and a
half and then you go to 678. So that's less than half and that's Yep. I can pull pull those details for you. My suspicion might be we'll see what that depreciation expense number was in 22. We could have had a higher
transfer out to the um general fund for the administrative overhead. Um, maybe a little bit. >> I mean, I don't know very much about this stuff, but some of the things is just jumping out like, whoa, that's that's a big jump. >> Yeah. >> Let's take a look. Let's pull those 22
statements. So, we had $983,000 of operating expenses in fiscal year 2022. Whereas in fiscal year 2023 uh five
we had 182,000 of operating expenses. Now why well why 182 from 900 something? I can dig into that. >> We could have bought a truck. >> Yeah. >> Well, if we bought a truck, >> would that have been in that? >> No, because technically
>> Oh, sorry. So, so I I do want to say just one more time that today is about an overview. We're going to get into the weeds on the numbers in our future meetings to be able to understand what the difference I
think the the purpose of today not that if you have a question you should ask it but the purpose is to really show us where we're at today where or where we're at in 25 where we've been and then um it would be beneficial I believe based
on the conversation if we all took our budget from last year and reviewed it and looked at the information that we will get over the time of these meetings because as our meetings move on, it will get very detailed in understanding what
they spent what they spent it on year overyear to give better clarification of where those dollars are. So I think I think that would help all of us to refresh us of what the budget is and what we will see in the in the months to come. but to remember to remember that
today is truly about the starting the process and seeing again where we are and where we've been. >> Thank you. I agree completely. >> Yeah, I can go far in the weeds. I mean, I'm pulling up the support. There's a one account called maintenance streets
and the storm water fund that had a uh ending balance in expenses of 820,000 and it looks like it was a something related to a project
um that was not a capital related project but was just more of a a maintenance related item and I'd have to just you at doing a little more research. But certainly if you find those, I mean, email me. Let's have one ones and say, you know, I see this from 23 to 24. This looks like a big jump
here. I can go into the detail, pull the transactions, pull the invoices, everything about it to uncover, you know, kind of why it happened. Unfortunately, I don't have all that memorized, but I can easily pull it if you have any questions. >> Yeah. No, I agree. It's just this is my first time in here and I know I remember
many friends and neighbors talking about how the budgets are so here and there and then once it got into a thing of like maybe we might have to raise a fee uh that that's that that's that's a sore subject. I mean you know so in terms of
when I look at these 22 and then 25 so that's where it's like kind of a red flag. So, I'm just trying to know for myself, but then like for future so that you have more information to be making definitive decisions,
>> right? Well, I want to am you give you all the all the ammunition you need for if there is a potential potential for a fee increase, right? Like if we decide to increase the storm water fee and residents can come at you with pitchforks. Okay, let me give you the full financial
picture as to why we're evaluating this, right? We have x uh number of projects that are going on at x cost. And you annualize that out for 30 40 years. That's depreciation. That comes in at 900 something thousand, right? We have this much in personnel
costs and other operating costs. And here's our total. Here's all what we realize on the storm water fee. We don't want to necessarily capture all that with a storm water fee, but we want to be able to capture more of it, right? to give you all the information you need to make an informed decision and then to justify the public as to why you made
the decision. >> If I can, I know that that 800 that was from Frontier Damage that was done in 2022 when they blew up the roads. So, that was not a budgeted project, but we did pay for that, but we were also
reimbursed for that. >> Well done, Megan. Well done. >> Thank you, Andrew. >> She beat me to it. >> Yes. Repair of roadway due to damage from Frontier in five locations. Three on Crystal Drive and two on Lillian.
Vendor was Keystone Excavators. I think that was a lot of who we were paying. Okay, I'm right there with you. Let's close. Uh, okay. So, back to the packet. And that was
and that makes sense too, right? Because um what year was that? 2022. And you can see, yeah, we have 2.2 million of expenses in 2022, but 1.4 million of expenses in 2025. What
happened? Well, you also have 1.5 million of revenue in storm water, right? Because we got reimbursed for that that damage from Frontier. So, it it more or less washed. Okay.
The next just a little overview on our capital outlay activity. Governmental funds show capital outlay based on how much we spent and it's called capital outlay. Enterprise funds don't show capital outlay. They treat capital aid expense costs as assets
called capital assets. So it's on the balance sheet. So what I wanted to show is uh pulling out that data, manipulating that data to show what do we actually acquire and construct for capital assets since the financial statements won't
show that. So I pulled that here and you can just see um over time and you can see sanitation is kind of like a hit or miss years, right? we'll have a big year. We'll make some big truck bigger truck purchases and then um maybe off. So there's a cycle on that and you'll
see now when we do have a multi-year capital improvement plan for each of the funds and so you'll see you know we have more more capital related expenses coming in fiscal year 27 and beyond. But this will show the um
the capital related costs incurred in 20 in storm water fund was not as much as we got some of these area projects kicking and now just in the last couple years we have a lot more in 26 as well those numbers are have upticked.
Okay. I think then same thing with marina fund. Not much in terms of capital needs, but there was a seaw wall replacement in 25 that's also continuing in 26. That's why you see an uptick in capital related activity in the marina
fund relating to the seaw wall. Correct me if I'm wrong, Krabby, but I believe that's what what that is. Okay. Now, let's go to this fund reserve analysis. So, we've already been through our fiscal year 2025 audit results and you
saw kind of ending fund balance in each of the funds. So, we're just looking at kind of like the big four of each. So, top the big top four governmental funds and then all of our enterprise funds. So, on the governmental funds you see general fund, building fund, lost fund,
archabal park fund. So, this is the ending fund balance. Um, and then actual inflows, actual outflows. So, a few things stick out to me on this one is the general fund. And this is well known, right? We had pretty pretty darn healthy reserve, $18 million in the
general fund. Well, that is depleted quickly with the 18 with the um $18 million land purchase. And so, you can see how that relates from our inflows um to our outflows. that's reduced that
general fund fund balance. Okay, we're aware of that one a one-time hit. Um building fund. So, this one is a little more concerning. Um available fund balance at 70,000. We
knew that. Um but so far in 2026, our our expenses are outpacing our revenues, which is of concern. there's a little bit of a residual effect on on those permit fees that were still not that are still getting um they're not
being assessed for those affected by the storm. Um because I guess if they went through the application process and got accepted and and met these requirements even though the permit wasn't completed, there's still maybe some permit activity
that's not being charged, but that's um not nearly as significant as it was 125. I think the issue here in the building fund thus far because right now it's at 378,000. So that's pacing to almost hit a million dollars, you know, almost 400,000.
annualize that we might be at the 800 900,000 which is almost kind of what we've been at the past few years except for 2025. The issue more is on the expenses side um and we're at $780,000 of expenses.
And if you look at our four-year history on page 11, the building fund um has been trending on the expense side, 582,636,000. And then the 1.1 million in 2024, some
of that was capital. A lot of that was capital for the uh downstairs um buildout for the the um the building department, community development department. And then 2025, a little bit of capital as uh as well and
some furniture replacement, but the operating costs were starting to increase in 25. There was a lot of demand and now we're seeing that big time in 2026. And there's a a primary factor at play for that is
that our professional services costs have been um extremely high compared to plan uh because of all the outsourced needs that we have. We don't have a building official in house um and other uh plans review and inspection related
activities that we're having to outsource for that. And the outsourcing model works perfect if we need those resources on a fractional basis. Take your city attorney for example or even your finance director. We work in a fractional capacity. If you asked Tom to
come to work 5 days a week, that would be cost prohibitive. Same thing with me. Um but it works because we're needed in a fractional capacity. It's not working well on the building side because we do need a full-time building official and we need those resources. So that cost is
at a premium by having to outsource. Um it's just an unfortunate situation um because those resources are very difficult to find in the market. Um but that's why we're we're currently at a negative projected available reserve of
3331,000 when I fully want had anticipated and want that uh the building fund to be fully self- sustaining. Any questions, concerns? comments on that. And other things we'll look at is we'll, you know, we can look at, you know,
permit fees. Um, look at our our composition. Um, Marcy could speak speak better to that. If she comes back in, we can have her speak to that further. Um, but this is what the the financial results yield thus far year to date. And
of course, we want to start seeing that trend in in a different direction. Could the impact fees go towards some of that that we had an abundance of? >> No, unfortunately not because those those can't fund like per your general
operating expenses. Those have stringent requirements around how they can be spent based on the additional impact that the development that the you know what what resulted in that in that development. Um, so it's, you know, it's
more of an u ex helping expand the footprint of the community. So things that are like a wear and tear on on our capital related structures, we need to build something out. That's more what it's for, not for operating needs. Um, so yeah, wanted to give you kind of
what this looks like on governmental funds and enterprise funds. I think looking great on Marina Fund, parking fund, right? Continuing to earn um Archabald Park again that was a big
project that we undertook and it was important but we don't have much left now in the Archabald Park fund. Um, so I don't think we can have an ambitious capital improvement plan around Archabald Park unless we want to really supplement that with general fund
transfers because the Archabald Park fund balance is has largely been depleted as a result of u the projects we've incurred thus far. Marcy apologize. I just went through a little bit on the building fund and some of our outsource needs and why
professional services is costs have really escalated from what we anticipated. And I don't know if you had any additional thoughts or comments that you want to add to that. >> Sorry about that. Every time I step out, somebody catches me. So, um, did Andrew do I need to add anything to what Andrew
already explained to you guys? We obviously there's the permit fee issue. Um, we did have a lot of waiverss that got turned in. So if permits are still in the hopper and they were submitted prior to March 26, those that get permitted will not be charged either. So
we still have a workload that will not have permit fees. Um but that will trend will start shifting. All right. Uh let's get into if you know more questions on that. Our current outstanding debt. Good news is we don't have a ton of
debt, different kinds of debt. We just have three issuances. One is the construction of the city center. So that um that was issued back in 2013 2014.
uh the original issuance amount 4.7 million. This is the debt that's in our debt service fund that the debt service payments. You can see what the principal and interest payment is in 2026. We've actually looked at um doing a debt
refunding on this. Um but ultimately, and I presented that um to you all in a in a previous meeting probably four to 6 months ago, um and the the the interest cost savings w wasn't quite worth it that we were going to
continue to evaluate this one um and see if interest rates go down, there might be a better time to jump on a refunding to um to yield cost savings on those debt service costs. Um but right now our current outstanding balance is about 3.5
million. Our biggest one as we talked about was what issue was issued in 2019 for 15 million. We've got 12 million left and our annual debt service requirement is about a million dollars a year. Um sometimes we in most years we'll have
a general fund transfer to the stormwater fund to cover uh that debt service cost. And then the last is just a refunding again of of 4.4 million. This was a
2015. So we did one in 2015 for storm water and another one in 2019 for storm water. The 2019 was much larger. Um and now we have about 2.3 million left of that. We did that refunding in 2020. I was a part of that. Love the interest
rate we're getting on that at 1.73%. So that's awesome. That was a great refunding. Um, and you can see the maturity dates on all this debt. We'll be completely debtree by 2044 if we issue no new debt, but we might be issuing new debt. So, that's why we're going to be through
this budgeting process and planning to see what our our capital needs are going forward. I had a lot uh more I wouldn't say cavalier attitude but I was a lot less concerned about budgeted capital costs prior to the 18
million and because that leads me to my next page is what is our cash and investment balance right a lot of when we budgeted and and funds were budgeted at a deficit meaning that budgeted revenues did not meet planned budgeted expenditures
personnel operating capital and that deficit would have just been funded by existing reserves, right? And so our reserves, as we can see, is have now going down in the general fund because we spent $18 million on that um on that property. And so that also that
translates to what we physically have in cash and investments. So we have an operating investment account. It's a sweep account. We have $750,000 as a steady balance in our operating account. all with the same bank with Hancock Whitney and any excess
periodically I'm not sure the timing gets sweeped into an an investment account that earns a pretty good rate. In addition to that, we also have what's called an LGIP or local government investment pool. It's called uh FL class that also has a decent rate that we
started funding in in uh fiscal year 2023. So you can see over the past three years plus where are we in April as of April 22 um that our total cash investment position
had been going up 33 million 37 million 30 then flat 37 then a little creep up to 38 million uh and now we're down to 22 million from the um the land acquisition that we paid for in cash right we didn't issue debt but if you
recall we also I structured it as a continuing resolution. Meaning if when we make development plans and need to spend X dollars on developing that land, we can incorporate that $18 million land purchase into um
uh into a future um debt issuance if we so desire um because we don't want to get our cash balance is running too low. So, we've we've left that flexibility. I'm not concerned right now. I'm not saying we're we're cash poor. We have no cash in the bank. 22 million. Not bad.
Um but we've got it before we undertake any major capital improvement um projects. We need to evaluate all of our funding sources or as a lot more there's a lot more companies say oh we got 38 million you know we can we can afford this out of reserves um less so now. So
that's why I'm I'm setting the stage for when we go through that our next budget workshop and talk capital. You know, we need to I need be very clear on how is this getting funded. Do we have a grant? Perfect. Even if it's a reimbursement basis grant, we got 22 million in the
bank that can fund it until we get reimbursed. Okay, with that. But if we're depleting reserves in a particular fund and we need major general fund transfers, well those, as you can see, those reserves have have gone down and
just over past recent events that we need to be a little more conscious of that when we uh put together our multi-year capital improvement plan for fiscal year 27 and beyond and present it to you all. Any questions on that?
