Morning. [Music] Today is Tuesday, January 13, 2026. It's 10:00 a.m. We're in the city chambers, and I call this city commission regular meeting to order. Commissioners present are Commissioner Dval, Commissioner Stokes, Mayor Emerich, Vice Mayor
Langden, and Commissioner Pro. There is a quorum present for this meeting. Also present is uh deputy city manager um >> Jason >> Jason Garro I forgot the first name uh
city attorney for city clerk Fost board specialist Linder police chief or deputy chief uh Morales and deputy chief hurle back there representing fire and police and I'm going to call on Mr. Daniel from
the paper if he could lead us in the pledge this morning. [Music] >> To the flag of the United States of America and to the rep for it stands
nation indivisible with liberty and justice for all. >> And before we move on, I'd like to recognize a dignitary, a former Sarasota County Commissioner, Mr. John Thaxton, thank you for coming as always.
>> And I'll be requesting a motion to approve the agenda. >> So move. >> Second. >> I have a motion on the floor to approve the agenda by Commissioner Stoke, seconded by Vice Mayor Langden. There's nothing to that. Please vote. I don't think our pads are working very
well. >> Mine's not working. >> There we go. >> There we go. And that passes five to zero. City clerk, is there any public comment? >> Nikki Miller, as a nurse, I must share
noise pollution will have a massive negative effect on the health and well-being of the nearby residents and wildlife, including but not limited to the protected scrub jays and gopher tortoises. There has been too much disruption already. Nighttime is sacred and protected for a reason. No exemption
should be given. We need good deep restful sleep to have any hope of healing and functioning. >> Okay, >> I'm sorry. We need good deep restful sleep and have any hope of healing and functioning optimally. Our city should
care more about its residents. [Music] >> This is hers. Concerned residents, everyone should be deeply disappointed by Commissioner Dval's conduct during the recent good governance workshop. This was a more than 5-hour session dedicated to improving how this commission functions,
how it works with city management, and how it serves the public. Commissioner Dvau chose not to participate. He remained silent, disengaged, and unwilling to contribute to the discussion or collaborate with his fellow commissioners and staff. What was the most troubling was not just the lack of participation, but the decision to
publicly declare at the close of the meeting that he would not participate in or agree to any of the items discussed. That statement was not constructive. It was not leadership. It was an outright refusal to engage in the very work he was elected to do. Good governance requires effort, dialogue, and a
willingness to work through differences. Choosing to sit out a governance workshop, then openly rejecting its outcomes, undermines the purpose of the meeting and disrespects the time and good faith efforts of everyone involved. Today, there is an agenda item regarding commissioner salaries. Based on
Commissioner Dval's own public statements and actions, I fully expect him to accept a salary of zero dollars. If a commissioner publicly refuses to participate in governance, refuses to collaborate, and refuses to support agreed upon improvements, then it is only reasonable that he also refuse compensation for that role. If this
behavior is rewarded with continued pay, it sets a troubling precedent. By that example, city employees could simply refuse to do their jobs and still expect to be paid. That is not how public service works, and it should not be acceptable at any level of government. Public service is not a title. It is a
responsibility. If someone is unwilling to do the job, then do everyone a favor and resign. The public should not be asked to pay for your stubbornness. Anonymous. I want to express serious concerns regarding what appears to be a waste of taxpayer dollars in holding a retreat that seemed clearly pre-planned
and guided with the assistance of the city manager to advance a predetermined agenda. I commend Commissioner Deva for choosing not to engage in what would have been a repeat of the same retreat previously conducted with Commissioner McDow. Despite remaining silent, he was still subjected to onind and inappropriate remarks. It is
particularly ironic that this retreat was followed by the city manager's public New Year's resolution emphasizing respect, patience, listening, and empathy. Qualities that were notably absent from the conduct displayed during this retreat. Sometimes fewer words speak louder than speeches. Actions matter, and this community deserves
better accountability for both its resources and its values. Debbie Mcdow, there are two agenda items directly related to noise. First, SMH is requesting permission to do construction activities and concrete pores between 9:00 p.m. and 7 a.m. Just imagine the surrounding residents hearing that
constant beep beep of the construction equipment and the constant shaking of their homes as they set and fill the pylons 24/7. The barrage of flood lights required throughout the area for the worker safety and the conduct even construction
activities are also a nuisance. Yes, there is a need to benefit the hospital, but there should be protections to the surrounding neighbors who will endure construction day and night, too. Here's a suggestion for a compromise. Allow SMH to do the concrete pores only one or two days a week and no other construction
activities in the evenings. Obviously, this will require planning for the construction crews, but it is doable. Also, consider approving this request every six months instead of until September 2028. This would ensure the agreement is being honored. The other agenda item is to entirely remove the noise protections in the ULDC, which
prevents any business activities and deliveries during the hours of 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. in the corridor transitional and corridor zoning districts. If this is approved, 247 activities will negatively impact the budding residential neighborhoods. Yes, we need businesses, but residents also have a right to enjoy the peace and tranquility
of their homes. Yes, there is a compromise on this, too. consider 247 business activities on the inside only within the four walls of their primary establishment. All outdoor activities would continue following the existing ULDC with the quiet hours between 1000
p.m. and 7:00 a.m. This protects the residents from loud music, talking, lights, slamming doors, and deliveries which affects their peace and quiet in the evenings. Businesses and developers shouldn't get everything they ask for at the expense of the nearby residents. In person, we have Joan Morgan, followed
by John Thaxton, Brahma Stan Vincenti, and Chuck English. Morning. Okay, I'm here about number 26-0265. Uh, Cheryl Cook is applying for a board position, and I have a real problem with
that. When she was the commissioner, a lot of things happened. Okay. uh don't have time to talk about all the problems you called with war warm middle springs because right now the county could be paying half our bills uh for repair uh but I want to talk about bay flight
which is something she tried to get rid of because it made noise. Okay. Well, guess what? When that noise happens, someone should say a prayer for the poor victim who's going up in that flight. on May 28th, 2014. Uh if it wasn't for Tom
Jones, Tom Jones, Jim Blucher, and Linda Yates, Bayflight would have been gone because Cheryl Cook and um and Rhonda Defranco voted to get rid of Bayflight in Northport. Okay. Um we took
hundreds and hundreds of petitions we had to send in to uh have Bay Flight continued. People had to send in letters. People came right here talking about how their lives were saved be because of Bayflight, but Cheryl had people wear red shirts to show their
opposition to Baylight. Okay. Now, public request comments. I just are uh obligations. They they want memos, emails, social media, calendars. Uh I think we're hiring a person just to take care of her personal agendas.
Okay. about onethird of all the requests uh for public requests are hers. Okay? I am sorry. If she wants to find out what's going on, come here. Listen, read, but don't have an employee of the city. Don't have us pay for someone to
be your personal secretary. I don't believe people on the boards. We want people on the boards. We encourage people on the boards, but not for their own vendettas or agendas. Thank you. >> Thank you. Good morning. >> Good morning, sir. >> Members of the commission, for the
record, my name is John Daxton, and I am here speaking on behalf of GF Coast Community Foundation. um specifically to agenda item 6A, uh the consideration of the outstanding Florida Springs designation for our
beloved War Mineral Springs. I'm here specifically today to um I feel like I'm looking at the camera. I feel like I need to slouch down cuz my head gets gets chopped off. Um that's okay. There's not much here to look at
anyways. um specifically to support option uh number two. Um, I think that staff has done an extraordinary job in outlining the benefits and the concerns um associated with the designation and the possible um uh financial obligations
that the city would be uh committed to should they go this route and especially if they were put in a position of enforcing a BMAP uh plan which is of course a best management action uh plan administered u by a government outside of Northport. I've been associated with
several of these BMAPs in the years and decades in the past and I can tell you they can be very ownorous and they can be very costly. GF Coast Community Foundation continues its support and commitment to establishing the conservation easement over the War Mineral Springs property that has been
outlined um uh by the board and we believe it to be the best option because it affords Northport the maximum discretion and ultimate authority. It also maintains Northport's ability to monetize the trans the development rights that are on the property through
a TDR program. The new possibility of the Charlotte Harbor National Estate Program money allows other GF Coast money to now be redirected toward outyear's maintenance of these exotic and nuisance species that would be
eradicated with the CHN grant, providing us with the ultimate leverage of not only establishing the conservation easement, but removing the exotic species and maintaining the removal for several years out at no cost
to the city of Northport, allowing your money to be invested in the buildings and other improvements on the on the property. I would like to say it's been a pleasure working with Northport staff. You have an outstanding natural resource and parks and administration group. Um we have listened to this commission's
concerns in the past and feel that we have a responsible plan to move forward to restore this amazing historic, cultural, archaeological, and natural resource for generations to come. and I thank you for your time and attention and look forward to writing some checks to you.
>> Thank you. >> So do we all? Um this will be kind of short and sweet. uh it's a matter of the topic of respect
to the citizenry and then to the citizenry to the commission and administration alike. Uh today's environment everybody is walking on eggshells with what's going on in our economy, in our legislature, with um
bills that are going and taking our citizens rights away, municipality rights away. Um, and to tie this in with the respect issue, especially to the citizenry, I submitted a white paper to y'all on advisory boards and on
communication between administration and uh the commission to the citizens. You continue to say that we want to hear from you. We want to hear from you. We want to hear from you. And when you do hear from us in the form of an email, it would be nice if we would get an
acknowledgement that the email has been received. Every now and then I might get one commissioner that says received or thank you for your input. It's appreciated, but that's not all the time and it's almost never. I think that needs to be
worked on so that the citizens really feel that they are their voice is appreciated. So, I think if you could work on that, that would be great. Uh, the second is the white paper I submitted on the advisory boards and the recommendations of what's going on. If I
could formally ask for a commissioner to endorse that, so it is either brought up in the form of a workshop. So, you could actually look at everything, discuss everything, uh, or at a commission meeting. That would be at your discretion. So, since Commissioner Stokes, you're
the only one who responded. Thank you to my white paper. I'm asking you if you would personally request as an agenda item or as a separate workshop because all the things that I recommended really need to be looked at to make it fair for
everybody and to make the citizens feel that their work on an advisory board is really taken into consideration and is just as important as the decisions that you make. Thank you. you. >> Good morning.
>> Morning. Pardon me. Robin led right into what I would like to discuss. It relates to boards and committees and their function. To me, the one that
concerns me the most is the process of removal of a member of a board and committee without any recourse to uh challenge or
or or or uh defend or or or explain, right? uh the the reasoning for uh their removal. The other aspect of it is that the commission appoints these individuals to
the boards and committees. It should be the commission that removes these individuals from the boards and committees. Sadly, I can find nowhere within the policy where notification is required
within the policy. The issues you're all aware of because I was uh graced to have the ability to chat with the majority of those sitting up there on
the issue. You're fully aware. Please take Robin's recommendations and we'll chat more. You have a blessed day. Thank you. >> You all >> Thank you.