Makes sense or I completely lost you. >> All right, so that's it for the historical analysis. We'll just do a real quick one on here's the this is more of kind of a formality thing when we adopt the budget every year typically even after that and this is not a mad
deer beach thing. This is uh very common for all governments is a one or more budget amendments might transpire throughout the fiscal year. Why? Because there's unplanned events that occur, right? That we didn't anticipate when we budgeted and this
happened. And so now I need to amend the budget, right? There's a formal process for that. Um that under our code of ordinances, what we can what we are allowed to maybe transfer monies within a department.
Maybe I need to move money from this operating this repair and maintenance expense line item in my department to a office supplies expense. Our departments have the um have the ability to do that without formal commission approval. But
if we need to increase the budget for a particular department uh and increase its overall expense budget, that needs to come to you all for approval and it needs to happen through a formal resolution. So in these in this next page on page
17, these are our proposed budget amendments that uh if it's acceptable to you all, I'll present again in the next regular meeting as a resolution. So this first one is a Gulf Boulevard undergrounding project. So this was uh
it looks like it was budgeted in 25. thought maybe would be fully spent in 25, but we had to roll over a purchase order relating to that uh with our Florida utility or utility consultants of Florida for some unfinished work. Didn't budget for that in 2026. But the
good news here is this is the expense. The revenue source is not just coming out of reserves. So we have a dedicated revenue source for that through our interlocal with Penllis County. So no net budget budgetary uh impact as it
relates to our our reserve balance. So there's a revenue source that's covering that. The next one uh is the $18,120,000 for the purchase of uh property at 555th
Avenue. So we didn't have a dedicated It' be great if we found a grant that would pay us $18 million. Um but we didn't have a dedicated funding source for that. So that was coming out of our reserves. That's that fund balance net position carryover used account.
Um so that's the um that's the proposed amendment to increase that capital expense in the general fund um offset by reserves. And then the last one, again this is a no concern for me as well. This is the
the Readington station that we're building. Um the city incurs all those costs, all those construction related costs kind of the city's managing that project as well. Um but it's not the city's asset. So
ownership was conveyed to the county. Um if the city were to discontinue serving that that building is is the county's building. So that's why the we're not even capitalizing that cost as a as an asset building of the city. It's in this account called other current charges
which is an operating expense. But since we are paying the invoices to these vendors, we're managing the project. We're incurring those expenses, but we also get reimbursed by the county. So, it's a net wash to the city. No, again, no budgetary impact with with regard to
or ending reserve balance on this one. We have the revenue that'll offset this expense. So, this is just timing. We try to budget when we think we're going to incur the costs and we'll we have um a need to increase our fiscal year 26 costs on this one. That'll be fully
reimbured by the county. And then the next page just kind of shows where we're at. If we incorporate these budget amendment items, then this is where we're at um
with for all these departments. And so these are the departments that you can see here and this is fiscal year 2026 year to date based on when I ran this in midappril. And so what we would hope for is to have a remaining balance somewhere at least
in the 40 to 50 per uh percent range or higher since we're about a little more than halfway through the fiscal year. You can see some are very low like uh I think information technology at 9%, law
enforcement at 3%, legal expenses at 8%. But remember that also includes uh incumbrances. So encumbrances means they're purchase orders that we uh create in our financial accounting system and once those purchase orders
are workflow approved in the system and completed they create an encumbrance means basically a purchase commitment. So what I'm evaluating here is not just what we budgeted and what we've actually spent but what we've also encumbered meaning what we plan to spend that we
have through this purchase order um process for the rest of the year. So, sir, so so it legal, law enforcement, we've got bigger purchase orders. We have a purchase order with Penllis County for law enforcement. So, of course, if you include that purchase
order, there's not much left. Um but again, right now we don't foresee um something that could could of course come up in the in the coming months that might require another amendment, but nothing that we see here thus far um
that uh gives an indication that we need to do another amendment at this time. But this is what these those are the three amendments that are needed at this point based on um our evaluation of year-to-ate 2026 results in relation to the budget as well as what we have
encumbered for the rest of the year. questions, concerns, comments on my proposed amendment or are we comfortable with me submitting this in the regular meeting at the next meeting and resolution? >> Not odds look good. >> Comfortable with that.
>> Perfect. Let's finish with our proposed timing for the our remainder of our budget workshops. So, this one I hope was just informative to help you understand. I know like Commissioner Dylan, you're new. What are
these what do these funds even do? What do they mean? How do we work where do we earn revenues and what funds they go into? So, hopefully that gave you gave you some decent perspective not only on what the funds mean, what they do, but also the operating results of each and maybe some of the areas of concern that
we should have in our minds as we go through the budgeting process in fiscal year 27. So that's what I meant to convey in this meeting. That along with the need for this um midyear fiscal year 26 budget amendment, the next budget workshop. So this is I'm now I'm on page
20. The next budget workshop number two at the end of May. That's where we're going to go through our capital improvement plan. I'll be the first one to acknowledge we've been a little loose with presenting everything to you is kind of like a big wish list. I think now that we've made some significant capital
investment with the $18 million purchase, a lot of the more seriously spending our our on our storm water projects. Um we want to be mindful of what our reserve balances are in each fund and have a better understanding and and present that to
you all how these projects are getting funded. um is it with existing reserves um reserve balances or is there a funding source associated with or do we need to issue debt for this or we already have issued debt and here's the remaining unspent funds so I want to
come armed with that knowledge and information as well to present to you I think what we'll also try to do is um give you also a listing of our positions so we'll run through our um our
personnel positions. Um, and give you some overview and analysis on personnel costs, those positions, total salaries, expenses, and what those related taxes and benefits, health insurance, retirement, etc., and what um to give
you some an initial anal uh information that's going to that we're putting together for our personnel budget. >> Can I ask just a quick question about that? Um will that include uh the uh HR director and a public information officer position?
>> So that's a conversation we'll have internally uh with our city manager. I know and I'll you know fill you in on here's kind of what we budgeted you know for 2026. These are the unfilled positions. Do we want to fund this in
2027? Um, so I I don't want to speak out of turn and answer that. I think that's ultimately a city manager call on the positions we want to have for 2027 that don't exist now. But assuming yeah, we're all on the same page on that,
we'll we'll show that. We'll show all the positions and if they're vacant, we'll note that that it's vacant, but we want to um to fund it for the next year. >> Thank you. No, I've been uh involved with uh speaking with the uh recruiter
on the HR position and she's going to give us a a U budget for her uh recruiting of the HR director and um Megan and I have been talking about that, you know, probably twice with the
or once with the recruiter um about what that position going to take. We will probably bring it up in the uh budget meetings on what the salary range is going to be. And then with the community communications officer, uh that one
we're going to be putting out a um a uh job description and then I think we're going to be hiring that in-house. Yeah, we're not going to have to go through a recruiter on that. >> Great. Thank you. >> So, I have a question for you. Um, Mike,
we've talked about doing a strategic plan. Um, the May 27th budget meeting is going to talk about capital improve the capital improvement plan. When do you think it's realistic that we would be able to schedule and do
strategic planning for the city? >> In the first week that I've been here. >> I know. I know. And I'm And I'm not here's my concern. My concern is that if we are making capital improvement decisions prior to doing strategic
planning, we don't really know what we want to do for capital improvements. um and can't really make decisions based on do we need debt for you know one thing or the other without the strategic planning and could we and I I obviously
do not believe we could do strategic planning in the next 30 days but could we do strategic planning in the next 60 days and then circle back on the capital improvement portion of the budget and possibly make some changes based off what the decisions the commission and
staff do in that process. I believe. So the other thing that we have is we have the master uh the the um the master plan which is a start of a strategic plan. So you have a good basis. So what we can do from now until
the strategic plan is use that as our guidance uh for doing the capital improvement. I would hope that we can get a strategic plan in the next 60 days. I I cannot tell you because we have not really gone out much on it. Um
looking past um what Kimley Horn has given us. That's about all we're at right now. And then I'd like to bring what we've decided uh to the commission on maybe having a uh we had talked about
um an an outside firm um and I'm trying to remember the name of it >> the strategic institute I >> yes um what is the name of that >> we got a quote from John Dailyaly
>> it was um creat Creative >> Creat Oh yeah. Innovative Labs. >> In Innovative Labs. Yes. Uh and so we're going to reach out to them to see what their schedule is like. Again, we do have a strategic plan uh cost from
Kimley Horn. So, we may go that route, but I I really would like to the do the creative lab the innovative labs. >> Okay. Thank you. I'm going to bring it up now in terms of
I told Mike I will not be available for the September 23rd meeting and since it's the second meeting I don't know if it's you know >> well we're going to have to replace you >> well okay I mean you yeah so uh and actually I'm
not going to be available for the October 10th meeting either I've got plans before I became a commissioner have to be >> well sometimes we're able to adjust the schedule to be accommodating but not always. So we'll have to see when we look at the um
>> I don't expect it. I'm just you know saying that in terms of if and since it's the second reading I mean you know I don't know you know I'd be here for the first so I think we'd have a good idea as to whether or not it's going to be passing. So if I'm not here I think
that you know the numbers would still work. So, yeah, that is a voting meeting. We do need to follow our truth and millage act trim guidelines. >> Um, I I'd love to get everybody on that on
that second meeting vote because we actually have to I submit that information back to the state on who all of our yes votes were, no votes. Um, you know, we could look at city clerk, I can work with you on potentially moving that date. Um, it's just convenient. It's at
5:45 and then it goes right into a a regular meeting >> because that vote depends on the vote. How many people's here >> is what you choose in the millage rate. Am I correct? >> Will you be voting on both the millage rate and the adoption of the budget?
>> So, uh, >> well, would I be able to vote by proxy? >> Nope. I mean, I'm just >> It depends on your percentage. four fifths vote or unanimous or whatever.
>> So, we could look at potentially changing that date if that accommodates everybody um to ensure we get full participation and maybe you we can look at that as an option. >> Yes, sir. >> Okay. on there.
>> And then just a quick comment on the on the capital improvement plan knowing that it's running in parallel with the strategic plan. Our city code of ordinances requires that we present not adopt but present a capital budget. That's not a state requirement. A state
requirement is we budget have a adopted budget for 101. Um and our that's a city requirement, our code of ordinances. That's why we start that process. But certainly it's subject to can go through multiple iterations and changes through
the through the process. That date of July 1 doesn't mean it's fixed and done and we can't touch it. Um we just have to you know have it formally presented by then. So certainly it can be it can be modified as we go through that strategic planning.
Any other questions on the the timeline for our remaining you know workshops? One down, four to go. you guys can do it. Uh each one kind of has its own purpose. I think the August 26th one could be as
you like a 10 15 minute meeting because we've already basically covered everything and given you a preliminary budget book ideally by July and that August one is just kind of formalized like okay this is the one we're going to be presenting in September. Do you see anything that needs any you know kind of
last minute changes? But um that's and this is pretty similar to the plan that to the uh the schedules that we've had in years past. So and it seemed to it seemed to work well at least from my viewpoint.
Otherwise, then uh we'll we'll reconvene uh for budget workshop 2 on May 27th with a capital improvement plan focus as well as roster of our proposed um personnel cost and an individual
positions both currently filled and those vacant that we'll be looking to fill uh for the 27 budget. Do >> we have any public comment? Appreciate you all sticking with me. >> Thank you, Andrew. All right, it is
3:32. We're adjourned. Part: 2
Good evening. Welcome to the board of commissioners regular workshop meeting. Today is Wednesday, April 29th, 2026. It is 400 p.m. City Clerk, would you call the role, please? >> Mayor Brooks, >> here. >> Vice Mayor McInn
>> here. Commissioner Tagalini >> here. >> Commissioner Dylan >> here. >> Commissioner Gabbay >> here. All are present. >> Thank you. Tonight we have two proclamations. The first first proclamation is National Safe Boating
Week and I will read the proclamation. National Safe Boating Week is May 16th through May 22nd, 2026. For over 100 million Americans, boating remains a popular recreational activity.
From coast to coast and everywhere in between, people are taking to the water to enjoy time together boating, sailing, paddling, and fishing. During National Safe Boating Week, the US Coast Guard and the National Safe Boating Council
along with federal, state, and local safe boating partners encourage all boers to explore and enjoy America's beautiful waters responsibly. Safe boating begins with preparation. The Coast Guard estimates that human
error accounts for most boating accidents and that life jackets could prevent nearly 75% of boating fatalities. by following basic boating safety procedures, carrying life-saving emergency distress and communications
equipment, wearing life jackets, attending safe boating courses, participating in free boat safety checks, and staying sober when navigating. We can help ensure that boers on America's coastal, inland, and
offshore waters stay safe throughout the season. National Safe Boating Week is observed to raise awareness of important lifesaving tips for recreational boers to help ensure a safer, more fun
experience on the water. Whereas on average, 650 people die each year in boating related accidents in the US of which 75% are fatalities caused by drowning.
Whereas the vast majority of these accidents are caused by human error or poor judgment and not by the boat equipment or environmental factors. And whereas a significant number of boers
who lose their lives by drowning would be alive today had they worn their life jackets. And therefore, I, Anmarie Brooks, mayor of the city of MadiRaa Beach, Florida, do hereby support the goals of the North American Safe Boating
Campaign and proclaim May 16 through 22nd, 2026 as National Safe Boating Week and urge all voters to vote smart, boat safe, and wear it proclaimed this 29th day of April, 2026.