>> Moving on to announcements. City clerk. The current vacancies for the following boards and committees include art advisory board, auditor selection committee, charter review advisory board, citizen tax oversight committee, community economic development advisory board, debt management committee,
environmental advisory board, historic and cultural advisory board, joint management advisory board, police officers pension trust fund board of trustees, parks and recreation advisory board, planning and zoning advisory board, and veterans park advisory committee, Sarasota County Advisory
Council vacancies, one resident in Northport to serve on the Sarasota Manatee Metropolitan Planning Organization Citizen Advisory Committee and one resident in Northport to serve on the Citizens Oversight Committee for School Facility Planning. If anyone would like further details, please see the city clerk's office. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Moving on to the consent agenda. Um Mr. Yaro, has anything been pulled? >> Uh yes, sir. Mayor, uh item N. Um, agenda item N also identified as item
number 26-0265. >> Just that one item. >> That just that one. Um, any public comment on this consent? My name is Jonathan Ter commenting on agenda item E number 26-00003
[Music] for the January 13th meeting at 10:00 a.m. My phone number is 9412211631 and my email is throwback entgmail.com. My family and I live directly behind the Sarasota Memorial Hospital construction site here in Northport. I'm voicing my
opinion to strongly oppose a proposal to basically allow 24/7 construction with weekends and holidays included. The noise we already live with is overwhelming, constant beeping, heavy machinery, and pounding from early morning to evening. It has turned what used to be a peaceful neighborhood into
an industrial zone. Allowing this to continue around the clock would make our home environment unbearable. We have two young children in school. They need sleep, focus, and stability to succeed. Instead, their rest is disrupted. Studying is difficult, and even spending time outside has become impossible. Our
dogs are constantly stressed, barking all day from the non-stop noise. This isn't a minor inconvenience. It's a serious impact on our family's well-being. We understand the important expanding medical facilities, and we support progress, but we don't understand why the noise ordinances to
protect residents are being bent in this case. These rules exist to balance development with livability. If exceptions are made here, it sets a precedent that residents quality of life comes second. We respectfully ask the commission to deny any requests for this
247 construction at this site. Please uphold the ordinances that protect families and neighborhoods. Growth should never come at the expense of the people who already call this community home. Thank you for listening.
>> Chris Miller for item 26-00003. This cannot be allowed. There are many families that live in the area around the hospital and this would be very disruptive to them. I can already hear noise from the construction all the time and overnight is not acceptable. Please show that you care about the concerns of
your residents and tell SMH no way. Nikki Miller for item 26-00003. As a nurse, I must share noise pollution will have a massive negative effect on the health and well-being of nearby residents and wildlife, including but not limited to the protected scrub jays
and gopher tortoises. There has been too much disruption already. Nighttime is sacred and protected for a reason. No exception should be given. We need good, deep, and restful sleep to have any hope of healing and functioning optimally. Our city should care more about its residents. And that's all, mayor.
>> Thank you. >> All right. Is it possible to pull an agenda item off the consent to discuss at this point in time or is it too late? >> I don't know the answer to that question.
>> Per our policy, it is too late. But further than that, I'd ask the city attorney. I could tell you what our policy states if you would. [Music] Quick question.
>> Is it too late to pull an item from the consent agenda at this point? >> We already need to approve the consent agenda and I think the policy is the consent removal have to be by noon >> the day before. >> Yes, our policy does state to request
removal of an agenda item from the consent must be must notify the city manager no later than noon the day before the meeting. It doesn't provide any language for any other additional time. >> All right. I'll find another way to speak to that item. Thank you. All right. Thank you. I'm looking for a
motion. >> I I'll make it. I move to approve the items on the consent agenda. Pulling item N26-0265 for discussion. >> Discussion. I have a motion on the floor made by Vice Mayor Langden to approve
the consent agenda pulling item N26-0265 for discussion and that was seconded by Commissioner Duval. Is there anything to that? If not, please vote. And that passes five to zero. Moving on
to item N 26-0265. This is to approve the appointment of Cheryl L. Cook as a regular member to serve on the debt management committee advisory board from January 13, 2026
through January 13, 2029. Um, city manager, who pulled this item? >> It's a good question. Uh, I I had that information, but it slipped my mind. >> This is Commissioner Stokes. >> Yes. >> Okay. So, Commissioner Stokes, you pulled this item. You have the floor,
sir. Thank you, Mayor. Um, first I'd like to say that anyone who volunteers for an advisory board should be commended. We have plenty of vacancies as you've all heard today and we always encourage folks to join advisory boards
and support our city. Um, that said, when we put together a debt management plan, one of the criteria was that this board would be created. And to date uh we've had one applicant. Um and
while we have established some criteria for qualification, you know, to me this is an extremely extremely important board. um commissioners. Some come with various degrees of expertise in various areas,
but we rely on not just subject matter experts out of staff, but our advisory boards who come with various degrees of expertise. And this particular board, bankers, accountants, financial planners, people who have really
credentialed financial background and lending background, I think would be tremendously helpful to this board. At present, we have no ability to borrow at this point. We have no projects in the pipeline that we are
seeking borrowing ability for. I might suggest that we either table this this applicant's uh you know this this particular application um or reject it and and have that person perhaps apply at a later date. But I think we need to
assure ourselves that we can keep that bar extremely high when it comes to the credentials of the individuals who get on this board. um this commission at at at the appropriate point in time when when we're reviewing borrowing requests and we're thinking about indebting this
city to some level, we need people who really have a plethora of experience in this area. And so for that reason, um would suggest we reject this or at least suspend making a decision on this
particular applicant to a later date. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you. Anyone else? Do we have any public comment on this? Okay. Um, the only thing that I would look at is
we do have an applicant that has applied, but like you stated, Commissioner, that uh we don't have any need at this point for this board except for being part of our debt management policy. So my suggestion would be is to
suspend the board until there is actually a need and then we could have applicants jump in at that point because it it's my understanding let's let's just look at the scenario of if an individual was put on the board now and
the board was not used for one or two years. They're on the board that's time served on that board. they would might only have a year left to be able to be productive within that board. So my suggestion would be is to suspend the board entirely until it's actually
needed. >> And and mayor, you know, I I I appreciate that perspective. You know, the the only rebuttal I would have to it is that the debt management policy conditioned
the creation of this board. I think it sends a bad I I'm concerned about this the signal it sends it it would then leave it to future commissions to reactivate this board. I think the board ought to stay in place whether we reject
this applica applicant out of hand or whether we simply defer making a decision. It then, you know, allows additional time to solicit
folks with the expertise we hope to have on this board and then be able to approve them maybe as a group at least to the point where we have a quorum of applicants. Um I I'm just personally would prefer not to suspend the the the
advisory board. I I think, you know, um it's an integral part of the debt management policy and and and I'm I'm just not comfortable with suspending it, but that's my opinion. Thank you. Um Commissioner Dval,
>> thank you, Mayor. Um this is a tough one. Do we suspend the application or do we suspend the the board? Uh and there's
my thoughts long ago were you know that our referendum didn't pass. So we really had no need for the board at that time. You know if we do get a referendum pass where you know we can borrow okay then you know
the the board can get filled. Um, I kind of go along with Commissioner Stokes in that, um, I think it would be better to just suspend the nomination of a person,
any person. And I do not agree with um rejecting a person just because we don't like some of their personal policies or you
know their arguments or whatever. Um every person you know that does apply is a citizen and has as much right to be on a board as anyone else. Um but in this case I do support Mayor
Stokes. you know, asking that we just not nominate anyone right now. I didn't say Mayor Stokes today. >> I appreciate it and just I'm old. Um,
yeah, but that that's my thoughts on this. >> Anybody else want to weigh in on this? All right. I'll look for a motion. Mayor, >> if if somebody is going to make a motion to suspend the application, if you could add a timeline, otherwise every month
we're going to bring it back. Some of you want to suspend it to a certain time before we bring any applications back to you, that would be beneficial. >> I'll make a motion, >> but um Okay, that's fine. Go ahead. I make a motion that we suspend this
application uh for the um for the uh advisory board for a period of 6 months which would provide us the opportunity to additionally solicit the community for additional applicants and revisit
this six months down the line. >> Good with that, city clerk? >> Yes. >> All right. I have a motion on the floor. Would you read it back to me, please? to to suspend the applications for the debt management committee advis debt management advisory committee for a period of six months prior to bringing
back any applications. >> I have a motion on the floor. Do I have a second? Made by Commissioner Stokes. Do I have a second? I'll second it. >> And it was seconded by me. How about
that? Anything to that people on the board? Let's vote. I take it too quick. I voted twice. So, and that passes 3 to two with Commissioner Dval and Commissioner Pro dissenting.
Commissioner of Dval, do you have anything on your dissension? >> Yes. Thank you, Mayor. Um, basically my my objection to this is that you added in the the six months. I'd have rather seen it go until um after we add another
referendum, you know, or we actually got the ability to borrow. Um, and that's my only objection, just the sixth more. >> Thank you. Uh, Commissioner Pro, >> no comments. >> Thank you, sir. All right, moving on to public hearings. Ordinance first reading, ordinance
number 2026-01. Um, I request a motion for the city clerk to read by title only. >> So moved. >> Second. I >> have a motion on the floor for the city clerk to read by title only, made by Vice Mayor Langden, seconded by Commissioner Stokes. If there's nothing
to that, please vote. >> Dave, if you got to do it again. >> Yeah, it's not. It's just sticking. >> It's sensitive today. >> One more time, sir. >> And that passes five to zero. City clerk. >> Ordinance number 2026-01.
An ordinance of the city of Northport, Florida, providing for the imposition and collection of non-aggalurum special assessments to fund costs incurred by the city in abating nuisance conditions of excessive growth of grass and nuisance weeds on developed lots and hazardous trees and accumulation of
debris on any lot. Amending the code of the city of Northport, Florida, chapter 42, nuisances, article 2, lot clearing to create section 42-27, providing for findings, providing for conflicts, providing for severability, providing for codification, and providing an effective date.