In witness whereof, I urge all those who vote to practice safe boating habits and wear a life jacket at all times while boating. Thank you. And I believe we have a member of the Coast Guard to accept
this. I don't have any speech but I would like you may support us and current year and just let you know we're back in business start the first Saturday of every month and
we're going to be getting pamplets out and distributing throughout the area within the next couple weeks. So if you hear invites of course we're in business. >> Awesome. Thank you very have another proclamation for municipal clerk's week. It's the 57th annual
professional municipal clerk's week. I'll read the proclamation. Whereas the office of the professional municipal clerk, a timehonored and vital part of local government, exists throughout the world. And whereas the office of the
professional municipal clerk is the oldest among public servants. And whereas the office of the professional municipal clerk provides the professional link between the citizens, the local governing bodies and agencies
of government at other levels. And whereas professional municipal clerks have pledged to be ever mindful of their neutrality and impartiality, rendering equal service to all.
Whereas the professional municipal clerk serves as the information center on the functions of local government and the community. Whereas professional municipal clerks continually strive to improve the administration of the affairs of the
office of the professional municipal clerk throughout participation in education programs, seminars, conferences, workshops, and the annual meetings of their state, provincial, county, and international professional
organizations. Whereas it is most appropriate that we recognize the accomplishments of the office of the professional municipal clerk. Now therefore, Immarie Brooks, mayor of the city of MadiRaa Beach, do recognize the
week of May 3rd through the 9th, 2026 as professional municipal clerks week and further extend appreciation to our professional municipal clerk, Clara Venbaran, and to all professional municipal clerks for the vital services
they perform and their exemplary dedication to the communities they represent. Clara, >> sorry. Yay. >> Congratulations. >> Congratulations. >> She said, "I'm glad it wasn't upside down."
>> Welld deserved. >> Next on the agenda is public comment. Public participation is encouraged. If you are addressing the commission, step up to the podium, and state your name and address for the record and the organization or group you represent.
Please limit your comments to 5 minutes and do not include any topic on the agenda. Public comment on agenda items will be allowed when they come up. If you would like someone at the city to follow up on a comment or question made at the meeting, you may fill out a
comment card with a contact information and give it to the city manager. Comment cards are available at the back table on the commission chambers. Completing a comment card is not mandatory. Do we have any public comment? You all got me here.
My phones are ringing. My name is Lori Hopkins. I've lived at 912. Can you hear me now? I'm short. My name is Lori Hopkins. I live at 912 Bay Point Drive, Madira Beach. I just have a few items.
I'd like to start off by saying welcome, city manager. Mike, I know it's an emergency. I'm sorry. I tried to turn it off. Is it bothering you? It'll go off. Sorry. Sorry. I got three emergencies, but I'm here because I I said I would
be. So, I wanted to say welcome to our city manager, Mike. It's nice to have you here. glad to hear last night. We're gonna pick up the pace and we're gonna get going. And also, I would like to share a commendation to our fire chief Clint
for his hard work and extra efforts as our extraordinary interim city manager. In all of my many city conversations with Clint, which the last 31 years I had very few conversations with the city, but with Clint, he was always very
forthcoming, honest, and always familiar with whatever item we were talking about. So, I really appreciate him. Thank you, Clint. Thank you. Now, I'd like to talk about Bayoint Drive where I live. I know you've heard
about it a lot and so I'll speak about it. About the middle of last year, we were at a conversation with the mayor's meeting and many of the residents on Bayoint Drive asked when the mill and resurface would be happening because we
are part of the area 9 project which I guess does not happen for about four more years is what I'm hearing. So there's planned a mill and resurface for that road. We were told at that time it would be about eight more months which
would be January of February 2026. So then at the February 11th meeting my neighbor at 904 Baypoint Drive came to this meeting and spoke to all of you saying Bayoint Drive is very undrivable.
It's not bikable or safe for walking or riding. I even myself was walking home at 9 or about 8:30 one night and a sheriff deputy stopped me and she said, "I stopped you cuz you're walking down the middle of the road." And I said, "Well, you had to
be real careful." So at that time the mayor asked or she first said that she had received many comments about this topic and asked for an expedited date and told the
fastest would get done is about 8 months and that was February 11th. So this is eight months after the middle of last year when we were told eight months. And I know in my past background in government purchasing, I'm very familiar with buying off of other county bids
that you can do that. You can get better pricing and also many times you can get it done quicker. And that's what we were told. But that it would be another eight months. And when my neighbor spoke at the microphone, he asked you all, if you're not familiar with it, go out there. I'll walk with you so you can see
it. And hopefully you all have done that. since February. I'm just here today to say, "Can you help?" I was ready myself to go find those bids so we can get it done. It's a simple meal. And
um so that was what I basically came today to talk about. I was going to wait and meet with the new city manager and somebody's like, "No, come talk to the commission about it." And um I think you've heard about it quite a bit. And then the last item I'll just mention
very briefly was the last April 6th magistrate meeting. And at that meeting there were several topics brought up. If you haven't seen them yet, um I encourage you to watch that meeting. Both of them had examples in
them that were very unfortunate, but they also both included, and I love our city staff dearly, but they both included city staff um wrongdoings, and if they had been done correctly, then the
outcome might have been different. The magistrate is very clear in explaining himself. All he can do is rule on if the code was properly written in the code violation. So whether anything else was done proper or not, he doesn't deal with
any of that. He just encourages them to find their own attorney. So I just encourage you to watch that and see maybe what can be done about those two instances. Okay. Thank you very much. I got 11 seconds left. If you if you want me to
sing, I will. Thank you again. I got to go deal with my phone. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Do we have any additional public comment? With no additional public comment, next on the agenda is the board of commissioners. The first item is 14140
East Parsley Drive property. Um, Marcy. >> And so I I know this is a topic um on the mayor's radar because we had a gentleman who reached out to us regarding his ability to rebuild on his
property related to a duplex. And we responded with information that where we informed him of some of the things he needed to be aware of for the redevelopment, but that we saw no no issues with it moving forward. When we sent that email, we also attached the
code um 110-96 and I've put that in front of you guys. It was not in the packet, but I have provided it to you guys. The issue that that happened there was um item number six in our code of 110 110-96
states occupational license required. Failure to have a current required occupational license in force at the time of the declared disaster will prevent this section from applying to the property. So with this with the storm having come in
and us having an abnormal amount of of permits that we're processing and stuff like that, a lot of things that we have not normally encountered as being issues are rise are arising. This is one of them and it's not one we've really came across too often, but it's one of those that you find one and
then you shortly thereafter have another. So with that, we do have properties that have been renting and have not received a business tax receipt. So they were doing business within the community without a BTR at the time of the
hurricane. So that kind of voids some of the flexibility they would otherwise be given. Um during the special magistrate meeting, the owner of the property and his attorney stated that they felt like that that's a harsh crime for a small a
small issue really. And then the question, you know, that has been posed to me is well, how do I know to get a BTR? When do I need a BTR? And those types of things. So, an issue like this happens, the first thing I ask is what do we need to do different and better to communicate who needs a BTR and then how
do we get that out there? Um, when I feel like a lot of the stuff that we do have um our communication breakdowns and sometimes you can overcommunicate. So, there's always that fine balance. I think the main thing with this and in my conversations with the mayor is what
what can we do to remove this as as a confining factor in this case and how much of an effort would that be? And so this is kind of for you guys to discuss. I would have to look and see where all this impacts our code. And so if it's
straightforward and it's a couple of sentences, it should be pretty easy. though it'll go through the the process, but it would require us changing our ordinances to to not enforce that at the time. So, and we are finding more people who did
not have a BTR at the time that the hurricanes hit. So, their ability to rebuild, like I said, is is impacted. Do we have any public comment? So, I'll start on this just because I I have
a personal experience with BTR. Um, had a online business that we ran out of our house that required BTR. I had no idea you needed a BTR to have a business in Mader Beach. It wasn't until I was elected to the commission and started
shadowing in the city and went into the community development department and sat with the person who is responsible for doing the BTRs and I found out what a BTR is. So I was in violation and had no idea that I was in violation or that it
was required. And my understanding was that there was a period of time where we really didn't enforce it. Um, when I did my shadowing that day, it was kind of kind of new that we were even working on
enforcing BTRs. So when this particular instance came up, um I thought well that doesn't really seem fair if somebody doesn't know that they would just in in this case and it's not just
this case. I believe it'd be safe to say this applies to more than just this one individual, but they purchased a property that didn't have a BTR and they can't re they can't tear it down and build up because it didn't have
a BTR. What we're telling them they have to do because of this code is you've got to spend a couple hundred,000 fixing the duplex and then after you fix it and you get your BTR then you can come back and tear it down and build a new one.
Is that is that a fair I mean that's my layman throwing it out there but is that a fair kind of statement Marcy? >> So there are there are things and and it that was never the design of the code. Correct you. But if you follow it and the ifands and buts, she's correct. That
is a conclusion that you would come to, which does not make sense. >> Right. So to me, it seems I mean, it seems ridiculous that you would tell somebody who wants to take a building out of the flood zone and and lift it up that they can't do that because they
didn't have a BTR. And I um the owner actually came to a meeting and I met with him and then I know he's had some discussions with Marcy. Um there was a a conflict in that when before they bought the property, they came to the city and asked, "Can we do this?" They were told
yes, but they didn't really know that they didn't have the BTR, which is what created the confusion. And I think that however we figure out to um let people know that they need a BTR or what have you, to me, this is very punishing for
something that doesn't seem like it really gets anything good accomplished. I would be in favor of changing it so that that is not and if you wanted to if you wanted to do it where there was a penalty or something I don't know that
that's appropriate but to just it seems like a doesn't seem like it makes sense to make it >> be that way. >> Agreed. And I was just double checking while you're talking to make sure it's it's in R1 which poses some added layer of stuff too. So you run into dis you
run into issues in certain zones that you don't necessarily in other ones. So um but yes I mean for sure >> I have a couple questions. >> Absolutely. I'm done now. >> I I recognize that look now. I always got questions. So tagini
>> is it expensive to to apply for and get a BTR? >> No. Our BTRs are very affordable. Um I don't know. It comes with a rental inspection. So sometimes that's where it gets, but the the BTR is is under $100. Um I don't
>> Is it a state requirement or is a municipal or a county requirement? >> We have a we we have it in our local ordinance. I can't speak to if we have it in our local ordinance because there is a state requirement. I'm not sure if Tom or Andrew can weigh in on any state requirements, but it is definitely in
our ordinance to have the BTRs >> and so I'm assuming that the property right now is not rentable. it's it's damaged and it's they can't. So, would they let's just pretend that didn't exist, the the requirement that it already be
in place. Would they even be able to get one on the current property as it is without us changing something? >> So, that that that's a good point. Um they've already demolished the property. So, >> so it's just a lot right now.
>> So, it this this particular instance, it's just a lot right now. And so, >> and our and our ordinance prevents them from applying for a BTR on a future property. >> So, R1 only allows for single family home. Thank you, Andrew, for setting.
So, R1 only allows for single family home. So, that's that's where and that's where our code becomes a, for lack of a better description, a word salad. >> We have you can be non-conforming because of the size of your lot. You can be non-conforming because of your structure, and you can be non-conforming
because of your use. So you can have a use that wasn't normally allowed but got grandfathered in or you could have a structure such as a duplex that would wouldn't be allowed to be built today. This particular instance he would you would not be allowed to rebuild a duplex
in R1. But because it's an existing duplex in R1, we would allow them through the rebuilding to rebuild except for the fact that they didn't have a BTR at the time of the disaster. So that's kind of where this gets a little layered. And Andrew, do you want to add anything into that? Sorry.
>> Yeah. Um, so basically if in a scenario where uh you um we remove either remove the BTR requirement or um give forgiveness for properties impacted by hurricane Helen. Um basically what is
being asked so the these properties are are non-conforming for for density. So, a lot. So, in R1, it's a it's 7 and a half units per acre. Um, so that means you need a lot that's about
like 5,800 square feet. Um, so a lot of these non-conforming uh properties usually they have at least double or more than the density that's currently allowed there. So if we remove so when they're rebuilding they're rebuilding
something that's normally wouldn't be a permitted use there by right it's would basically only be allowed to be rebuilt because of it was damaged during the storm. So, >> so we would be we would be really doing
not only uh if we change things allowing them to apply for BTR, but also we would be allowing them to build a legally non-compliant structure. Is that also what's >> Well, it be it'd be compliant with Florida building code. It it just when
um and and we have pro like that provision, our code to protect um uh property owners. So they because a lot of these buildings were conforming at some point and back in the back in the day in various areas some areas were downzone for the concerns of
overdevelopment and other various reasons. Some areas were reszoned from R2 to R1 because they only wanted single family there. Um depends on which property there's history. So um but it would be approving a building. Other
cities do have provisions in their code to allow for non-conforming density to be rebuilt. Um, St. City of St. Petersburg has a provision in their code, but they also do require BTR uh to be able to rebuild. >> So, can you remind me is is is R1 mean
no rentals at all or is it just long-term 6 months, 3 months? >> I mean, it's a six-month minimum. six months minimum, >> but but it's a single family is the permitted use for res residential um property there current if you wanted to
build something by right. >> But the big key here is as I've done a lot of research, if they demo it, they can only go back with a single family home. So if it was a duplex and they tear it down without some of the changes here, they can only go back with a
single family home, which is wrong. and and it's kind of getting combined cuz there's this came up with the Greg Chason. He has not done anything to his property. He did the right thing. He purchased it and he came to the city and
said, "What can we do?" And this is what we're looking at here now. But now what we were also talking about is the magistrate's hearing. There's a lady that lives right down the street from him that had a quadplex. She went through the same process. She demoed the
place and now she can only build a single family home back because of something I think in 1987 that they wanted everybody in the R1 district to only have single family homes.