>> Thank you. Uh commission question or city uh deputy city manager. Yes, >> this is your item, sir. >> Thank you, mayor. This ordinance is to authorize the city to levy a nonavalorum assessment against lots for code
enforcement leans that are not timely paid for the actual cost of abatement for hazardous trees, excessive growth of grass and nuisent weeds and accumulation of debris. Um Elena Ray, our development services director, is here to answer any
questions the board may have regarding this ordinance. >> Thank you, sir. Um, Commissioner Stokes, you're up. >> Yes. Uh, I just want to say that I appreciate staff working hard to figure out a a way to make this particular
issue make sense to us all. Um, you know, some of the previous conversation about, you know, uh, assessments, you know, for for vacant lots and other things just just couldn't seem to work it all through. But but this is great.
the ability to, you know, uh to tack this on to somebody's tax bill so we can get these dollars collected, I think, is a great way to go. And um you know, it's uh uh I mean, in the past there's been over a4 million dollars that that's just
gone uncollected because, you know, we we had no real leverage to do so. So, you know, I appreciate the hard work staff did on this because, you know, it was kind of a a hurdle to figure out the best way to to approach this problem and solve it. So, thank you very much and
I'm supportive. >> Uh, Commissioner Langden or Vice Mayor Langden, I did it already. >> I'll give you one more month. >> Um, I I concur with Commissioner Stokes. I think this is a very reasonable
approach. Um it it doesn't tax everybody uh even people who maybe don't have trees or anything happening on their property. It's very specific to money spent on a particular parcel. So I'm
supportive of that and um I I just look at it as a way more coste effective way to collect those monies. It makes a whole lot of sense. I I do have one question. Um, is there any limitation
placed on how much we might assess a property? >> Good morning, Elena Ray, director of development services. I apologize for my voice. I am not contagious.
>> Um, there is the the costs are the the actual costs that the city incurs is what would be assessed. So, um, the city pays for abatement fees for, uh, contractors to go out and do work,
mowing, debris removal, those types of things. The city pays administrative costs such as, um, leans, I mean, sorry, such as the filing fees and those types of things. So, there is a limit as to what we can charge. It's just not just
open-ended. >> Okay. Yeah. Um I I was hoping that was the case. Now will it be actual costs? Will the assessment be actual costs on the property or will we have a certain
like a flat rate for the removal of a tree? How will that work? >> So we when we uh contract with outside uh services such as mowing companies or um landscape companies Thank you.
I'm doing my best. I promise. We have in those contracts, we have the cost that the city will pay to those contractors for specific services. So, um the the mowing services are uh based
on sizes of lots. trees are based on per tree uh for removal uh and take down. So when we pay those contractors, that's the amount the amount that we're invoiced is the amount that is assessed as a lean.
>> Okay, that's fair. And as someone who has spent hundreds of dollars trimming, impinging tree growth onto my property, um I think that this proposal is timely. Um, and I also am very supportive of it.
Great work. >> That's it. >> Commissioner Deval, sir. >> Thank you, Mayor. Um, and thanks for the amount of time that this staff has put into this. We've talked about this, you know, a number of times just since I've been a
commissioner. Um, I have one, well, I have a couple questions. One question is, you know, it's talking about, you know, the trees and the weeds and the grasses. What about a home that has
some other code violations such as, you know, maybe there's there's no windows in the house or or in the case that we have a lot, you know, where a house is unfinished and they're left. Would that be part of this ordinance?
>> It is not part of this ordinance. Those are handled typically under our Florida building code provisions. So they're under a separate type of collection. Um okay, they are they are separate and apart from this. If we wanted to go that route with those, it would be a a
different type of assessment. >> Okay. Um secondly, um this is just some uh I want you know for a number of years I owned a an undeveloped lot
not where I lived and I went out and made sure the borders of that lot were clear. But obviously we all know not everyone does that and you know we have many
owners of undeveloped lots that don't live in the state. Um and my fear is that someone who has a house and has a fence around their
property. staff are going to start to get myriad complaints about the grass is, you know, right up to my fence. Um,
generally, you know, we're in a drought right now, but generally, you know, we get rain and when it rains, we get grass and it grows fast. um how do we separate you know what's a real concern
and and just you know someone who kind of nitpicks >> so for undeveloped lots we do not mow undeveloped lots and we will not mow undeveloped lots still um so that's not
something we would take care of the things that we would take care of for undeveloped lots are the dangerous trees. We are looking at those things that would uh cause property damage or safety issues for the
neighbors. Uh so we would be able to um take those trees down, assess those people for the the lot owner for the cost of those trees. Whereas now we put a we put a lean on the property, sometimes thousands and thousands of
dollars for what we have spent. we may not recover that ever because the lot may never be sold and the people may never pay it. This would allow us to do that. We won't be mowing those undeveloped lots. Um we won't be
clearing out 15 ft around the edges. We will be taking care of those trees that could fall and cause a danger to the structures or people next door. >> Okay. Thank you. Nobody else.
Um, any public comment on this? >> Robin Sanente. >> Morning again. Uh, I totally support this. I think it's a great uh way to help collect the fees. I just have a couple of comments and questions. uh
within that article uh the provision states authorized to levy a special assessment on which there occurs or has occurred. Uh so in the current situation all throughout our city are properties that have been in hazardous conditions
for an unlimited amount of time uh and they're really getting dangerous. So in that particular instance if we're looking at has occurred then if you're going to attach an ad valorum
assessment and they haven't paid to date. What makes you think they're going to pay the the adalorum tax if they haven't paid any of the fees? Do you do you abate that property and then hope to
collect the adver or do you just say forget about it, there's leans already filed, they haven't paid or do you continue to assess it so maybe when it sells you can collect all those fees upon sale?
That's that's one of my questions. Um because a lot of them are in such disarray and you either are in foreclosure or you've already filed leans and so forth on them. So again, do you abate them or do you just forget about those and then continue to leave these nuisance properties in the
condition that they're already in? Like how do what is our remedy for that? You know, how do we deal with that particular situation? Um that was my question. >> That's >> Thank you.
All right. I'm going to close this hearing and request a motion. I'll make it. >> I move to continue ordinance number 2026-01 to second reading on February 24th,
2026. >> Second. >> I have a motion on the floor to continue ordinance number 2026-01 to second reading on 224 2026 made by Vice Mayor Langden, seconded by
Commissioner Dval. anything to that? If not, please vote. >> Oh, go ahead, sir. >> Uh, it says a there's a chance for discussion here. So, I kind of want to u
give an answer, a reply to the the concern of the citizen. Um, my understanding is that, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that if we assess the lean for this ordinance and it gets to the
period of time where it doesn't, it will go on to the tax role. Okay? And if you don't pay your taxes, now it goes to the county. They're going to put it up for tax deed certificate and sale. So, that's the answer. It's not going to
just hang. Okay. If you don't pay this lean at a certain time, it's going to go on the tax roles as unpaid an unpaid tax. And then that property, if you don't pay
your taxes by the I think it's the 31st of March, uh now the county puts up a tax deed sale, tax certificate sale. I did it myself one time. Um, and so it's not going to hang forever.
>> Do we evade property or just leave it? >> Please. >> Um, but but but that's it is it's you know that's the >> Yeah, I know. >> As clear as I can get. Oh, >> Commissioner Deval.
>> Oh, I'm sorry. >> It took me three times to get it through. So, there you go. And that passes five to zero. Moving on to ordinance number 2026-02. Um I request a motion to direct the city clerk to read by title.
>> So move. >> Have a motion on the floor by commissioners commissioner Stokes to uh uh have the city clerk read by title only. Seconded by commissioner
Dubal. Commissioner Duval. >> One more time for luck, sir. There it goes. And that passes 5 to zero. City clerk. >> Ordinance number 2026-02. An ordinance of the city of Northport, Florida, adjusting the commission's base
salary rate, amending the code of the city of Northport, Florida, section 2-23, declaration of salary payment, providing for findings, providing for conflicts, providing for severability, providing for codification, and providing an effective date. >> Thank you. Uh, city manager, this is
your item, sir. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. During the city commission regular meeting held on November 4th of 2025, the city commission directed the city attorney to bring back an ordinance amending commissioner salary calculation starting compensation baseline at its current
amount increasing annually based on that same cost of living increase as approved for city employees. If there's no cost of living increase given to the city employees, then commission gets no increase as well. The recommended action today is option one, which is approving ordinance number 2026-02
as presented and moves to the second reading during the city commission regular meeting on February 24th, 2026 instead of the 10th. >> Thank you. Uh, Vice Mayor Langden. >> Uh, thank you, Mayor. I think this
commission has had a number of conversations over the past year or so expressing our discomfort with basing our compensation on population numbers.
So I for one am glad to see us finally codifying um this approach. I I think the base salary at this point is is adequate and appropriate. Um, I think
that tying any increases to the same increases that our employees might get based on cost of living is also appropriate. So, um, I am in support of this ordinance. Thank you. >> Thank you,
>> Commissioner Duval. >> Thank you, Mayor. Um, when it comes to commissioners pay, you know, part of how I campaigned, I have never been for the idea of commissioners
voting on their own pay and I wanted to see this changed and put into the city charter. Uh, I also did not like that population and the whole formula. Uh the last time a rather large pay
raise was given was when you know different factors in that formula were changed. Um but Mayor Stokes no not well I guess he was mayor back then. Uh, Commissioner Stokes, you know,
brought it up this way and I'm willing to compromise and, you know, the fact that future pay raises will go along with, you know, what our city employees get, um, you know, and the commission seems to agree
that, you know, what the salary is at now is is is a reasonable amount. Um, so I'm for this ordinance. Thank you. >> I just want to state that um a lot of
hubbhub out there is that we're giving ourselves a raise at this point. That is not the fact is what we did was as over the years we've came up to this scenario and this is what our current salary is. we're taking out the population equation
and starting from here to going into just a CPI type, you know, uh, raise in the future. So, it's just holding fast and moving forward in a different rate than by population.
Anybody else? I will uh any public comment. >> Thank you. should just get a seat over here. >> Uh, thank you. >> Um, I have been contacted by a lot of citizens and I think most of it is
coming from that they don't fully understand the whole structure. So, they automatically assume it's too high. What do you do? It's too much. Blah blah blah blah blah. So, I promised them I would get up and I would give them my opinion
publicly and to also support the um item as well. Um so, the county versus the city. The salaries for the Florida County Commissioners are determined by a statemanded formula based on population as outlined in the statutes. However,
the city commission, we can go by charter and we can go by policy and so forth. Uh, in the proposed ordinance, it states it's going to be effective November 4th with a recalculated base salary for each commissioner at 66 and change with an annual cost of living. I
think that's totally uh worth it and you need it. Um, as of January 12th of this year, the average annual pay for a city commissioner in Florida is $57,326 a year or check works out to be about 27
and change an hour. The majority of city commission salaries currently range from 29 474 which which is a 25th percentile to 77 and change which is 75th percentile and they can go as high as
125 and above and that's like for Fort Lauderdale over in Broward County. Uh there are some other factors that some cities consider commission council salaries such as the city's population, the number of commissioners per capita, whether the city is districted or
non-districted, and whether the city offered commissioners health insurance, and so forth. So, in summary, again, I just wanted to get my public opinion out there to answer everyone who's been calling me um so they have maybe a better understanding of why this is a
necessary adjustment to your salaries. So, I support. >> Thank you. >> Any more city clerk? >> That's all. >> Okay. Thank you. I'm going to close this hearing and
request a motion. >> I'll make it. >> Go ahead. >> Move to continue ordinance number 2026-2 to second reading on 22426. >> Second. >> Have a motion on the floor made by Commissioner Stokes to move ordinance number 2026-02
to second reading on 2242026. And that was seconded by Vice Mayor Langden. Let's vote. Now it's mine. >> I think I voted for >> keep hitting it till it >> for Commissioner Pro last time. I'm not sure.