So I I mean you know it it's wrong. Um I I don't believe that the BTR should be gotten rid of. I think they're very good and keeping them in place is important, but yet the catastrophic
occurrence that we had is where it's really putting a ball in the system. And that's what I feel we need to change. Where at the magistrate's hearing, this lady bought the quadplex, tore it down, wanted to build up another quadplex,
and by code and all the stuff that we have here is she can no longer do anything except build a single family house back. >> So So, so that but that's unrelated to the BTR. Is that is it or is it? It's
because of the BTR. She did not have a BTR in place. >> She purchased it four years ago >> and then did not have a BTR in place. And since she demoed the place >> and and once again, just like the mayor said, it's so convoluted that, you know,
the way our code reads is that you got catastrophic damage. So you've got to replace the damage then for the next storm then you can tear it down and lift up which you know is is ludicrous.
I would be interested to know if we just removed six, would that fix these particular situations that we're talking about? Six, because six says occupational
license required, failure to have a current required occupational license in force at the time of the declared disaster will present this se prevent this section from applying to that property. So if number six wasn't there then
would they be able to do to rebuild up? So what we can do is we can evaluate the code we we've discussed there's a this comes from our non-conforming section which needs a complete overhaul in general. So this has been one piece of a larger conversation.
>> But if the goal is to remove this penalty, we can get together, figure out what we do need to touch in our code. If there's other areas where we always find that they are somewhere, we can address that, meet with the city attorney and kind of get a better fill. But with that direction, we we we could move forward
with with researching that. I think also whatever was implemented in 1987 uh which was if something a catastrophic storm happens then this happens. So I don't believe in 1987 anybody had any
idea well they didn't know about titles and all this stuff and the raise in water level but I think that in itself might need to be looked at removing or at least changing the wordage and I know Tom's
>> true throughout our code. So we have a lot of stuff from the 80s that are still there >> and just to clarify I mean residential density is capped here. We're not allowed to increase it. Right. >> So, whatever is in place is in place and we're not allowed to touch it. One potential thing we could because because
other cities do have the business tax license requirement with their equivalent of rebuilding after catastrophic loss, but is there any way we could offer forgiveness for properties damaged during Hurricane Helen and Milton? And because I because I think getting rid of it would kind of
open the door for people just not to have a business tax to get inspections. But I I I do agree it's un because a lot of properties didn't realize and they got hit all at once with backto-back storms. Um but offering forgiveness
would be important but not to encourage that to continue. That's that's what I was going to suggest is that uh if re just reword number six to read if BTR was not in place at the time of the damage it must be uh applied for and received before re uh construction can
begin and therefore this would this would catch all those you know would get scoop everybody in that didn't have one and need to rebuild and we would we wouldn't get rid of the BTR requirement. >> Let me let me ask a question. The reason for BTR is because they were renting these units.
>> Correct. So, how many units were there? >> Was we had one with four units and then the other one was a duplex? >> Those six units all together >> for the two different properties. >> And how big is the property? >> It's two separate properties. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. I mean, we're looking at seven and
a half units an acre. Uh that's for residential but typically for like overnight is is overnight is rental allowed in R1. >> R1 you have to rent for 6 months or more. >> Yeah. And and these were probably be
rent these were being rented as long-term apartment like like more than six months. >> Let me let me just say Penol County doesn't have any BTR. You can you can have a you can have a building a business in Penol County. there's no BTR
requirement. So BTR is just a local thing. Cities impose that and it's not a bad thing. Um there's also this thing called termination of nonconformity. So if if we are allowing
properties like this to be rebuilt, then we should agree that we're terminating the nonconformity of the use. Ter uh termin terminating the non it has been non-conforming. It has been it's non-conforming. will
terminate it. And we all agreed that it's okay to continue with that nonconforming and therefore allowing her to go ahead and build these units. There are municipalities that use that terminology.
>> And >> well, I don't I don't have my numbers. I forgot to bring the sheet, but I was doing some stuff on the property appraisals. And in that area, if there are 30 properties, 25 of them are
multifamilies. So, 25 out of 30 are duplex, triplex, or multi- uh quadplex. And so, I don't know that any of those people necessarily know that they have to have a BTR. And
this is what the mayor had said before. So is whether or not they are knowledgeable of it. Well, I think the city kind of should take some fault in that because like you know we know and we can see what our duplex is and so we
have some responsibility in this I feel and by correcting this and and I'm not looking to get rid of the BTRs at all. I think the beepts are very correct and not changing. Well, it it it's it's
because we had a catastrophic issue and had that not happened, this wouldn't be an issue. So, by correcting it, and I'm not sure exactly how we can correct it because you guys during the magistrate
hearing was were trying your best. I mean, you know, and as to what what we can do, and this is something as a city, I am a big on board with helping our residents. And if they had a duplex,
let them go back with a duplex and it's was if it was non-conforming or conforming, you know, and this is just in that area. We've got 143rd, 144th, 145th that are tiny, tiny lots and they're non-conforming and many of them
are duplexes and triplexes. So this is what our city is. So I think we need to do what we can to help these people and especially if they're wanting to tear it down and build up another duplex and be
compliant. That's that's my >> D. That's what we're trying to do here. help these people. So that that's what we're discussing to help them. >> How to help them is the question. >> Exactly. >> So So let's try to find a way to help them. >> Yes. So Marcy, I would I would think
that based off this conversation um if you your department would come up with a solution that we can vote on and approve and whether that's to make sure
that we are not disrupting other areas of the code and bring that back. and we all agree that we want to do whatever we can to accommodate those properties and move them forward.
>> Absolutely. And um obviously the goal with these codes was always to get compliance and things like that, but right now the priority for us the compliance is really in having um flood resilient homes and so getting them built and getting them elevated. And just as we talk about BTRs, not to get
too focused, um because we have over 107 listed, um the rental ones are like nine or 10 bucks. So those are pretty inexpensive, but as you get into different businesses, the cost of the BTRs do vary and stuff like that. So I didn't want anybody to think that across the board they were like 10 bucks. But
if you go to 62-60 of our code, it'll give you an extensive list. But the rental ones are not are not expensive. So with that, our marching orders will be to figure out how we can incorporate some verbiage into our code, provide relief such that people are not penalized in this capacity as related to a BTR.
>> That's great. So we're not we're not uh getting rid of BTR. No. Right. Just got it. Thank you. >> And then also I guess just like we we change the uh when houses are lifted, we change that so that they can go into the
setbacks and all that to have access and stairs. I think this is something that we should do as well. I mean, you know, and in terms of that went through pretty quickly and rather than keeping all these people on hold as to what they're going to do. So, thank you.
>> Clearwater has a very good code in relationship to what we're discussing. It may not be a bad idea to read that and see if we can adopt any. >> Yeah. >> Thank you, Marcy. >> Thank you. >> Next on the agenda is the BOC policy handbook. Did everyone review it?
>> Yes. >> Did anyone have comments for changes? >> Oh, yeah. Where do you want to start? >> Start. >> Let you go. Okay. Uh, a super majority. I still
>> give a page so that we can go to it and >> Oh, it's 13 of 20. I mean, you uh Let me look and see if >> Nope. Nope. You got 13 of 20. >> Yeah. No, that's that one. That's my >> Okay. >> Article two. Let's see.
services. Oh jeez. Hard gole rules of procedure. I had it in my Well, someone else. David, if you want to go, I'll find it. >> If you want to I'll just do this real
quick. Uh in the uh regarding Ma Oh, you want me to know exactly where mine comes from, too? Uh commission contact with mail page 11. Um it says, "All correspondents received at city hall for the mayor of commissioners
is considered official mail excluding anonymous mail and shall be open by the city clerk." And then this is the part uh original shall be filed as part of the public record and a copy of the mail shall be placed in the handbook of the commission member to whom the mail was
addressed. I I don't have an issue with that, but I don't recall that ever happening uh in my last two terms. If we're doing it, let's do it. If we're not doing it, let's remove it. So, I believe that there was a period of time, and Clara will correct me if I'm wrong, there was a period of time where that
the city manager instructed for that not to happen, and it is something that should happen. Anything that gets mailed to us at city hall is public record. And my understanding is Clara's Clara is opening them, >> um, scanning them, and recording them
like they should be for the public. >> So, we took that task back over when we realized that was happening. >> I work here. So, that's going to start happening again because a couple of times I I mean I haven't really felt worried, but I've received a card and I said I have the original for this. Uh
what happened if I just threw it away? And so I feel like I should have somebody should have a copy and I don't know if it was copied. It said according to this I should get the copy. It says and a copy of the mail shall be placed in the mailbox of the commission member
to whom the mail was addressed. And I've I've always received originals. They've been opened >> right there. So when they're opened, you get the original. That means if it's been open, it means that her office has documented it. >> If there are invitation cards, just cards, you know, inviting you to
something. That's different. >> I just want a clarification on that. Thank you. >> The clerk's office took that back over when we real because it was removed. >> I can't I can't hear you, Clara. >> The clerk's office took that back that passed back over when the new the past city manager removed that from the
clerk's office. So when we realized what was happening, we took it back over and made sure that those copies were being made. >> Okay. Thank you very much. That that seems to answer that pro that issue for me. Thank you.
>> Okay. I found page 25. >> What? It's number what of 20? >> 25 of policy and voting. >> Look right here. What number is that? >> 13. >> 13. Thank you.
a supermajority vote of four members. So when is a supermajority vote required >> from the city charter >> I I know that community development >> I didn't find it there >> commissioner for a commissioner any plan
development or zoning special area plan shall require a m a supermajority is what it says there. >> Okay. >> And that's because it's in your charter. It's a charter provision that's just been regurgitated here. So your charter
requires that supermajority for the plan development reszoning or special area plans and that's why it's written here again. >> Okay. I just didn't really um I hadn't gotten any clarification as to when exactly those are. I know they have to happen but so basically so for planned
development >> plan development resonings and special area plans >> for instance when we did the uh the John's pass village activity designation that required a 41 supermajority and uh I I can't remember maybe there was one
other since I've been here so it doesn't happen much. >> No. >> Okay. And then page 14 of 20 or 26. The workshops, are we changing those to 4:00 as opposed
to 6:00? >> Yes, >> I have no issue with that. >> No. That's all I had. Any other comments >> with residents? Most residents work, don't they? I mean, generally residents
work, so they want to be here after our after work hours. >> What are you referencing? Who >> the time? >> The time >> that the workshops. So, we started today's workshop at 2:00. >> Yes. >> Our budget workshop. And then we started this workshop at 4:00. And when we
changed that, we agreed that 4:00 because workshops can run so long were better because number one, staff has been here since 7:30 this morning, right? And so workshops are working meetings and if a
meeting runs until midnight, there's no there's nobody here witnessing the meeting then anyhow. So whether we come early enough that staff has the um cognitive ability to still be present,
starting earlier is better for staff. Staying later is is >> detrimental >> for all of us. And either way you go, you're either earlier or later. I think if something's on the agenda and people really want to participate in the
discussion, they'll either call us or show up before or if it ran until 11 o'clock at night, they would call you after they watched it the next day. So 4:00 starting is really being more cognizant of staff
and all of us that we can sit here and pay attention and have valuable conversations and still be able to think quick on our feet, >> not fall asleep. >> That's right. >> Yes. I feel like when we had this discussion, we we talked about how the workshops, as you said, were discussion,
but the meetings, the regular meetings, six o'clock absolutely are making it available to people come. That's when we vote. >> Correct. >> There's still opportunity for input. >> There is. That's why we do input before discussion and then you know what the community thinks and then we talk about that
amongst ourselves. >> Okay. If >> mayor, I have two Yes, sir. >> two changes that need to be made just to bring them your attention. uh page 10 of 20 which is 22 in the packet there's a reference to the government and the sunshine manual that
should be a reference to 2025 and the pages are 21 and 22 and um >> on page 11 of 20 which is 23 of the agenda packet the reference to the 2022
government the sunshine manual should be the 2025 government in the sunshine manual the page number is correct Correct. >> Correct. I'm changing that. Yes, sir. >> Thank you, Attorney Tras. All right. If we have nothing further,
next on the agenda is the city manager, RFP26-02, holiday decor. >> Good evening, mayor and uh commissioners. um on this um this was a
a request for proposal for holiday decor services and they did it did go out to bid and they received two responsive bids. Uh one was from Holiday Outdoor Decor and Sarasota Holiday Lighting. Uh
the difference in the pricing was a was a real large difference. uh holiday decor was $43,642 and the Sarasota holiday lighting was uh $117,550. Um
their proposal reflects a continuity of services consistent with prior years that is for the holiday one. Uh the Sarasota lighting submitt uh was significantly higher than the than the current vendor's pricing. Not really
sure why that was, but it was a large uh a very large difference. Uh staff recommends that we award it to holiday decor uh contract uh the holiday decor contract to holiday uh outdoor decor.
That's a lot of holiday decors. Um so if there's anything else um you want to talk about on this. Do we have any public comment? >> Any questions?
>> I just I believe anytime that we can save money during these times that it's it's a great idea to uh stay with the same company that we had. So, uh I would be more inclined to agree with the staff on this one.
>> Sure. Uh one thing I would like to note uh with the holiday outdoor decor is they are getting some solar options. So, um, something that I'm looking for direction of is are you interested in that? And if you are, what would you like to cap it at? Because I don't want to go crazy. >> So, my question was going to be about
the electrical. I know that last year there were a lot of challenges with the um decorations that were put on the light poles >> uh, and the need for electrical repairs to be made there. So, if we were going to do illuminated decor decorations on
the light poles, they're they don't all work. and that's challenging. So, is there value in fixing those? I know that um we'd had some conversation in the cost to go with Duke Energy, the cost to do privately
because the the electrical receptacles that are on the poles are our responsibility. >> Yes. And so I would not want us to put in to install decorations that are plugged in and don't work because it looks
terrible when you're driving down the road and three are out, then two are on, then one is out, then one is on, and then um so I mean I would appreciate some conversation more in depth on that. Is it because if if you're going to do
solar and the solar is going to cost us just for renting, >> would that money not be better spent in repairing our electrical receptacles or not? I don't know that that is a factual statement. >> If you'd like, I can do two proposals with them. I can do one with the solar
options for the the poles. I don't know exactly what's out there because I haven't really dug deep with that yet. Um but I do know that Megan has some contacts for the electrical poles to get them repaired. So we can add that to the cost of the non-solar if you will so we can compare apples to apples.
>> I mean I think I think that would be what I would want to see. >> It's a good idea >> for for what >> and and just to clarify to understand is the value in it. >> Yes. >> For us to repair the receptacles on the poles or not is that because it could be
a yearly cost. >> Correct. >> For what it's worth, uh every every Christmas I get emails. Why aren't all our lights work? They look terrible. So, uh, let's do take action. >> They'd be better to all be dark. >> Yeah. >> Than to be sparse.
>> Okay. Uh, for the next workshop, I'll come with those two proposals then. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Pleasure. >> Next on the agenda is direction on the new property purchase at 555th Avenue. >> Um, >> city manager.
>> In the first five days, I've been asked by staff about this. Um, and I think what what we're looking for at this time is are we in the right are we going in the right direction of trying to figure out
what uh what is what are we going to put out there at the 555 property? Um there have been I believe two workshops and if you look in your package this is the basically a a notes of what were taken
during those workshops and it's an assortment of of different things um following the there are four areas that that have keep having a a return uh conversation on and that would be
parking garage surface um parking and then shuttle boat docks for the uh hourly and overnight time uh rates and then open space something like a coachman park and then a nice restaurant uh to be there.
Um again uh this property is going to have to be reszoned so we have that obstacle to go through. Um, and I think at this point, um, maybe the strategic planning process
would help us give us a more, uh, concise, um, direction on how we go with this. Um after thinking about our conversation earlier in the in the uh budget meeting the we have already a
proposal from Kimley Horn to do a strategic planning and maybe that's the route we should take um moving forward because that's wrapped around a capital improvement portion. Now the strategic plan that at some point in time that we're going to have to do I believe is
going to be a a more than just capital improvement. So the strategic plan for the capital improvement would be just for this budget year and then we can think about later on the year having a strategic plan which would be more than just capital improvements.
>> Do we have any public comment? So I thought that when we talked about Kimley Horn doing the strategic plan, it was for a long range view, not just for one year. We we if if it was only for one year, then this whole commission, I think, missed that because
um we would have been looking for a strategic plan >> for a fiveyear >> for five years. Yes. >> Okay. And I will check on that to make sure. >> Um >> what I saw I my understanding was it was almost just like a one-year like a capital improvement one. again. I could
be I'm >> and that's a I I don't understand why you've been here for five days. >> I I will get upset. >> I'm only kidding, Mike. I'm only kidding. >> I will I will look into that. It was just that um the strategic planning
portion that I'm used to having is a more wide >> which is I think what we wanted. That is what we wanted. Yes, I I mean I would say that um uh >> just following up on the budget on the
budget meeting, I I think that for the community, we need to look at everything we're going to do in the city and what are we going to do over the next 5 years and how do we see that laying out? We've all talked about we know that we have funds set aside to build a parking
garage down in John's Pass. That is a number one priority I think for everyone. uh we know that we purchased the new property. We we need parking at this end of the city. Where is that best suited? That's all going to come in. The parking study that we do for where it
needs to be, how many all that so I really feel that the um strategic plan is going to set the ball rolling for every for the property, for what we build there, how we build it, in what
phase we build it. Um, so my input would be we can't really make any decisions until we all sit together at that table and discuss a strategic plan and get led towards that would be my input. So then I I I think my my marching orders is to
go ahead with the with the Kimley Horn strategic plan as a part of the first of all this first year's capital improvement plan, but also as a five-year or 10-year plan to get all the
initiatives that we've already started. >> Did you Marcy, do you remember when we talked about the strategic plan with Kimley Horn? I thought maybe you were over there looking it up. You look so intense. >> I I actually actually was was looking it up. So, I was trying I was trying to
read through and it basically does um um is this the right one? Sorry. Um Andrew had sent me something. So, I I was looking through it to kind of see. So, to Mike's point, we can sit down and kind of revisit what we were what we were getting out of the strategic
planning um the services kickoff meeting. think it goes through coordination meetings um engagement and communications um so yeah kind of talks about the strategic plan draft action plan table um so I I feel like it was going to be
pretty much longer much further out than just one year conversation that's was pretty much what we had asked from them so I think we probably just need to dust it off and revisit it >> we haven't signed a contract though >> have we did we did I did sign it yes
>> uh December I couldn't remember if if we actually signed the contract or if we just voted that we would move forward. >> In all fairness, it was right around Christmas. So, yeah. >> I remember the discussion that we we landed on Kimley Horn because they did our master plan, right? And they would
know best what our long range planning is, what our what our master plan is. >> And part of that discussion, too, was they did a ton of community engagement and they got really good results and they showed up at a lot of the the tents and stuff like that. So on the heels of that real positive experience, it kind
of fed right into the strategic planning discussion we were having. So >> So part of that strategic plan will we will get direction out of the 555 property. >> Well, now the strategic plan will be a round table with the commission, right?
Talking and that all that. Yeah. >> Yeah. I think everything will go together. Okay. All right. Um, >> do we do we have any more discussion on the 555 property? The next one was about a um uh hold on a second.
>> The survey water for >> the survey water, right? >> So, I think that that can um that's there because of me and I think that that can go until we do the strategic planning >> because we're not going to order a survey until we know what it is that
we're planning to build there. Um, and my and I and I was lucky enough to have some conversations with Krabby and he filled my geek mind on that. >> Okay. >> Do we know if we have any repairarian rights there or would we have to lease
properties or water water properties from D? Do we do we know that >> there is some submerged land uh leases that are involved? >> Leases not repairarian rights then. >> Correct. It's leases. >> Yeah. Okay.
>> Thank you. >> Okay. >> Is this on? Yeah. And also though, if they wanted to expand, you could still go out and lease land from the state. So, if you wanted to go beyond what we have, that's a possibility. You go to the state. It's not a terribly
painstaking process. You just have to report yearly on the income you make, the revenue you make off of that land, and then you pay the state based on how much you made on that. Yeah. >> Thank you. Thank you. Next on the agenda is community development urban county
requalification fiscal year 2027 through 29 renewal of the CDBG cooperation agreement community development. So, um, it looks like previously this
item was usually handled by the city manager's office, but, uh, it was kind of a transitioning over, so we wrote up a memo because as done yearly, uh, the city has been a partner with Penelis County Housing and Community Development
in the current uh, Penelis County CDBG community development block grant urban county program through an existing cooperation agreement. The program is undergoing its re-qualification with the US Department of Housing and Urban Development and the county has requested the city of Madira Beach to either
remain or withdraw from the agreement. As a non-entitlement city within Penelis County, the city has two options for applying for CDBG funds. either uh one enter into an air local or cooperation agreement with the
urban which is Penelis County which must receive a HUD approval or two the city itself applies through the state of Florida small cities program under option one the city applies for CDBG funds for any eligible project through the county uh but relinquishes its
ability to apply for small cities CDBG funds through the state of Florida additionally by participating with Penelis County the city is also O eligible for participation in the county's home investment partnership investment partnership program and the county's emergency solutions grant
programs. Um, city staff recommends choosing option one to sign the agreement to remain in Penelis County's uh community development block grant urban county program for the for use of any future CDBG funds for the fiscal
year of 2027, 2028, and 2029. And attached is uh the agreement and uh the letter from the county attached to the agreement. Okay.
>> Do we have any public input questions? >> I don't have any questions. >> Option one. >> Option one. >> Option one. >> Okay. With nothing further, we'll go to
B. Ordinance 2026-03, the 555th Avenue reszoning from planned development to C4 Marine Commercial Community Development. >> Um, city staff has drafted an ordinance
uh which is ordinance 2026-0355th Avenue uh reszoning from PD Plan Development to C4 Marine Commercial. this ordinance to reszone the property at 555th Avenue from PD plan development to C4 marine commercial. Cor Panelis has reviewed the ordinance and said the ordinance is compliant with the county
plan in the material reach code of ordinances section 110397 time limitations requires a property to be reszoned to the previous zoning district for the pro for the property if a plan development fails to be built. A resoning ordinance is required to go to
plan commission plan commission meeting, public hearing, and two board of commissioner uh public hearings. A public notice will be mailed 10 days before the plan commission meeting uh to effective parties within 300 ft of the proposed resoning. A newspaper legal ad will be published 14
days before the second reading of the ordinance. Located below is a table that compares the plan development PD zoning district versus the C4 marina or marine commercial zoning district. The table shows the maximum development potential of a planned development with alter with the alternative temporary lodging use
standards. The previously approved plan development used the byright density and intensity but received a height increase of two additional stories. Reszoning uh the property to C4 marine commercial would reduce the maximum height for the property to three stories above base
flood elevation. And uh located below is the table that that does the comparison and um city staff initiated the proposed reszoning and the proposing the property is owned by the city so there wasn't really a physical impact. Um and city
staff supports the adoption of ordinance 2026-03 555th Avenue reszoning from PD plan development to C4 marine commercial. attached is the ordinance um the consistency letter and the uh business
business impact estimate. >> Do we have any public comment commission comments or questions? >> Well, I have a question at 300 ft. Who would be the affected parties? what I want to find out with
>> the mailing it was really just us and I think the adjac adjacent property that's uh owned by I'd have to see this specific owner >> but it's it's it's not the condos >> that's that's not in the 300 foot
>> that's I just wanted to clarify that >> so there weren't too many affected priorities >> okay thank you >> anything additional >> um yes so this C4 zoning was that the previous zoning prior to PD Correct.
>> Okay. So, what will C4 prohibit to build as far as use? >> I I mean use usewise the commercial and various municipal
uses that were pro have been like talked about at the various workshops would be allowed. Some would be permitted uses. Some would potentially have to be special exception uses. Um, I'm trying to think of anything that would really be a pro prohibited use
there. Um, >> recreation, in other words, would recreation be uh allowable use in C4? >> That so some of those types would be special exception uses and we would go to the special manage rate and get that approved.
>> So what if we just left the PD as it is, just a just a hypothetical, right? and then modify the PD to whatever we want it to be. You've already gotten a whole bunch of densities and height approvals. So, if we just left the Caladia zoning
alone and just modify the PD when we move forward, then we won't have to work as hard to get those heights that were previously approved and the F and densities and so forth and so on.