>> And that passes 5 to zero. Okay, moving on. Ordinance number 2026-04. And I request a motion to direct the city clerk to read by title only. >> Second. >> Have a motion on the floor made by
Commissioner Stoke, seconded by Vice Mayor Langden to request uh to direct the city clerk to read by title only. City clerk. Oh, vote please. Got a vote. Tired of this machine here.
And that passes 5 to zero. Go ahead. Thank you. >> Ordinance number 2026-04, an ordinance of the city of Northport, Florida, amending the unified land development code regarding authorized hours for business activities and deliveries and corridor transitional and corridor zoning districts by amending
section 3.2.4, for providing for findings, providing for conflicts, providing for severability, providing for codification, and providing an effective date. >> Thank you. Um, city manager, this is your item, sir. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I am going to turn it over to Lori Barnes, our development
services deputy director, to lead us through the conversation of the item. >> Uh, good morning. >> Good morning, ma'am. >> Lori Barnes, deputy director of development services. Uh, this ordinance before you this morning amends the Unified Land Development Code to
eliminate the business activity hours limitation for our CT and COR zoning districts. Uh, this item was discussed at your June 2nd commission workshop and then again
uh in November where the commission gave direction to bring back the formal ordinance for your consideration. Um, on December 16th, the Community Economic Development Advisory Board voted unanimously to recommend that the commission adopt this ordinance as well
as the Planning and Zoning Advisory Board on December 18th. So, I'd be happy to answer any questions you may have. Staff is recommending approval. >> Thank you, Commissioners. Uh, Commissioner Stois. Yeah. Um,
this is an interesting one. On the surface, as a citizen, you want to say yikes. You know, there's a lot of residents residential properties in some of these carters. And, you know, uh, the thought
of simply doing away with with the hours, uh, limitations are like, you know, mindboggling. But at the same time um arbitrarily my first thought is well
could we just adjust them? But the arbitrariness to doing that exposes the city to challenges legal challenges. So I took the time
to go through the usage the uses property uses in these categories these two corridors and found that virtually all of them except for one unless I miss something
most of them don't even operate at the hours of concern. Um, and the reality is it's been a struggle getting businesses to have an interest in some of these areas because of some
of the constraints. If a if a business closes, you know, is forced to close at 10 and there's cleanup and there's things to do that require taking garbage out or deliveries. You know, it it it puts a burden on those businesses and and we're trying to attract the right
kind of businesses, but at the same time create a balance here. And it seems to me that other than restaurants, which seem to be the the only in my mind area of concern, the other uses in these carters don't
seem to cause a problem. They they I mean, I don't know that we want to go through them. They're pages long, but but I took the time to and and you know, restaurants were the ones that popped out at me. uh you know there are a few others that require special exceptions
which would have to come before commission to approve it. Maybe there's a way to address the restaurant aspect. The other thing is in there there's a a slew of attachments to this particular
item on the agenda. One of which is the noise ordinance. And when you read through that, um, there's some pretty good guidelines there. They need to be enforced and sometimes that's not always the easiest
thing. But it appears to me that even with regard to restaurants or bars, there are there are the guidelines and the ability to control this issue. I think it's easy to want to just say,
Jesus, this opens the door to 247 chaos, but it doesn't if you take the time to go through it. So, I'm supportive. I I think that the the carters we're talking about, you know, are carters that that are going to be
developed here. And I and I think that it's important that we do it smartly. And I think staff has I I I really do. I think if we run into some additional problems, commissions can address them and can tweak things and can change some guidelines and rules and and ordinances
to to to help better protect the citizens and create a better balance. But but but I I you know, I've come to the point where I'm I'm good with this one. So, thank you, Mayor. Thank you, sir. Uh Commissioner Dval, >> thank you, Mayor. Um,
as Commissioner Stokes just mentioned, uh, I also looked at the uses, you know, in the different, uh, categories, and, you know, there are some that are just definitely not allowed. Uh, like if I'm
looking at right now under, uh, flight industrial in the CT, it's not allowed. Uh, in the corridor, it's a special exception. Okay? It's going to have to go in front of the commission to get that. Okay.
Um, and I did go through all of these different, you know, restaurants, recreation, pocket parks, schools, RV resorts, and um, it really, it really helped to, uh, calm my nerves about
this. Now initially what my big concern with this is that this city is segmented
and you know we have the former West Villages Wellen Park area that's a planned community. Okay, things are planned there before it gets built. Unfortunately, the
uh parts of Northport that a lot of us live in u they weren't planned. This just kind of happened. And it seems to me discriminatory that all of these exceptions or whatever,
they're all in the older po part of Northport. they're going to affect the uh what I'm going to say are the um not as well to do section of our populace and that's a concern but also
as I was reading through all the background information on this I kept seeing uh two words noise ordinance and you know with all these delineations of what's allowed and what's not allowed
for each type of business and the noise ordinances. Um, it's convinced me that I should support this. Thank you, >> you vice mayor Langden. >> Uh, thank you, Mayor. Just a question of clarification,
Miss Lori. Um it was my impression so um transitional corridor in particular that those areas that will have the most impact are the ones that still have
undeveloped lots on them. And I'm just trying to get clarity around Commissioner Duval's concern because it's an important one. Um, I wouldn't want to see any of our policies inadvertently disadvantaging,
if that's a word. Um, some of the older and perhaps not as affluent areas of the city. Um, but my knowledge of them is they're pretty much built out. I mean, they're the original general development um, and the older sections of the city
and they're pretty built out. The transitional corridor are those streets that someday will be four lanes and when we changed the zoning already had, you know, larger parcels of undeveloped
property. Am I on target with that or do I need to be adjusted? >> Right. I'm I'm not certain that I'm understanding the question completely. the the CT and corridor districts were designed specifically for arterial and
collector roads where we know that eventually those areas are going to um be less than desirable for single family living >> because of their expansion to full lane. >> Correct. Um the corridor districts lie
in specific areas where larger tracks as a general rule existed on our current GDC plat. So the larger tracks with the corridor district provided an opportunity for a larger footprint and
therefore the uses there are a little bit broader than in the CT district. Um, in the CT district, it's clearly most developments that will occur on vacant land are likely to assemble lots
rather than use a single quarter acre lot. However, the existing developed properties, for example, along Price Boulevard, you see in cities these existing single family tend to convert to offices, attorney's offices, dentist
office, realtors, those type of uses. Now, in consideration of the business activity hours limitation and the CT and corridor districts, you can simply look to the 41 corridor and the adjacencies
to all of the legacy Northport single family development that occurred back in the 50s and 60s. those districts, the activity centers and the commercial districts along the 41 corridor don't have the same
limitation. And primarily that is the reason why staff is recommending approval due to the constitutionality issues that were outlined in the attorney general opinion that was attached to your packet.
>> Did I answer your question? >> Yes, you did. >> Thank you. I'm I'm wondering did that answer Commissioner Duval's concern? >> Okay. >> Thank you, >> Commissioner Pro. >> Thank you, Mayor. I just want to find
out uh if you can define the business activities. What does it entails into that phrase? Uh the commission um adopted that language in 2017 for our neighborhood commercial centers and then
again for these CTN corridor districts. Um it's my understanding that business activity meant any activity on the property. So it wasn't just um an hours of operation limitation. It was no business activities whatsoever can occur
on those properties during those hours. So, um, a restaurant, you couldn't clean up, take the trash out, do prep work in the kitchen for the next day's service. Um, if you were an accountant, you couldn't stay late during tax season and
work after hours. So, any activity, any business activity on those properties was was restricted during those hours per the current code. What about service uh uh shops like mechanical shop or um any
of similar business type? >> Um off the top of my head and I can I can look if if it's necessary um the automotive repair shop use is very limited in these districts. Um, my recollection isn't serving me well, but
I know major automotive repair is not allowed in CT and um, it requires a special exception in the corridor district, I believe. Okay. Um, now automotive repair, if they were to operate after hours, they're going to be
subject to the noise ordinance just like every other business in this city, regardless if it's in a corridor district or an activity center or a general commercial district. >> Thank you. Personally, I was on the fence on this one because I get I I can
see the where where do we draw the line and I would rather want to see this change to be on a request base um type of a change. Um but after looking at the deeper in the materials and
the restaurants are probably the majority of of of the business activities that we are looking into this um grocery stores and um it's it's a hard one but uh at the
same time we have to look at the benefits outweigh the cost and um if anything Northboard Port Lex restaurants. If you if you I'm not talking about Wellland Park specifically, but this part of the from River Road all the way
there. Um if we want to go out, we would have to drive and uh this will solve it. Um, I just want to to be very transparent and to show the citizens that we do care about the noise
ordinance and uh change of business hours of operation. Um, the noise ordinance will be still in place. We not eliminating if we vote to for this to be proceeded and to be
adopted as an ordinance will not change. the noise ordinance will stay. Um, but the hours of operation, it's a one-time delivery and that's
where the restaurants are limited to have because the deliveries happen early in the morning uh between 4 and 6 hour 6:00 a.m. generally speaking. So
I want to support this. At the same time, I want to respect our citizens uh concerns and um but it's like you choose the lesser of two evils in this in this case and um again it's the
benefits outweigh the cost and again this is the change of ulc which I was not part of it but um since we're there I've met also not with citizens but the people who want to have
businesses to serve those very same citizens. And they told me we cannot we we we we're not going to acquire that property. This property will be vacant or somebody else will buy it for whatever reason. But as a business to
serve your community, I'm so limited because I cannot have one maybe once a week delivery. And that's one week delivery prohibits that business to be there. i.e. restaurant. Um, and I don't
know if you can what would be your um opinion besides the restaurant uh industry, what would be other ones that would be affected by this change? Um as outlined in the economic
development division um analysis in your packet, there are a number of businesses um hotels, bed and breakfast, um um animal services, um you know,
overnight boarding, those type of businesses that um you know, by virtue are 24-hour operations cannot locate there. And everyone knows we need hotels in Northport, too. Um, so it's it's not
just restaurants that are impacted by this business hours limitation or this business activity limitation. And then, you know, as I mentioned to vice mayor, moreover, we have the um potential legal exposure um in retaining these business
activity hours of operations as described in the attorney general opinion that was included in your packet. >> And the hotels, they would be not built on a quarter of an acre lot. Obviously those would be commercial designated
lots that largely are permitted by size to build a hotel. So >> correct. >> So it is a tough one but um you know you make better for the benefit of the greater
benefit of the city. It's a tough one for me. >> That it. >> Yes. City clerk, any public comment. >> Okay, I'm going to close this public hearing and request a motion. >> Oh, take it.