So, with the previous PDF shown, um, they they didn't they really only asked for the the height. Um, it was, um, at the the density and intensity aren't aren't, uh, changing. Also, our code requires us if the PD is not going
forward, uh, we have to reszone it back to the previous zoning category. So, um, because of that, um, requirement like the current PD can't be used. So there's a code provision that should have to go back to the original
equilibri zoning. >> Correct. Yeah. Uh that 110 397 time limitations. >> Would that be automatic or you have to go through the process? >> It still has to be adopted like through the normal process to reszone a
property. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Then next on the agenda is the snack shack update. Um good afternoon commission. So I wanted to give you guys an update on the snack shack. We did an we had removed um
a portion of the sand and did a brief kind of initial structural assessment. Uh following removal of additional sand, we went ahead and reached back out to Penoni who did our original structural assessment to have them come in um now that we had cleared the sand from
beneath the structure. and their findings were pretty much very much in line with what we had initially communicated. They identified uh two piles that had 5 to 10% section loss, which isn't a lot. So, those can be reinforced, repaired in place. They were
able to identify roughly 450 square ft of subfloor that will need to be replaced, but going in, I think that was one of the conversations that we understood that the subfloor could possibly have some damage once we started taking up the tile. They found the beams and joists to be in good
shape. Um, and uh, in accordance with our original finding, the straps do need to be addressed. So, there was that pretty much was in in line with what we had previously found. So, that was that was good. So, our plan now is to move forward with um we're going to meet with
um an architect and start going over the plans. This is a great opportunity um with Mike starting to really pull him into this project, especially with his construction background. So, I do want to meet with the team and go over some thoughts that I have. The adding the language to our code to allow for
historical designations is moving on. We do have a draft and we do have the individual Blair that we're working with from Kimley Horn will be coming by tomorrow. So, we'll be sitting down with her and kind of for the first time really sharing some of the trove of documents we have related to the snack
shack so that they can start helping us narrow down how we identify the periods of time so that we can start discussing those in a little more detail. So, we'll be moving forward with that. They've also provided us with the applications for review that will accompany any
historic request whether it's Snack Shack or any other property in Madera Beach. So that's moving along. And so the next step is really to to get that adopted while simultaneously um taking construction plans as far as reasonably possible until we kind of
decide the historical era. But I do have some ideas around maybe again talking to Mike and the team about how we can continue to move this forward. So not pausing for anything. Um, I do know that Jay did share an update on the
food trucks and I I'll let him correct me if I'm wrong, but it does look like we definitely have one slated for the week of May 18th to May 24th. There's been little turnout for it. So, um, I was wondering I was thinking maybe
we've got that board out there. Yeah, Jay, come up. Jay's already been thinking. Oh, he's already on it. >> Good evening. Uh, so yeah, after um last 48 hours, I've been kind of on the phone calling people directly and putting out some more information. So, we do have
that one weekend you're talking about, but over the next 11 weekends, we have interest in seven of them and some of which are uh going to be doubled up as food and potentially uh ice cream. So, we might end up with two on some of those dates. That's kind
of the intent. I've had a lot of questions uh people calling city hall as well as the rec center. So, we've we've been giving out more information. Uh long and short of it, we have a uh through the event software that we use, we've set up an application week by week over the next 3 months because there's
kind of a sweet spot of too far out and too close. Um so now they're starting to to see where they're free for a full week period of time. Um and then we have to line them up with the initial visit that they visit with the city. either going to have to get an inspection from the fire department. Uh we'll do that
once per the full term of if they're out here one week or if they're out here 10 weeks, they'll still only have to do that one time. So, we're just trying to make sure that we get the the process itself final or not final, but uh worked out the best we can. Um and then the first couple of times we do it, we're
going to we're working with it, massaging, taking some feedback to make sure that it is smooth as possible as we go. So, uh but we have had a lot more interest in the last couple days, which is good. Um, I think people kind of see what the availability was because they were unsure as to what we were trying to do and all that stuff. So, but yeah,
that's where we are. >> Do we have any public comment? >> So, I have a question. How is it advertised? How would someone know that we are looking for food trucks? >> So, we've been I've put it out in our newsletter. Uh, and then social media
was the one uh recently that got the most push back. Um, again, some people a full week opportunity hasn't been they're saying, "Oh, well, what if I can do five of the seven days?" I'm saying, "Well, we're giving you the opportunity. We're not requiring you to be out
there." So, we're trying to work with them because this is this is kind of new territory for us as far as a food truck vendor location. Uh, we normally do like a single day event or seafood fest, which is three days. so they can commit to those times, but a lot of them are like, "Oh, I'm booked out for the next
six months on a Tuesday, a Thursday, and a Saturday." So, they're trying to figure out the best way to open up for a full week. We had an application for which would have been this week and the previous two. And then when we contacted him, he said, "Oh, well, in the 48 hours after I applied, I changed and found a
new location." So, it's just they're trying to book as many places as they can, so they change their plans a lot. Yeah. >> Okay. Thank you. Any questions? >> Yeah. real quick. Um, anyone local reach out to you so far? Because I know Fruit
Float Fruit Float had a interest in >> That's not We're looking for a food truck that that is fully self-encclosed and has all the proper and and I'm not saying they don't. I'm just >> right. >> A food truck that has everything that they need within it. They can park, they
can serve and be there all day. Um, so that's a whole another we we've had, you know, there's a restaurant John's past that was interested and they were trying to make sure they had access to a food truck and they're working through some stuff, but they just haven't gotten there yet. So,
>> um, most of them that I think that I've seen so far within at least Penllis County. So, that's there are one or two that live in town that have expressed interest, but it's just based on timing once again. >> Okay. Thank you. Yeah, because that's what I ran into somebody at the green room a couple weeks ago, maybe a month
ago, and they said they've they know you personally and have done stuff at the seafood festival >> and so he was very excited about it, but yet it was timing, you know, so and that's yeah, they they've got a book up as far as they can. Okay, thank you.
>> I have a question for Marcy. Um I I I know you're working on getting the historic designation for this um Archwell Park, but we're spending money. So
how do you assess I mean obviously you're thinking that there's a 100% chance that we'll be getting that designation. Is that what you're assuming? Yeah, it's it's my understanding once once um I started understanding a little bit more about the designation, we're we're
setting our our requirements and we'll adhere to the regulations within the state that we have to, but and we we foresee no issues with getting the historical designation. Um I think there's probably only a few spots in Madera Beach that would qualify and and this this was definitely one of those
that we feel like. And speaking of expenses, I did hand you guys on your uh on the DAS there is a revised um table. There were two POS that I had missed. So I did I did update that for you guys.
The total expenditure to date is $91,250 and that does not include anything from the historical designation work progress. So that will be into that as well, but just wanted to share that with you guys. And when we went out for bid the first time, the construction cost
did come back from 23800,000 to roughly 39,9900,000. So those were kind of the bids the first time. Um and I'll just continue to reiterate this. We did um Megan did get it treated for termites. So that has been done. uh the superructure above is
is you know still going to be even though we're going to remodel it and add new things in you know the resiliency is not it's not going to be fully floodproofed or anything like that. So it is still a vulnerable structure at that location and that's just inherent to where it's located.
>> Um so just want to make sure we continue to re reiterate that as we go through this process. They did recommend some additional analysis, but again, I kind of wanted the opportunity really to pick Mike's brain on this um and talk to the team a little bit about some of my thoughts and um on
how we proceed forward with with what you're talking about in mind is is financial fiscal responsibility in our decisions and how we move forward. >> Are we getting any funds from FEMA? So, I believe I know that there was some insurance um there's we've been we've
been in contact with the insurance agents regarding this, but uh I I do know that we're keeping them a breast of how we're moving forward and what decisions we're making. I'm not involved on that flip side of what the financial conversations Megan is coming up hopefully to add some context to that. Thank you, Megan.
>> Good evening, mayor and commissioners. We have submitted everything to FEMA. Um and we keep going back and forth with FEMA about this. Uh we are getting insurance money, but it the insurance
cost is way lower because it was not fully insured. Um and Karen and the finance department can probably speak to that a little bit more, but um I want to say we only had $65,000 or so in contents and then roughly
$100,000 or so for the building for the structure. But we can get those exact numbers for you. Um and I'm and I just want to refresh my memory because I forgotten. Forgive me for that. Um the previous um lender the pre previous
>> tenant >> tenant >> are they totally out of it. How did we >> been out? I don't even remember when they It's been It's been quite a few months. Several months. >> Okay. >> No further obligation from us to them.
>> Right. That would be an answer for our attorney. >> No, their lease was terminated and they have been provided with the appropriate notice and so they have vacated the premises based upon that termination. >> Thank you. >> Welcome.
>> All righty. Then next on the agenda is parking garage feasibility study quotes. >> Good afternoon. So in followup to the um the last the last meeting I went through and kind of tightened down uh the description of the scope of work which I
included in your packet and I sent to to both firms and I with this just bear in mind that both of these firms are you know selected on our continuing services list. the conversation came up really with about
how we're kind of gut-inge again to you know the the money that's being spent and the firms we're selecting and the scope of services but at the end of the day we we did reach out to two of them to kind of just gut check us but um these are kind of qualificationbased selections that we want to make sure
that you know we're taking into consideration when we do select the firms. Um, so these if this gives you guys an opportunity to see specifically what we've asked for and then in turn what we've received from from the two firms.
>> Do we have any public comment commission comments? >> I have I have some observations and comments I'd like to make. Uh, I found I found it complicated to compare the two. Uh, but I I I did come up with some
results. Uh I I understand that Kimley Horn is doing a lot of great things for us. Uh which I try not to let uh unbalance my my my decision. Uh but just some some simple things base cost then not to for for Kim Horn not to exceed
65,500 to 90,000 uh with a potential increase if additional data collection is needed. And with the I'm just going to I'm going to call it adas. >> Yes. so I don't have to say all those letters all the time. Approximately
43,000 uh with all the tasks required by the city. Uh the Kimley Horn is a higher cost task with broader assumptions optional work clearly identified but premium priced uh clear line uh the DS
clear clear line item pricing. Um so the city's RFP emphasized feasibility and decisionm not detailed garage design. A DS a DSQ's scope closely very closely mirrors this intent. Um Columbia Horn
provides concept layouts and higher detail outputs which may be appropriate for a later a later design. Um it's the cost is much different. Um the Adidas has a nogo no-go methodology which
refers directly to the city language and it helps avoid cost. If if we just need to stop, we can stop uh if at some point we decide that um the Kimley Horns does have a robust public engagement which could be
valuable. Uh but these services are optional and more costly. So based on some of these comparisons, I I would I recommend I'm going to say I would prefer a DSQ. Uh they're the best fit for the RFP. That's the main thing. They
answered our question specifically. They have the better cost to value ratio. U the nogo approach I was really happy to see because that gives us a safe out. Um the modularity and flexibility. Uh the
ADSQ's line item pricing allows the board to easily reduce sites scale enlargement or expand analysis without renegotiating the entire contract. I think again it's very clear what we get and what we don't get. Um
uh the strategic phrasing for a resort community for a city experiencing extreme visitor to resident ratios. A DSQ's approach supports a prudent phased capital strategy. feasibility first, design second. Um, if we'd want to go to a different conceptual garage layouts,
we might want to engage Kim at a later time. But for this feasibility >> study, I feel like a DSQ is going to be our best the most bang for our buck. >> Well, I was kind of confused because I thought the last time Kimberly Horn was
cheaper going into it. I thought it was like 48 to 53 and now they're more expensive. And I kind of have a little bit of concern going with Kimberly Horn that we're tying ourselves into them big
time. You know, that if we're looking for them for 555, they did the study. Now, if we're doing that with this, uh, you know, it could be good and it could be bad. So I'm I'm like I would you know
I love what David said but then also as to what your guys recommendation I' highly looking forward to what the staff feels >> and and with to be to be fair with the second iteration I was much more clear I
gave a lot more guidelines and I did expand based on the conversation that we had it did feel like we we want to while we're doing it let's get a snapshot of the city we have needs at north and south And so this gave them much clearer direction. And so I think that's why
you're kind of seeing that it's there's more to this than previously described based on leaving the meeting and taking the information from you guys. So that's why you're seeing that. And David made some really good points about they did
lean into some of the concept conceptual stuff a little bit. So that's going to drive up the cost. And when you're when you're comparing them, there's a little more there for sure. I think that when we get to the point once the study is complete, that's going to be a whole different conversation of
building a garage. Um, and I really like the idea. I like that you kind of clarified it up where they're looking citywide so we can see I think we all could agree that we need parking in the north end of the city. Also, um,
recreation holds a lot of events at here at Rock Park where there's just not enough parking, whether it's softball and or just a concert or king of the beach like this weekend. So, I love the idea of getting a study that tells us
you really need a parking garage at John's Pass and you need one wherever else and this is why. And based off the data, this is how many parking spaces you needed because to what commissioner to what Hoo had said to us in a previous meeting, you know, we all know how much
it cost. Well, we all know now because he told us to um build build a space, right? So, we don't we're not looking for what the cost is going to be. We're looking for where does it need to be and how many parking spaces do we need to put there and is it feasible to build it
on that piece of property or not. So, I I think everybody knows I'm really excited to get this and be able to move forward a parking garage that a previous commission now years ago started saving for so that we could have parking that
we need in the John's Pass area for sure. >> So, how many areas have we designated for possible parking garage? I I believe we're at three.
>> All right. So, each lot really allows you only for so many parking spaces with regards to the height, with regards to the length and width. So, you know, I I don't really know why we
would need to do a study. I would just go ahead and provide those three lots that we have and just throw a parking garage on it and see how many you can get. You know, you can your study could say, "All right, you need like 700
spaces, but your property can only deliver like 200 spaces. So, what does that mean? How would that work for us?" So, you know, we we don't have unlimited land. We don't have unlimited height. we
are are limited to certain property width, length, height. So I would I would just instead of doing studies, I would just say all right there are three pieces of properties in here. Please maximize and see how many spaces we can get. That should be a one, two, three
kind of thing. Just drafting don't have to get public involved. Don't have to do a whole bunch of things at this stage of the game. And of course, the other idea I had shared with the board was incentives to development teams that would want to
build properties. So, what if we, you know, give them an extra 10 foot of height as long as we can get some parking spaces in there? So, I I I really don't like spending all this money, and I'm in this environment
just for things that don't really matter to us. We're just looking at all these studies, all these meetings. You know, I think I think the whole thing is much simpler than we think. Thank you. Just with respect, we we're so often
accused of of ready, fire, aim, and I I feel like that we have the opportunity with a DSQ at a price that's I mean, not cheap, but uh to to let this is what they do that this is what they specialize in in parking. And I I feel
like it would be worth the effort. So we can say yes we did a study using a professional firm whose specialty is parking uh before we go forward and then and then find out what the public thinks and the public uh
the public engagement is is is up to us. You know we we we decide how how much or how little we have. So that's just that's just my feelings. I'm very I'm I'm very in favor of of of having a professional firm uh do this feasibility study for us so that so we know what
we're getting into and they'll provide all those numbers along the way as well with uh city with public engagement uh so we can we can at least feel have our conscious clean we we did this in a in
an organized rational Okay. >> One of the things that we brought up um in a previous meeting was the property at 130th. There had been conversation that we could not build a parking garage there because of utilities, which has been one of the things that I really wanted to understand. Are there
utilities there that would prevent us from building a parking garage? Can we vacate that road and still have a um foot path to the beach, but build on that entire piece of property, which would expand the size of a parking
garage you could use? To me, that's as much what the feasibility study is. Is it feasible to build a parking garage on this piece of property with all of the expense that it would take to be able to whatever? Is it feasible to build? We
identified a piece of property within John's Pass. We identified the 130th. We identified the um property at or the property the south parking lot. We've since found out we cannot do we cannot
drive under the bridge. FDOT came out. Um, we met them on site and they did they went back, they did a study and they said, "No, the bridge is a >> It's a pre-stressed." >> Yeah, pre-stressed. It's a pre-stressed
bridge. So, no way. You can't if something hit it, it would be done. >> So, we can put We could build a lot a garage there, but we can't use that. >> You cannot drive under it. And you also cannot have any ground floor storage,
and you can't do any retail. So, you wouldn't be able to put a restaurant on top for of the parking garage or anything. You couldn't do anything like that. It would just strictly be a parking garage. >> Are you suggesting we're down to two then? >> Well, I mean, so I'm interested to know
in a parking study um and just just to elaborate. So, we've had presented to us within the last, I think, year to build a basketball court and a new concession stand over at the um softball fields.
And over the last 3 years, excuse me, there's been discussion about um building a concession stand that would have a announcers booth up top where we could bring in more softball games, make us more desirable for whomever would, you know, broadcasters,
whatever. How can you talk about building something like that when you have no place for people to park, right? So, the idea of doing what was presented to us is a fantastic idea. It's going to bring
more people here, but where are you going to park them? So, do we do we need based off of what we do now, we need a parking garage here? Could they, you know, where where would that be? I mean, I have my own ideas, but
that's that's why I'm interested to see what a professional would say. And if they said, "Yes, you really need to find a parcel in, you know, in the north end of the city. You need to find a parcel to build a parking garage." And based off of the activity that you're doing there now, this is how many parking
spaces you would need for today. And then they also think about for the future, you know, and and and the one thing we've done in this city really, really, really good in my opinion is we've built for today without thinking about tomorrow.
And I think it's incumbent on us as a commission to make decisions not based on today, but based on the future as we're going to grow and as the city is going to develop whatever that looks like. >> While I agree 100% that we need parking
in the north into town, it was my understanding that this fund was specifically designated for child. It >> is it is. But if we're doing a parking study >> Oh, this fund. Yes, the study. may as well do it all instead of spend now for it all or spend now and then spend again. It
>> well the study uh can include three locations. We decide what those locations are. That's what they we were doing. >> So this says existing conditions and demand analysis citywide. So that is what Marcy one of the things
that she added that I particularly liked because it's not saying just look in John's pass look in the whole city. I mean >> as long as one of them is in John's pass 100% 100% that and that is our focus is John's pass. >> Good good absolutely.
>> Um and I did want to just say real quick to elaborate on the mayor's comment u regarding the ground floor uses for the parking garage. Um the limitation at the John's Pass Park there that we were discussing is because of its underlying land use. So that's where that
prohibition kicks in is is the underlying land use at that location um messes up. It it dictates how we can use that first floor. So it's not applicable at every site, but particular to that one. >> Thank you for that clarification, Marcy.
All right. Then next on the agenda, >> do do we need to give them direction on which company to >> do you feel like you have direction, Marcy? >> We do have somebody from Kimly Horn. So she may want to step up and and speak or answer questions on the proposal that
was given by >> Do you have any questions for her? >> I I I felt like I understood the proposal pretty well, >> so I I don't have any necessarily questions. >> Okay. So no questions for Kimly Horn. Okay.
>> So, I >> you want to give her direction and we'll tell you whether we agree with you or not. >> I thought we needed to give direction on which firm if we're going to I mean, which I think we need to go forward. >> Yes. >> I think we need to provide direction. I've already made my position clear, >> Mr. Dylan.
>> So, the choice is one or the other, right? >> Correct. All of that. >> Well, I have to ask, does staff have a recommendation as to which you prefer? Typically, you guys do a recommendation as to which way and then we go from
there. Uh I mean yan and >> in consideration of some of the comments from the commission and our desire to just really spread out the work. Again we've been very very lucky with Kimly Horn. The team we have is absolutely amazing. But I would say with with what
we've seen here I would say that we could move forward with the AES asQ for I I would with Seth has no objections to either form. Like I said, they're on our continuing services and that's why, you know, we wanted to present it to you guys to to really discuss, but for the same reasons you
pointed out, it would be the the ADE ASQ. We got to figure out how to say too late, right? >> So, >> so yeah. So, again, that's >> adq. I would agree with Commissioner. >> I agree also.
>> She better. >> We can call >> agree. Okay. I'm going to say >> Marcy, you feel like you have direction from us on that? >> I do. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Next on the agenda is fire approval of Florida Department of Children and
Families grant for Rip Tide Simulator. >> Good evening. Try to go off script here a little bit. Uh I don't need to explain to you guys how dangerous the waters off our beaches are. >> Pull that up. how dangerous they are, especially near John's Pass. It hasn't been two weeks
and our boat was out there rescuing a female that was swept out in the current almost all the way out to the outer marker. So, uh, when the Department of Children and Families contacted us and said, "Hey, we have the ability to give you guys a grant uh to get you a swim a swimming simulator, a rip tide simulator," I jumped all over it. And we
have been awarded it. Um, we do need to come out of pocket initially for the purchase. That's $12,750 for the purchase of the simulator itself. Um, the only other stipulation is I have to teach a class to our personnel. I've already designed that class, so we'll be ready to go as soon
as it comes into our possession. Uh, the simulator goes into a pool, creates a rip tide current, throwing 3,000 gallons of water a minute across the pool. And, uh, I intend to teach our personnel how to identify them, how to swim through them, out of them, and everything else.
and eventually uh make a video so that we can use it on our website and teach uh citizens on how to do the same thing. Uh also we'll be getting some uh training materials that can go out to the public. Um so the initial fiscal impact will be the $12,750 for the uh
riptide simulator. Uh the grant also allows for us to uh spend up to $1,150 in training materials. Uh so the total grant funding is 13,900. So, uh, our recommendation is, uh, for
the approval of the expenditure for the riptide simulator, any training aids that I come across within the $1,150, of course, uh, and public educ education materials. Wow. Trying to combine words. Um, that way we can provide, you know,
the safety impact for our personnel and and the residents. Any questions? >> Do we have any public comment, commissioners? I think it's a great idea and I talked to Clint about it yesterday and um you
know the idea of the simulator and we had talked about the idea of I know some of the condos and potentially have um classes or reach out to the condos and say okay so we are going to do a demonstration here and there's a few
board people that have condos and you know so to do it and get public awareness of it. And I think it's a great idea. >> It's very portable. Uh it weighs about 70 lbs if I remember correctly. There's a battery pack that comes with it and I can drop it in anywhere. So
>> So how big of a pool do you need to create that? Do you know? >> Well, it moves 3,000 gallons of water a minute. So it would have to be a good size pool. Um I have already reached out to St. P beach to use their wreck pool uh for the initial training video and
our our personnel because it's an Olympic size pool. I figured that would be big enough. >> Yeah. >> So, but yeah, we can downsize from there, you know, you know, for condos and whatnot after that. I think >> I think that's really cool. >> I think it's a fantastic idea. Uh and
definitely maybe the whole the board we can uh also uh >> save you from the rip tide. >> Yeah, we can train with that also. Um, especially with the grant, I think it's a great idea. As you know, a lot of people, we lose a lot of people in
Florida with the rip tides. So, I think it's a great idea. >> Anything for public safety? >> Yep. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you very much. Next on the agenda is public works FT resilient Florida grant for vulnerability update and
adaptation plan discussion. Miss Weeper. Good evening again, mayor and commissioners. So, this is an exciting one. This is a grant. Um, and it also comes in in two-part and I have Cody here with me. Um, he's from Advanced Engineering. So, the city has been
awarded a grant. Um, this we're going to discuss the grant. We're going to ask you to accept the grant and also um approve the proposal for advanced engineering to do the scope of work. So, this is a um fully reimburseable grant.
This is not a match grant. It is 100% reimbured through FD. The total grant is for $485,000. So, it is for the reason why it's a vulnerability update is because Penllis County is working on our vulner vulnerability assessment. I can't talk.
Um, we are going to update that because there are portions of that. I'm going to let Cody speak on that. >> Sure. So, the vulnerability assessment update and hello uh Mayor Brooks and commission. So the vulnerability assessment update um it'll do a couple
of things for the city. One is the current um vulnerability assessment that the city has was completed under a larger um a larger effort um that was catered towards Penllis County. So although there is some city specific um stuff in your vulnerability assessment,
a lot of it was broader scale. So doing the update will enable us to focus more on the city and potentially incorporate more um more assets like your seaw walls. In addition, it was completed under the old set of data standards. So, FD has updated their data standards
which include new uh planning horizons and new sea level rise values. So, this new vulnerability assessment or the vulnerability assessment update will make sure that your VA is compliant for a longer period of time because it'll be under the new data standards >> and then we will be working to create an
adaptation plan in which we do not currently have. The adaptation plan will help us for future grant requests and also help us to acquire more grants because they like us to have a plan in place. It just makes us look more resilient and like we're trying to work
towards the bigger picture. So in your packet you have the uh I believe I put the grant agreement >> in there as well as the proposal and the scope from Advanced Engineering. So, we can go through that if you'd like or I
can have Cody kind of go through it if you have questions. Um, it in it involves a lot of data and also involves um neighborhood meetings, um, public outreach if you will, which will also I think we were talking
about rolling kind of the terrain mod in a sense into that as well. So, we have a lot of different resiliency things going on that we're going to roll into this kind of plan, if you will. >> Do you have any questions? Would you
like Cody to go through the scope? >> Just a quick description of work. Uh, you know, it's not really just about us often. It's about the residents to hear what's happening and how much we're paying you and what you're going to do for this city.
>> Absolutely. Thank you. So um this total the total grant application that we prepared for the city. So actually you had two grant applications. I guess if you don't mind I'll give you a brief sort of narrative. So you had two separate grant applications. One of which we worked directly um with the city on handinhand
with Megan and Marcy and Andrew and that was for an adaptation plan which will be the second element of this total scope. And then FT also received another grant um from the city that covered a little bit of um it was a vulnerability assessment update grant. It was also for
an adaptation plan and for a WM kind of study. So FT saw both of those grants and they put them both together which is how you ended up with this vulnerability assessment update and this adaptation plan. So and that's so that's the grant
or that's the proposal that you see right now. So again with the vulnerability assessment update um with that we are going to take your existing vulnerability assessment work directly with the city to figure out if there's anything that we want to add. Like I said seaw walls would be um something to add to that that's currently not
included in your vulnerability assessment. Local roadways are included. However, I'm not sure to what extent. I have a meeting with Sharon um at HDR which was the consultant that was involved in the current um vulnerability assessment tomorrow. when I'm going to ask her to what extent she looked at
your local roadways, there may be an opportunity for us to look at a shorter distance. So like let's say they looked at every 500 ft or 1,000 ft, we could look at 250 or something like that to provide a greater level of detail. In addition to that, obviously bringing your VA up to the current data standards
that FD has. And then after we complete your vulnerability assessment, which we incorporated a lot more public engagement. So technically your vulnerability assessment because it was completed under the Penllis County initiative had public engagement but it was more regionalbased. Our public
engagement will be directly with city residents of MadiRaa Beach and that public engagement then continues from the vulnerability assessment to where we identify all of the vulnerabilities and opportunities that the city has into the adaptation plan. With the adaptation
plan, we then look at all the problems that were identified in the vulnerability assessment, which a lot of these problems admittedly the city knows that you have. Um, it is just a way to document them. Um, that also enables you, as Megan said, to have vehicles to additional grant money from the state
for projects. And then that adaptation plan then builds strategies to address those vulnerabilities that were identified. And obviously one of the things that we would like to do with that is talk about terrain mod with residents and among other adaptation
strategies. But really your adaptation plan is an opportunity to engage with your residents. Figure out what opportunities they see and what they would like to see in terms of the city trying to become more resilient >> and plan.
>> This is the entire scope of work that you will be performing for us. >> Correct. So, we'll be doing the vulnerability assessment update and an adaptation plan that's included in this scope. We're just under 485,000 is our proposal and your grant is for 485,000.