>> Go ahead. >> See, I'm on the right one here. I move to continue ordinance number 2026-04 to second reading on 21026. >> Second. I have a motion on the floor made by Commissioner Stokes to continue ordinance number 2026-04
to second reading on 210 2026 and that was seconded by Commissioner Duval. Please vote three times. There we go. Yeah, three times I hit that button and that passes five to zero.
Moving on to resolution number 2026-R3. City clerk, can you read this by title only, please? Resolution number 2026-R03, a resolution of the city of Northport, Florida, authorizing the use of electronic records and electronic
signatures pursuant to the Uniform Electronic Transaction Act, and directing the city manager to adopt and implement control processes and procedures for the use of electronic signatures, providing for incorporation of recital, providing for complex, providing for severability, and providing an effective date.
>> Thank you, city manager. This is your item, sir. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Uh for this item, we're asking for your approval of this resolution that would bring the city into compliance with Florida State Statute section number 668.50, also known as a uniform electronic
transaction act. Um cryptographic digital signatures provide assurance that the stated signer signed the content and that it was not altered after signing. This leads to significant cost savings based on staff time saved by routing documents electronically rather than manually. And additionally,
there are substantial time savings derived from electronically routing documents. U, we also have our IT manager, Mr. Eric Ryan, here if you have any other questions, but we're seeking for you to approve resolution number 2026-3 as presented. Thank you, sir. >> Thank you. >> Uh, Vice Mayor Langden.
>> Uh, thank you. Um, just a couple of questions. One for Mr. Eric. would we be purchasing sort of an industry standard software package for this? Um, in my
experience for the past 20 years, um, it's been fairly common to use electronic signatures on contracts. So, how would you proceed with a solution on this? Uh for the record, IT manager Eric
Ryan, uh we will purchase Docu Sign and be using that as our uh de facto standard. >> Yeah, that's a real industry standard. >> Thank you for that, sir. And um city clerk, does this solve would this potentially solve the problem of
candidates for city commission having to physically deliver a paper financial report? We don't have that problem because we bought the easy vote campaign um portal. So, they already use that to upload their documents. >> Oh, that's wonderful. I'm behind the
eightball on that one. That's great. Okay. Thank you. I'm supportive of this. It makes a lot of sense. And docuign, boy, that's been used for decades really by a number of businesses. >> Is that all you had? >> That's all I have.
>> All right. Um, city clerk, any public comment? There >> is none. >> Thank you. I'm going to close this public hearing and request a motion. >> I'll make it. >> Go ahead. >> I move to adopt resolution number 2026-R3 as presented.
>> Second. I have a motion on the floor made by Vice Mayor Langden to adopt Resolution number 2026-R3 as presented. And that was seconded by Commissioner Stoopes. Please vote. first time
and that passes 520 that one. Okay, moving on to E resolution 2026-R4. Um, this is a quasi judicial hearing and uh, city clerk, can you read by title only? >> Resolution number 2026-R04,
a resolution of the city commission of the city of Northport, Florida, vacating utility and drainage easements for lots 15 and 16, block 334 of the fifth edition to the Port Charlotte subdivision, providing for findings, providing for reporting, providing for conflicts, providing for severability,
and providing an effective date. We have not received any agreed party requests. Can everyone wishing to provide testimony please stand and raise your right hand? You swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to provide is true and accurate to the best of your knowledge. So help you. >> Yes.
>> Thank you. >> Okay. Uh moving on to presentations. Applicant is not present, I take it. >> Mayor. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Oh, presentation by applicant, please. >> Mayor. >> Yes. >> You're supposed to do exparte communication. Oh, is there any exparte
communication? >> That would be for commissioners. Nothing. >> I'm asking you to. >> I believe there's none. >> Okay. Do you have any Commissioner Deval? >> No. >> Commissioner Sto. >> No, >> I have no >> none for me. >> Okay. There's none, ma'am. >> Excuse me. Did you all both stand and
raise your right hand when I did? >> I did. I'm sorry. If you're going to speak apologize, it's okay. If you're going to speak, I'll need you to raise your right hand. Do you swear affirm that the testimony you're about to provide is true and accurate to the best of your knowledge to help you guide? >> I do. >> Thank you. >> My name is Sheri Dehi. I am the
applicant's realtor and I also am excuse me I apologize I have that crud also um I'm acting as her agent she is um disabled and could not be here today so I'm acting on her behalf um this is a situation where I sold um
Miss Aabling the home over 20 years ago and when we did the survey for the initial purchase it was found that the line of the property went through the kitchen of the home.
>> Uh which was a problem. So at that time uh we were she was purchasing a home on a single lot because the prior homeowner had built the home and I don't know how that ever happened but the home was built in the
middle. Like I said the line went right through the kitchen of the home. They had to then purchase the lot next door. So that was done simultaneously when we closed on the home. They ended up buying, you know, the home and then got two lots
um to fix the issue of the line going through the kitchen. Um time has gone on now. We are under contract to sell the home and it was brought to my attention that you have an easement that's going through the kitchen.
Um don't know why it wasn't taken care of at the time of purchase 20 years ago. nothing was brought to our attention. Although I will say that it was a um title company in Miami that handled the closing, not by my doing. Um which is just a a thing everyone should use a
local title company when they're purchasing. It makes a difference. Um so here we are today. We are under contract. The buyer uh wants to close on this, but we can't do it unless this v um this easement is vacated.
>> Thank you. staff. >> Good afternoon. Adriana Silva, Planner 2, Development Services. Today we are considering a vacation of easement at 2682 Yamada Lane under resolution number two 2026R-04.
The owner is Susan Abling. The request is to vacate two platted six-foot utility and drainage easements for a total of 1380 square feet located between lots 15 and lot 16 on block 334 of the fifth edition to the Port Charlotte subdivision.
As the applicant's representative discussed, she's requesting this vacation of easement to bring the property into compliance um to allow for a clear title for the sale of the property that is currently under contract for sale. The subject lots are under common ownership with the unity of
title and the entire property area is 20,000 square ft and the vacation of easement is for 1380 square ft. The plat for a background on this review process plat typically compa contain an
automatic vacation language and this specific plat did not have that language. Thus um the need for this vacation of easement. The utility agencies have reviewed the request per section 2.2.17c
of the uldc and through written response have granted approval. If no response was received within 10 days of notification, the vacation of easement is deemed uncontested. Staff has reviewed and approved the proposed vacation of easement, finding
it in compliance with Florida statute 177 and the ULDC chapter 2. Staff recommends approval of petition number PVAC-25-0436 via resolution number 2026-R4. The city attorney has reviewed the
accompanying resolution for form and correctness. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, let's see. Rebuttal from the applicant.
>> You just say no rebuttal. >> No rebuttal. >> Staff, any rebuttal? >> Okay. Uh, city clerk, is there any public comment? >> There is not. >> All right. Commission questions, discussion, anything?
Commissioner Petro, >> I have a question to the staff um to our staff that you know it seems like every time we have those vacating or vacation um request there's a easement. Is it typical to have easement on individual lots?
>> Yes. >> On both sides? >> Yes. So those easements exist to allow for utility access and maintenance typically of the property and they are reflected on the plat. So when the plat has language that when that unity of
title is done, it automatically vacates. But when that language doesn't exist, then we do have to go through this process per Florida statute. >> Okay. Thank you. >> That sir. Okay. Nobody else.
All right. Closing arguments. Um staff, >> none. >> Applicant, >> none. >> Okay. I'm going to close the public hearing and request a motion. I'll make it. >> Go ahead. >> I move to adopt resolution uh make sure I'm on the right.
Resolution 2026-R4 is presented. >> Second. >> I have a motion on the floor made by Commissioner Stokes to adopt resolution number 2026-R4 is presented. And that was seconded by Commissioner Duval. Please vote.
[Music] Petro, >> your turn. >> And that passes five to zero. >> You're all good. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> All right. Uh we're moving on to general business. And before we do, since it is
a long uh item probably, do we want to take a break? Do we want to take a lunch? What do we want to do? I say we can take a break and come back and finish everything up after the break. 15 minutes. So, do you want to take a lunch? I'm asking city manager for staff as well.
>> Staff is fine either way, Mr. Mayor. >> Okay. All right. We'll take 15 minute break and then we'll come back and we'll move through this. All right, it's 11:45 and we're back. Moving on to general business. Item number 26-0228,
discussion and possible action regarding pursuing an outstanding spring designation for Warm Mill Springs. City Manager, this is your item. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I am going to turn it over to Miss Chanel Bosch, our environmental planner for the Department of Development Services to lead us
through the presentation. Thank you. >> Thank you. Good morning. Uh Chanel Bosch, environmental planner with Natural Resources. Thank you for having me here today. Um I'm here today to provide an overview of what it would mean for Northport to pursue an outstanding Florida Springs or OFS designation for Warm Mineral
Springs. I'm here today to provide an overview of what it would mean, not so much to advocate for or against, but to give you a broad overview of the pros and cons related to this. Today's presentation will cover the
potential benefits, drawbacks, financial implications, regulations, and impacts associated with such designation. We'll review what OFS designation entails, discuss both environmental advantages and regulatory challenges,
outline potential costs the city would inquire as well as our residents, and identify which neighboring jurisdictions would become involved if a basin management action plan or BMAP would be triggered. A BMAP is FD's
regulatory framework to restore water quality and impaired waters associated with OFS designation. War Mineral Springs is one of Northport's most iconic natural resources. It's a third magnitude spring, meaning
it discharges between 1 and 10 cubic feet of water per second. It's Florida's only known hot spring, producing warm, mineralrich water that attracts visitors from all around the world. Beyond its recreational benefits,
it supports important ecological benefits and functions, including habitat for gopher tortoises, endangered species, and downstream warm water refuge for manatees. Archaeologically, War Mineral Springs is one of the most significant Paleoindian
sites in Florida with discoveries dating back thousands of years. It was listed on the National Register of Historical Places in 1977. Hydraologically, the spring lies within the Maka River Basin and the broader southwest central
Florida groundwater basin, which spans approximately 5,000 square miles. These characteristics help explain the level of interest surrounding this resource. Outstanding Florida springs were established under the 2016 Florida
Springs and Aquafer Protection Act. Statutoily outstanding refers to springs that are significant to Florida's water resources and may be impaired or at risk for impairment requiring enhanced legal protections.