And as Megan said, this is 100% reimburseable. So, the city is paying up front, but they'll be fully reimbured. >> So, how much time do you think you'd be engaged in developing this plan? >> So, in the scope, I proposed um 80 weeks
from NTP to complete. Now in the sorry go ahead. >> Yeah. So 80 80 weeks basically you just multiply the number of hours by 80 weeks and then so much per hour. >> Oh sorry. So I have a propo I have a um proposed labor breakdown in the scope
that's in front of you. Sorry. >> Yeah. >> Um I don't have total hours for the whole thing. Let me see. >> No, it doesn't. >> So, I don't have a total hour. Sorry. But you do have in front of you the proposed labor breakdown.
>> And it does have it does have the hours listed. >> Yeah, >> the hours are listed for each task. >> Just doesn't have the total in there. >> Okay. >> It's on page 134. >> Yeah. Thank you.
Sometimes I just want public to hear it not just us to know it. >> I just can I ask a question? I mean 100% reimburseable. I mean can't go wrong but when engage residents and stakeholders in resilience planning. What does that mean to your average resident resilience planning?
>> Sure. So with a vulnerability assessment um we identify all these problems. So we're going to present all of these maps that show all this flooding. But again, a lot of these problems a lot of people are already aware of, especially with these recent storms, right? Um, but that
doesn't really do anything for the city or for the residents. It just lets them know that they're vulnerable or the city's vulnerable. The actual adaptation strategy part is to where we as an engineering firm also inside, you know, with the city staff and with the
residents develop solutions to that. One of those solutions could be terrain mod, which is an effort that the city is um currently pursuing, but it could also look at pump stations and other types of solutions. So, it presents those to residents in a way that is
understandable to gauge their feedback on that so that it would help guide you as a commission as to what path to go forward because we're doing the community buyin part through the adaptation plan. >> So, I could say specific actions. So you
would to help um prevent the flooding that you're seeing on uh on high keen ties and such as that. These are spec to to rationalize why we're doing some storm water projects etc. >> Exactly. And then it and then you'll get in real time what the resident feedback
is and then we'll have a summary report with statistics that state you know x amount of people participated x amount of people supported this solution or x amount of people supported this solution so that you have an idea of what that is. >> Great. Sounds good. Thank you. >> Absolutely. >> So on your schedule um you have the
start date for July 1st and then the task due dates are all the way out to 2028. Do you do you think that's a actual is is that actual u what you really think or is that
>> so I think you might be looking at the grant work plan um and not the proposal. The proposal I just talk about weeks from NTP. >> Oh, so I'm I'm looking I'm looking at the task titles and when the start date would be and the due date. So
>> So that's in the grant work plan. >> Yes. So then for the state those are our deadlines that we have to submit deliverables to the state. >> So I guess my question is do you do you foresee that those are accurate dates that this project would run into 2028? That's my question. >> I foresee us completing before then.
>> Okay. Very good. I think this is great and and the um having it covered 100% is fantastic and being able to utilize it for grants or even to um get favor for appropriations.
Wonderful. Thank you. >> Absolutely. >> I totally agree. Thank you. >> Thank you. So, next on the agenda is the John's past dredging update survey. >> Hello everyone. What you have in your
package is the survey that was completed um April 9th I believe was the date. So since then we have received an updated survey and I apologize we just received it yesterday so there wasn't enough time for us to get it into your packet but we will share that data with you once um
once Mike and I actually have a chance to fully review it. We have reviewed it but we haven't really had a chance to to talk it over. But to date um we have removed approximately 9600 cubic yards of sand. So um to date with when the
survey was completed it was only at 80 8485. We are moving right along. We are moving along as scheduled. We are still anticipated to be completed by the end of May. Um, I know that there's been a lot of
talk out in the public about the there may be additional sand. We've talked about that in the past and as we when we first began this project from the first initial survey to the design plan, there was roughly
4,000 cubic yards additional sand in the dredge area. So, our current cubic yards that is in budget was for 12,900. With that being said, we have a 5% 5%
contingency that we included in with the bid. And then there is also $10,000 that we had in the bid for a restoration of the parking lot. So, we have approximately $74,000 additional monies that can take us up to
I don't know exactly what that cubic yardage is, but we can use the budget and make sure that we get the most amount out of there as we can without exceeding the budget that you all have approved. Um, I think we are meeting
with Brett tomorrow. We have a we have a meeting tomorrow morning at 10:00 a.m. and Brett is working on trying to get what the what that 74,000 can get us in addition to the 12,900 cubic yards that we've that we had in
the budget. So I think um it's important to kind of talk about the APTM survey and the design plan and and how this project was designed because I know that that's also come up recently. So we met with Aptum on
Monday or Tuesday. I these days are running together this week. We've met with Aptum. >> That was yesterday. >> That was yesterday. >> It was yesterday. Um so APTPM while they were not provided the entire survey document or study from
2021 I believe it was that that this is the study that the county paid a portion of um Hubards paid a portion of and the city paid a portion of. So they were not provided that whole entire document but what they were provided was the final presentation which had all the data in
that document and also the geo the geo techchnical study. Am I saying that I'm saying that correctly? Yes. The geo study that was done for Panelis County's dredge projects. So when Aptum was
selected to design this project, they were not given a budget. They had no idea of any type of budget that was for this project. They were not given the grant funds for this project. So they designed this project according to the
survey data that they were provided from Penllis County. So I think that's really important to note because it wasn't often times engineers are giving a given a budget and they designed to that and they weren't. So what we know from that 2021 study was there are multiple
different scenarios within that study and I don't know if anyone you all commissioner Dylan I don't know if you've seen that study um but everyone has been provided that study and we are within what one of those
one of those areas called out for and I think it was like 13,100 cubic yards removed and out of like the 10 or 11 that were there. So, I want to make sure that we're all on the same page that while they didn't have the whole thing,
they did have it, but there was a misunderstanding whenever we spoke and we had a meeting with them two weeks ago. So, um I think I have Oh, another update is that um Bayside is going to film underwater and they are going to
capture all the debris from the bridge and we will take that film that video and we will send it to DOT for them to come and remove all of that debris which we believe and Brett believes that that will help as well. And there may be in the survey some of that debris may be
accounting for yardage and so we may have additional as well once that's removed. >> Can we do can we move forward with getting the debris removed before they're done dredging? >> As soon as we have that data and that video and they plan to do that this
week, we will send that to FDOT and we will continue to push them. >> So I cannot guarantee but we will push DOT to do that because likely the debris is keeping the sand in and not letting it go even flow back out. >> It is likely.
>> My two cents for Aptum would be that before they make bold statements um that they check their work because they've caused us conflict by providing us with inaccurate information. That's not your fault. I'm just saying
it so that it's out loud that when when you're the when for them they were the company hired to permit and when they were asked a question they gave an emphatic no and that was actually not correct information that caused some um
misunderstanding and miscommunication that could have been avoided and would have been much better for all of us had it been avoided. I just said that for their benefit, not for anyone here because no one here in this room provided misinformation. They did.
>> But thank you for the update. >> You're welcome. Any comments? >> We're on board with you, mayor. >> Then next on the agenda is acceptance discussion for FD L253 storm water resiliency project.
>> This is another grant that we've received. This is the state appropriation. Uh, thank you, Linda Cheney. This is the for storm water check valves and we finally received the grant agreement. So, this is what you
have before you. This is a $100,000 grant. Um, I have been working with FT to get this grant agreement to work because we're not going to bring in an engineering firm for this. So, we're going to save money and be able to just
bid out the project to have basically two separate phases, an assessment phase and then an implementation phase. So uh we are going to be able to get minimum of eight different locations for these
valves but it is all based upon the cost of the assessment along with the cost of the installation per valve because every single location is different and the I've picked the locations based on our flooding events that we have in the
lowerlying areas. Um, so I am just asking for you all to review and then I will bring it back before you for acceptance and then we will go out to bid. Once we then have the bid, I'll bring it back before you for approval. >> Any comments? >> Yes, all these grants.
>> I know. >> Yes. Well, this is an appropriation. >> Appropriation. >> Yes. This is Cheney. >> So maybe are these flapper valves or gate valves? These are flabber valves we have in place in the Bokea neighborhood and 137th Avenue circle. They're called
waypro valves. Um they have they're a cylinder and they basically have a rubber valve on them. They are we've had them in place in Bokeh for probably eight years I would say.
>> I think they were at least at least eight cuz I remember living there while that happened. So maybe nine years. And um they are for the most part they don't stop the water. Nothing's going to stop the water, but they do slow it down. The
biggest issue that we've had with them in that neighborhood specifically is debris going down into the storm drain and then not allowing the the seal to close. >> But as far as maintenance and as far as um just their overall integrity, they've
been great. What's the material? >> It's a aluminum material and then a rubber valve. >> Okay. >> And I can show I can show a video of them next time. >> Do you just regularly maintain them? >> We do. Yeah, we have a new we have a new
software um at 4Erunner that we actually went on with Marcy that allows us to have every single storm water asset on that. And now we have a better we've we've done a decent job of taking care of our storm water, but now we're doing a great job and we can track it much
better. and they match the size of the pipe. Right. >> That is correct. So, the assessment portion of this will be for them to go out and to ensure and to measure and to ensure that we're getting the proper valve. >> Thank you. >> You're welcome. >> Mr. Mayor, help me to understand. It
says it says uh Florida Department Environmental uh protection grant and where does just so I understand is it is is the appropriation is going to match that. Is it? But >> appropriations turn into grants.
>> I just wanted to be clear that we all understood that last year we got one appropriation, right? >> And that representative Linda Cheney got us that appropriation and this is it. This is what we got. >> Thank you that she put forward for us. >> Thank you.
>> Then next on the agenda is purchase of two easy dump dumpsters from Parkon Park. So, I believe everyone has seen the two F250s that drive around that have the dumpsters on the back. The dumpsters on the back of those trucks
are are Parkan easy dumps. We've utilize those um since I've been here, 2015 and probably prior to that. They started out as three yarders and now we have gotten much busier and found that six yarders are better and they uh our trucks are
able to to hold them. So these trucks um utilize these for if in the event the broill machine breaks down, which it did this week. So we were able to empty the trash cans on the beach, we use it for various park locations, for various bus stops. Um
oftent times if we have to do a go back and the the garbage truck is already at the dump, we use these truck these trucks for that as well. So we have we will be purchasing these off of a source well. This has been posted to the demand star to follow the proper statute on
purchasing. We had no and I believe I included all that into your packet. We no one um no one responded to the source well and I've I've attached all that information onto there. I've attached the source well
document and um we will be purchasing this directly from Parkan and then our mechanics will install them. So, previously we had always paid a fabricator to install these for us. Now, we will install them in house because we have the ability to do so. There may be
some various welding that may have to be done. I think we should be able to do most of it in house. Um, we do have $60,000 budgeted for this and I would imagine that we're going to come up very close to that budgeted amount. >> So, definitely
60,000 was budgeted. Is that what we said? >> That is correct. So, that's fantastic. >> That's what I was going to say. I thought I saw that somewhere, but I don't see it in the packet or No, >> I mean, you Yeah, >> in the memo. I believe it's in the memo. >> Yeah. >> Okay.
>> Yes. In the in the fiscal impact portion of the memo that $60,000 is budgeted, and it's for truck number three and truck number 68, which are both 2019 F250s that we will be able to utilize. And if for some reason something happens
with the truck, we can disconnect this and put it onto a new truck. >> For the record, I haven't asked for public comment because there is no public here. They've been gone for quite some time. >> Um, thank you, Megan. >> Thank you.
>> So, would you wait for um so public comment is our last item. >> Yes. >> And Miss Hopkins came and we have heard you've been at a lot of the conversations where Bayoints come up. >> I have. Do you have an update or should
we put this on a next meeting to give an update? >> We should put this on a next meeting to give an update because Mike and I need to talk about that. >> Okay. So then for the record, we want to add Bayoint to our next workshop or if you can provide an update at our next um
official meet at our next voting meeting just to give an update to the community as to where we're at on milling and resurfacing that. Well, andor I mean, you know, can we do pothole repairs? I mean, I haven't been out there in a while. >> It's not just potholes. Um, and
honestly, there's there's only one section of Bayoint that is really bad. And if you are going out onto Bayoint once you get out there, if you go to the right, there is about I would say probably a 3 or 400 foot section that is
it it is the the base is failing. Um, I had core sampling done of it and it's just it's alligator cracking really bad and it's constantly saturated and even if you look into the yards, the yards, even though the homes are all elevated,
the yards are always saturated. So, I had core sampling done because we were trying to figure out exactly what was happening out there and the core samples just basically said the base had failed. I don't know what's going on on the personal properties because obviously we
didn't take samples from there, but it is take a drive out there and take a look at it. It's it's quite interesting. >> Well, I mean, you know, coming from north, you know, the mill and overlay is a great thing, but yet just possibly a simple overlay. I I you know, and like
not a big deal, you know, and especially if who's ever doing area >> nine >> three. Well, is nine what's in work now? >> Yes. Oh, you're >> Yeah. I mean, you know, so if they go out with two trucks and say, "Okay, so this is the area we want to overlay to
Yeah. get it through for 3, four years. I mean, you know, and that's what I think >> there is a possibility that area 9 is not going to take that long because we're going to try to go for resiliency money, which is due by September. So, um, we'll definitely come back with an
update. >> Let's let her come back with an update. All right. Thank you very much, Megan. It is 6:05. We're adjourned.