Outstanding Florida springs are the state's most significant freshwater springs and are designated by the legislature to receive focus protection and restoration. The program is primarily designed to address nutrient pollution and protect
aquafer recharge areas. It is most effective when there is a clear water quality concern. Springs in Florida are classified by discharge volume with first magnitude springs having the highest discharge and
flow rates. Current designation applies to all first magnitude springs and a limited number of second magnitude springs with very high flow rates. Designation brings a suite of regulatory tools including stricter water and
nutrient reductions, water use limitations, mandatory restoration improvements, but only if impairment is identified. Warm mineral springs, however, is a unique system. It is a third magnitude
warm mineral spring formed from from a prehistoric sinkhole with naturally elevated temperatures and mineral content that differs significantly from typical freshwater springs. It is not considered a major aquifer recharge spring, but rather a
groundwater discharge feature that flows directly into the Maka River. Because of its distinct geology, hydrarology and chemistry, warm mineral springs does not fit neatly within the regulatory framework designed for first
and second magnitude springs. Applying the OFS framework could mischaracterize the natural mineral conditions as impairment. While the legislature does have the authority to add springs by name, given
these characteristics, it may be unlikely that warm mineral springs would meet the intent of the OFS program. The following slides summarize prior discussions related to OFS designation for warm mineral springs. In early 2021,
the Maka River Management Council emphasized the ecological value of warm mineral springs and Little Salt Springs and encouraged the city to pursue OFS designation. In April 2021, commission reviewed that
request and directed staff to continue discussions and consider a future resolution. Later in 2021, the commission adopted a resolution supporting designation and discussed potential criteria and
coordinating our efforts. At the end of 2022, commission adopted a second resolution supporting designation of both springs along with legislative support and funding for spring protection. In early 2023, staff
presented a memo outlining the long-term commitments associated with OFS designation and the BMAP process. In mid 2023, a follow-up memo recommended pausing pursuit of
designation due to concerns related to the BMAP adoption and associated financial and regulatory obligations. In early 2025, commission voted to resume the consideration. And in May, staff presented a third memo
outlining updated pros and cons along with general terms for a conservation easement surrounding Warm Mineral Springs. Although Warm Mineral Springs does not automatically qualify for an OFS designation due to its third magnitude
status and lack of current impairment, the legislature could amend the statute and add it by name. That process would require substantial political support, including coordination with Sarasota County and other jurisdictions within
the regional springhed. Even with designation, OFS status alone does not guarantee water quality improvements unless impairment is identified and a BMAP is required. If designated, a priority focus area or
PFA would be delineated. Existing OFS priority focus areas range widely in size from just over 3,000 acres to nearly 400 acres. For warm mineral springs, a PFA could include
portions of the lower Maka River River Basin or potentially multiple basins and could encompass all of Northport depending on FD's determination. OFS designation does offer potential environmental benefits. It strengthens
regulatory oversight by FD and SwiftMUD, supports nutrient reduction efforts, and provides tools such as minimum flows and levels to protect groundwater withdrawals. Designation may also elevate the spring's profile and increase public
engagement around water quality. However, these benefits are largely realized only if water quality and water quantity impairments or issues arise and a BMAP framework is initiated for the community. Designation may
promote stewardship, regional cooperation, and recognition of War Mineral Springs cultural and historical importance. It can support environmental education, tourism branding, and long-term planning, though these
outcomes are not guaranteed. There are also significant drawbacks to consider. Absent impairment, designation alone does not bring new protection or funding. Once impairment is identified, a BMAP can impose mandatory requirements
affecting development, water use, fertilizer application, and wastewater management within the city. Because the spring shed beyond extends beyond city limits, these requirements would likely have to occur regionally
for the city. designation, excuse me, designation prevents financial and administrative challenges. If a BMAP is triggered, the city could be responsible for major infrastructure investments, including wastewater upgrades, storm water improvements, and
expanded sewer service. Staff workload will also increase due to monitoring, reporting, and regional coordination. Residents could also experience direct impacts if septic systems are identified as a
significant nitrogen source. Homeowners would be required to upgrade systems or connect to central sewer at costs ranging approximately 12,000 to over $20,000 per household. Utility rates could also increase to
support expanding treatment infrastructure. City costs would include both capital and ongoing operational expenses. Capital costs may involve treatment upgrades, storm water retrofits, hydraologic studies, monitoring
infrastructure, and habitat restoration projects. Operational costs could include long-term monitoring, compliance reporting, public outreach, and enforcement. Communities involved in existing BMAPs
often incur tens of millions of dollars in long-term costs. Because Warino Springs is connected to the broader Maka River Basin, which is highlighted in red, Sarasota County highlighted in yellow, a primary focus
area would likely extend beyond city limits. Multiple jurisdictions including Sarasota County, the city of Venice, Englewood, and potentially portions of Sarah, I'm sorry, um, Charlotte County could be required to participate in the
BMAP. Coordinating policies and infrastructure across jurisdictions is complex and resource intensive. If a BMAP were created, it would include a detailed source analysis, ranked
mitigation projects, implementation timelines, and cost estimates. Projects must demonstrate measurable nitrogen reductions, and secure funding. The framework is legally binding and includes 5, 10, and 15-year compliance
milestones. Minimum flows and levels are another component of the Springs Protection Act. If established, falling below minimum flows can trigger withdrawal limits or recovery strategies. Currently, warm mineral springs does not
require minimum flows and limits under o but under OFS designation that could change potentially affecting groundwater withdrawals. When staff met with FD on April 15th of last year, they posed a key question.
What specific problem is the city trying to solve through OFS designation? FD emphasized that designation alone does not guarantee funding or regulatory benefit. Its effectiveness depends on
identified impairment and appropriate tools to address that impairment. Without clear objectives, the city risks assuming new obligations without the corresponding benefits. The city does however have potential
alternative tools. These include conservation easements, local water quality ordinances, targeted storm water and wastewater improvements, and partnerships with SwiftMUD, USGS, and FD. These approaches allow a focused
protection tool while maintaining flexibility and fiscal control. In summary, OFS designation does offer potential benefits including increased awareness and long-term planning. However, the drawbacks are significant.
Designation does not guarantee funding. Regulatory requirements are triggered, but only upon impairment. and costs to the city and residents could be substantial. Local protection measures may offer a more targeted and cost-effective
alternative. Today's decision points for the commission are to whether OFS designation aligns with the city's long-term vision, whether the obligations fit our strategic goals, and whether alternative
approaches may provide similar protection with fewer impacts. And we're seeking your guidance today on how staff should proceed and providing you with three options. Option one, pursue designation and begin
legislative and regional cooperation and coordination. Option two, focus on local protection tools such as easements, ordinances, and targeted improvements. And option three, a hybrid approach.
Strengthen local protections now while monitoring long-term conditions to determine if OFS designation is needed in the future. I want to thank you for your time and your consideration today. Um, and I welcome any questions that you may have. Um, staff is here to answer those for
you. Thank you so much. >> Thank you. That was very, very informative. Commissioners, >> Commissioner Stokes, I guess I'll go first. >> Well, you popped up first. She did her thing twice. So, >> well, appreciate the presentation. >> Of course.
>> You know, on surface an outstanding designation sounds like a great thing. It really does, but as you've highlighted, there's pros and cons to it. You know, my Whoops. Audio, excuse me. Yeah. Um, and
there are pros and cons to this approach. We're in the midst of working through a conservation easement on Mineral Springs. We're also committed to fixing the 20 acres and and bringing that the
springs up up to a to a a level that we can be proud of. So, you know, after years of neglect, this commission, this past commission voting to do that, this designation is just fraught with
pitfalls that make me fearful. Uh, you know, there are all kinds of residential properties in and around that area that have septic and wells.
The wells are probably sucking the water out of the aquifer. God knows what what the septic systems are doing over there. If it were determined that, as you said, the nitrogen levels were affecting the springs. I mean, citizens could be
looking at millions overall. Um, the city could be looking at millions. The county could be looking at millions. Making this decision has serious implications to our regional partners. And I for one haven't heard
anywhere that we have reached out to those regional partners and met and talked and solicited their input on this. Um which I think certainly would have to be done if we were to proceed in
any fashion. um or or you know um so you know it seems to me that um whether we defer any decision on this until we get the conservation easement
in place. I kind of like the idea of of you know putting this off to a time when it's actually determined that there's an impairment to the springs and and and in the interimm maybe there's some dialogue
to have with our regional partners so we can make them aware. I don't even know how many of them are even aware that we're considering this um if it's on their radar screens at all, but you know, it's um we all want to protect this, you know, more mineral springs. It could
very well happen and and I don't know that you mentioned it, but it was somewhere in the in the materials that were attached. I mean, if if there was to be a determined impairment of the water here and the water quality, it's possible Mineral Springs could be shut
down, fenced off, nobody would be able to use it, be there. That would have incredible implications. So, you know, it, you know, I remember a meeting not too long ago where one of my fellow commissioners said, you know, um, who
trusts government? Well, at least if the control of War Mineral Springs sits within the elected body of Northport, we have some control over what happens if we
move forward on this designation. Potentially the future more mineral springs gets taken right out of our hands and I for one would not want to see that. So, just some thoughts to ponder. Thank you, mayor. >> Thank you, Vice Mayor.
>> Um, thanks, mayor. So what I'm getting out of this presentation is currently Warm Mineral Springs is not impaired. >> That's correct. >> Um it's currently not at risk.
It does not have the flow um that would potentially make it appropriate for this program. It's it's a level three, not a one, which kind of
guarantees it, or a two, which might qualify you on an acceptable basis. So, I don't see pursuing this designation as a good use
of our time. But like it or not, we are stewards of warm mineral springs and we need to figure out what's our strategy here. So, is it our strategy
to abuse the springs until it qualifies for this program, or is our strategy to monitor the springs in a more comprehensive way
so that we can protect it? Um and our regional partners should be concerned about the springs because it does flow right into the maka. We have um you know all kinds of environmental
and and conservation issues with that. So, I definitely fall in the camp of what can we do within our own local control to protect the springs for future
generations. And my sense is the the most regular testing we do, I think we do do flow testing, and Miss Sandy might have to help me here. Um, in my agenda briefing, I also confirmed
that we regularly do fecal content, but but that's more to protect people using the springs, not to protect the springs itself. So, I think I I might have some questions for um Stefan.
What other testing should we be doing that focuses as much as testing we need to do to protect people using the springs as it is to protect the springs itself. My gut
tells me we're not doing enough. >> Correct. >> Um and we need to look at that. And and I'll just share with you years ago I had an off-the cuff conversation with Elizabeth Wong. I think a lot of people
in this room will remember who she was. And she made a comment to me. You never want to make an off-hand comment to me. She said, and this was either just before we were lifting the restrictions because of COVID, you know, when we were
going to reopen the springs after it was closed down for I forget how long, year, year and a half. She said, "The water quality of the springs has has never been as good as it was as that testing
before we opened it up again to human participation. So, I've long been concerned with the level of human interaction with the springs, not because I think we should fence it off and prevent people from
coming in. I want to protect the springs for future generations so that people can continue to use it for its health benefits. But I don't want to burn it up. And I'm concerned about the I forget who brought
up. I think it was um Mayor Stokes. There are all kinds of older homes and septics. Did I say Mayor? >> Yeah, I'm just going to give him the G. >> Just give them the G. Um there are all kinds of older septic
systems just north of um the springs. I've long been concerned about that. So maybe there is a a question in there. Two questions. What kind of testing should we be doing to better evaluate the health of the
springs? Number one. And number two, how impacted is the springs by groundwater? In which case, we should have some concern for the septic systems north of
the spring. So, I guess I was able to dig out two questions out of that rambling dissertation. Sandy Funher, parks and recreation director, I can speak to the testing that we do currently. Uh we test the portable water um under a department of
health requirement. Uh we also voluntarily test the water in the springs for fecal cifform. Um and we follow the same procedures that you would see followed at the beaches um if there was a an issue with the water um we have the ability to close the
facility um until it had readings that were acceptable for people to be in the water. But the but we measure two things. So we >> portable water for department of health >> and then in the springs we test multiple
locations within the springs for fecal cifform. >> There are so many things that you could be testing for. Um it would not make sense for us to try and test for every possible item that could be in the water. So, >> well, maybe not every possible item, but
are there certain standards that that we should be looking at? >> So, and perhaps >> let me have our assistant director um Trish Sturgis um she's got a little more background on that and can speak to it. >> Trish Sturgis, assistant director parks
and recreation for the record. So, the fecal caulifform is a indicator bacterium. So it is our best option because what happens if we see a spike in that that would then indicate it could be septic, it could be nutrients, it could be there's something that's
feeding that component that we would then have an indicator to go back and do a more in-depth test if warranted. So that is why that's the key one that we want to make sure we focus on regularly. >> Okay. Um what other indicators? So let's
go back for a minute to the outstanding springs designation. What are they testing? So certainly water flow, but what other parameters are they testing >> from the research that we were able to
collect? It appears that they're testing for nitrogen. Um so the nitrogen that could be coming from septic systems. Um, if that were the case, if it were determined that the nitrogen were coming from septic systems, those homeowners could have to um, improve that to a
nitrogen reducing system or switch over to um, city services. >> Okay. If I may, as Stefan Kaiff, natural resources manager, in addition, usually some of the water quality indicators involve dissolved oxygen, nitrogen, such
as Chanel mentioned, phosphorus, the feal, caulifform, bacteria, that's a common one, and there are a few other um impairment indicators, so to speak, that on a general basis get tested throughout the state. >> Okay, thank you for that. Did Did I also
hear though that given the mineral content of the springs itself, which is a large part of its value to the community that uses the springs for health benefits, that in other springs
might trigger a concern? So unlike the other springs that are designated as outstanding, none of them are mineral springs. This would be the first spring that would be introduced as
a mineral spring. So the parameters on which they base their assessment on for um pollutant loads may change because of those minerals and the mineral content that's in the water. It would have to be
a different test. they wouldn't be correlating it to a freshwater spring that's you know discharging fresh pure water. This one is is discharging mineralrich water. >> Okay, thank you for that. Um how
ownorous would it be for us to test for things like nitrogen, phosphorus and some of those things that Mr. Caleb um indicated and this is my last question, mayor. I know you kind of looked at me with
>> No, no, no, you're good. >> Our natural resources division um has taken over the water quality testing throughout the city. Um so we are currently monitoring water quality. I'm not sure if one of those is placed within the spring or um the discharge
water, but I do note that the state is um monitoring all of that and it's included um on their state website um and you can go on to see which um parameters they are testing for and what the current um discharge rate um and contents are.
I just I am so not an expert in this area, but my gut is telling me and I have a pretty good gut that we need to expand what we're monitoring and I personally would like to see trend lines in these things. Are we kind of holding
steady? Are we deteriorating in terms of some of these? I I just think we can do more to protect the springs locally and maybe get one of our partners involved in helping with the cost of that if it's
ownorous. So, at Lur Mineral Springs, there is a um site gauge from um the US um geological service. Um and so they do monthly testing out there and that data is on our website. Um and it's it's
years of data on discharge, water flow, and water quality. um we have not been contacted and and we're in in contact monthly with them when we arrange the visits, but there's not been any contact saying that there is an issue that they've seen in the data that they've
collected. >> Yeah. >> And again, I'd still be interested in seeing trending information on that data. I mean, I personally would like to know before we have an
issue that we have an issue because we might be able to take some preventative or remedial steps to prevent the springs from falling into a state that we
wouldn't want it to. And um that's really all I I have, >> folks. >> Yeah. Um If if I may, um, Vice Mayor Stefan Kale of Natural Resources. So, we always can
have this opportunity to do further testing as a city. Um, and it's always a matter of time, staff time, and resources. Of course, >> you had budget time then, huh?
Commissioner Stokes. >> Yeah. Um I mean the reality is that um if if there's problems with nitrogen, phosphorus, and oxygen levels in the springs, the odds are it's it's going to be
coming from the surrounding properties and the septic and the wells. And you know, they all lie within unincorporated Sarasota County. So I I you know to devote city resources to look for a
problem that at present doesn't appear to exist to search that out then run the repercussions of you know um well not the repercussions but were we to find there's a problem and it was
coming from all those properties which most likely it would then how would the city go about solving that problem anyway since none of those people live within Northport. They're unincorporated
Sarasota County. So would Northport sue the county to force these people to convert to our I mean this just is like huh? We got other governmental agencies looking at this who who monitor
periodically. We look at our water quality and our fecal levels. So, as as you know was stated, it it would trigger an alert. It would tell us we got some problems here. There does not appear to be any problems. I mean, if we really want to protect the springs, let's just
shut it down. Shut it down. Save all that money we're going to use to improve it. Put a fence around it like little salt springs and people can just talk about how great it is and not be able to enjoy it, which makes no sense to me. So to me, we're like beating this thing
over the head because some people believe that this designation would be a good thing. And clearly from all the information presented, and if you don't want to believe Stale, I I tend to want to
believe a guy like John Thaxton who, you know, if there was anybody who who you could find who would be more concerned about our environment in Southwest Florida, it's him. And and you heard it earlier today say that in a nice way
that this designation doesn't make sense when we are doing our thing to keep track of the springs quality and we have conservation plan conservation easement plans and plans to protect and take care of this property by ourselves. So I I
you know I just can't wrap my head around doing anything more and devoting resources. I mean, where in the world would you get the money? And if and if we force this issue, I mean, you know, who's going to pay for it all? So, you know, why create a problem that doesn't
exist? And I just don't see the problem at this point in time. I just don't I just think that there's this perception that this designation would be exciting. People would think, "Oh, wow. We're a design." I mean, it's not a good designation. It It's the designation to
say you got a problem. That's what this is all about. You got a problem that's got to be fixed and everybody's going to pay for it and we aren't there. So, why would we do it? >> Anyway, >> if I may provide a few more additional comments to what you said, >> um, currently the spring's not
designated. If we were to confront our legislative lobbyist to um add this spring, it would have to go through intense reviews. Um so currently it's not it's not a first or second magnitude
spring. Um currently the discharge from the spring is not being put back into the aquifer. It's going out into the Maka River. So it's not considered a recharge spring. It's considered a discharge spring. So the the groundwater
is coming from so deep within the ground that it's a a it's still within the aquafer but it's a separate layer within that aquifer. So that's why we're seeing all these mineralrich contents within the water. If designated
the state would come in and um p create a priority focus area. Um so that's determined by the state. um any municipalities that encompass this priority focus area would be required to comply. So whether
Sarasota County wanted to um support this designation, if it were designated, they would be required to comply with the state requirements um by switching. if it were found to be septic um issues,
they would have to find ways to improve those. And if I may add another two quick points, um, as Chanel mentioned previously, the unique characteristics of the water quality
from War Mineral Springs simply are different from the standard water quality thresholds that the state has in place for most surface water bodies. So this is why as um our parks and
recreation department stated the fecal caulifform bacteria um parameter would probably be the ideal one to study where we still have sufficient information without really
overdoing overdoing it as it does not simply meet the standard uh water quality uh criter bacteria that we have. So this is why factors such as dissolved oxygen may not be ideal for
this specific water body. And then um perhaps you um you heard m Mr. Taxton saying earlier today that there has been additional funding of $230,000
allocated from the Coastal and Hartland National Estuary Partnership uh to the city. Uh we just received the good news. So with our partners with parks and recreation, we will put these funds to good usage towards the health
of the warm mineral springs. Good, sir. Commissioner Pro. >> Thank you, Mayor. First, I just want to say I'm in support of this idea of at least nominating outstanding Florida spring designation. Um, but the last
thing I want to see is, you know, we designate it and the park is closed and we cannot use it. Um so the use of the resources to me and to to the people I represent is is very important. The use
of it we have a lot of users and we can see it from a financial standpoint as well because it's one of the most profitable entity within the entity um in our city. Uh but uh and I'm rather
concerned that we use our natural resource uh to the fullest rather than you know fence fence it and have this title. Title is really cool to have um which I will support but I want to have
uh I want to make it u I want to ask a few specific questions and kind of have a deep dive in to designation triggers. Um not to mention um not to take into consideration the magnitude. Can you talk to uh uh to us about Chanel or
whoever about basin management action plan, priority focuser area designation and stricter nutrient controls and permitting oversight and specifically um more of a concrete requirements what
needs to be I mean the these were the bullet points of the presentation which was by the way was u nice presentation I thank you for that. Um can we go into like a detail of the triggers how much and what the percentages or numbers or
uh can you walk us through? >> Yeah. So currently we wouldn't be able to give you um percentages of what our resources would be going towards whether it be um nutrient reduction or flow rates. A basin management action plan is
only triggered if nutrient levels or um out discharge levels drop below the state's standards. >> Good morning, Elena Ray, director of development services. Um to answer your question directly, we don't know.
This would be a unique circumstance that the state has not dealt with at this point. they would establish what those parameters would be. We would have no control over that. So the state would come in determine what
their flow rates were going to be established at what the um testing criteria would be, what types of tests they would perform, uh whether they'd be looking at phosphorus, uh nitrogen, it
could be a number of things, but we would have no ability to control that. That's what Mr. Faxton was stressing in his comments today is that when you give
when you get this designation, you are giving control over those parameters and enforcement to the state and they will not ask our opinion. They will mandate what has to be done. So that's the
important distinction. We cannot tell you today what the parameters would be. We won't we wouldn't know what those parameters are until the state comes in, studies the springs and determines what
those parameters are going to be. >> Thank you. That leads me to another question and um Vice Mayor LinkedIn kind of shown the light to that. Can we start? I guess from my point of view, we
are doing ourselves a disservice uh by not um you know jumping to the to the nomination or the process of designation without the proper or mimicking at least some tests that we
can do on our own. And um my question is um can we start testing on our own um mimicking other other uh springs uh which are two in
front of us um and maybe to have those uh impurity indicators um like you mentioned. Can we start doing on our on our own some testing so we can see if we qualify? Even if we qualify, um that
would be the first step to do it. I'm more inclined to option three. Um you know, I'm not against it. I'm not completely embracing the idea to do it now and today um to vote and have this
spring to be designated. But um I want to do something proactively. Uh can we start doing some homework in advance to see even if we qualify by the testing requirements or parameters?
>> So um the city did do a study partnered with the US Geological Survey. Uh the survey began in 2014. Uh it was dated published 2016. um that measured certain things like the the load, the discharge,
um the the uh mineral loads. Um that of course has been a while, 10 years. Uh if we were going to do that again, um then we would need to likely partner with them again. Um, I believe
that the cost to the city at that time, 10 years ago, was about $50,000 to do that study. >> What was that number? I'm sorry. >> 550. Uh, and it took about two years to to do
that study. Um, we would need to go through that process again. Um, because without a study, what do you measure? What do you test? How do you decide what things need to be
tested? As um was stated before, um the the testing that we do now seems to be the best indicator for the underlying issues that you might find. The springs because of its high mineral
content would have to be tested differently than most freshwater springs because those minerals change the quality of the water. And so are you testing for things that you want to have in the springs or are you testing for things you don't
want to have? Currently we the testing that we do gives us what we believe is the best indicator for those things that we don't want to have in the springs. If we're going to do more than that, then we would need a study to tell us what those things might be.
>> And second, Commissioner Pro. City attorney wants to >> Sure. >> Comment. City attorney. >> Thank you, Mayor. I I just want to make it clear that when we talk about designation as an outstanding mineral spring, there's a statutory definition
for that under the Florida Springs Protection Act. And it specifically says either a spring of a first magnitude as defined by the in the latest uh bulleting by the FDP or one of six other
springs. Then that's important because this isn't just like a program that DP says that if you do some testing you qualify for in order to get this uh designation that's talking about we need a statutory change which would be like any bill or any law. So there would have
to be a bill that would pass in the House and the Senate signed by the governor. So I, you know, I don't want to get ahead of the of the of the staff, but we do all the testing in the world and if the there's no political will up in Tallahassee to do this, then we're not going to get that.
>> Uh, correct. And I think the the thing that we're trying to determine today is whether the commission wants to pursue that legislative change or whether you want to continue managing War Mineral Springs at the local level. Um if we are
going to manage it that that's the first decision. Um if we are going to continue to manage it at the local level then we can talk further about the types of things that the commission might want to
test for u study um protect. Uh so we are and we are currently um doing some things around the springs that will help the ecosystem surrounding it and which will ultimately help the water quality. Um but that's something we can discuss
as we go forward as well. Really the answer that we need to know uh because the legislature is in session is does the commission want to um pursue that designation and if that designation is
approved recognizing that we will be giving that control to the state or does the commission want to um keep the control at the local level. That's that's really where we're at today. And I was aware of this because I read the options obviously there's option
three as well which uh you know by by approaching our state legislature and and I was aware and thank you the city attorney. I was aware that the legislature state statutory um statutes or whatever you want to call
it have to be changed. Um my my my position is more of a you know if we decide not to let's shove it completely. I'm open-minded. Um let's there are some things we can do proactively and uh as
we heard that we from Khiff um we we and from John for that matter that we're going to get some additional funding we can use towards that specific springs um and maybe do some more testing just for our peace of mind and to see if we
even qualify what if we not even qualify and I know it's early in the game but going to the to the state legislature uh or um representatives and you know it's also um jumping a gun if you will
because if we don't know ourselves what we want or what we are heading to that's also I in my view at least in my opinion we're doing ourselves a disservice because like you said it's very unique uh the
the natural resource is so unique uh that they have to mand um amend if you will like all the requirements of what we are testing. But uh my my approach would be a much simpler um maybe on on the level of staff and not
even involving the commission as far as additional funding, but maybe to test something else and to see where we so we can see the trend over the let's do four times a year quarterly >> or let's do monthly whatever we we
decide. So we know where we we where we stand. If you know the the idea of being designated is really uh really high level idea and it's really high earned title. Um but what if we get closed?
That's another issue. But we have to have some some guidance from you as a staff to see and to show us maybe on quarterly basis. Hey, this is where we are. This is the the nutrients or minerals we're testing for. um mimicking
the other uh natural resources in the state or designated resources uh springs I'm sorry. So this is where I'm open to and if the board is willing to do it uh maybe to do
something more than not doing it all. Um I've also want to address this issue that uh residents have contacted me who really um invested in the in the in the area financially uh but also the big users of the
springs. So they were and I don't know where they're getting this information from but uh that the level of impurities and the springs have been um rising and u I I just refer them to to you guys.
>> Can you address that issue to >> assistant director parks and recreation? Yes, I can. Um so the study was done in 2014 presented to commission in 16. Um, when we took over Operation of the Springs, specifically myself, there's a lot of time and effort put into what
those tests are. One thing we have to understand is no matter where we take water from, when we're talking about water, there's going to be a makeup content. If I fill a swimming pool in South County Panagorta, you're going to have high phosphates because you have
you're taking water out of the Peace River. That's going to be an indicator when I'm trying to balance water and I'm trying to add chemicals and I'm trying to do bacteria testing to make sure that water is safe. That is one of the considerations that was put into doing the type of water testing we're do not
only for the public bther who's coming in to be safe, but it is a big indicator bacterium that says if if this isn't managed, something else is wrong. So we have that from that test in 2016. We have years over years where we have
that report that comes in every month on what those levels are. So, so that is something we're already doing on a widespread thing and and it's monitored. I I look at them every month. Our aquatics manager looks at them every month. We make sure there's no anomalies. If something drops by a
little bit, why is it dropped by a little bit? Was there more rain at that time? You know, we really do follow that through for that overall health of the spring water component. Um, so I want to make sure that that it that doesn't get lost, that it's just not we're doing nothing. Um, and on the other side of
that, when we talk about very specific water like this with a high mineral content, you're not just calling your average water check guy to come out to get these levels. So the more difficult your water is to test, the more fiscally
impactful it is. So, we have to remember that like we could test that water for a hundred thousand different things, but we might be paying $1,000 a month for one or two of those things to be tested. So, there's a a balance between the fiscal responsibility and choosing those
indicator components that are of most value to us. And I feel that's what we did and we can go back and show you know from especially the time we took over that path of where those numbers have been. So just >> just one second. Let's let's just get it
back to where we are on the agenda. The the should a could a would of what we can do in the future would be another agenda item. We're here to discuss whether we want to do the outstanding springs or not. Now if we want to do more testing like Miss Ray has stated,
we might have to do a study for 50,000. We're not going to get through all of that in this discussion. So, let's try and keep it to the designation of if we want to go with it or not or if we want to do one of the three motions. So, if we can keep it at that, we can get
through it a little bit easier. >> Okay, fair enough. I'm done then. >> I didn't mean to cut you off, but I'm just saying that would be another discussion. The further we go into how do we fix this? That's all I was trying to say. >> Just to finish with this, I was not advocating for any study by no means.
What I was advocating is or asking um to mimic the whatever the test they doing right now for those the other designated outstanding designated springs and I cannot imagine that they do $1,000 per test per every day or every week. Uh but
somewhere because this is our homework before we arrive to this conclusion whether to proceed or not to proceed. We don't know the the actual data. That's my that's was my whole point. So maybe we know before we arrive to this decision.
>> So bear in mind, we would not be testing the springs for the same things those other springs that are outstanding are being tested for. Those are freshwater springs with without a high mineral content. So you you can't apply those
same tests. Yes. The study that was performed back in 2014 and 20 to 2016 gave the parameters and the substances of what the USGA logical
survey felt were the best things to test for to determine water quality for a high mineral content spring. So we are already testing that. our parks department has indicated um that there have been no um significant changes in
the water quality based on those tests. So at this point another study would need to be done to determine if there's anything else that we need to test for. that based on the USGS survey, they gave us what would be the best testing uh to
do. [Music] >> Good commissioner. >> Yes. >> Uh Vice Mayor, >> thank you, Mayor. I just want to be really clear. I don't support pursuing the designation for all of the reasons
we reviewed today. I am all for continuing to manage it locally. Um my only suggestion or concern particularly in light of $230,000
potentially if we did want to do some things a little differently. If we did want to do some testing, this might be the opportunity to do it. So the funding that we have been allocated for from the
coastal and heartland national estuary program is very specific. >> It is to remove invasive m um vegetation from the 60 acres surrounding War Mineral Springs to replant native
vegetation on that property and to install educational signage. It is limited to those activities. Now staff is always looking for additional money. We are ready and willing to take any
money uh an organization wants to give us to improve uh the environment. So our grants team and our natural resources team are very active in looking for those opportunities and applying for those opportunities and we will continue
to do that. So, if we found an opportunity that would enable us to get funding for water quality studies, we would certainly pursue that for this. >> Thank you for that information because I wasn't aware of that grant and and what
was involved. Um, I poor Elizabeth Long, she's not here to defend herself, so I'll invoke her once again. And I can remember her saying that one of the best tests they did that
that we regularly test the quality of water coming into the city and then leaving the city. Um, and the canary in the coal mine shaft is sucrose. And she said one of the best ways to test
potential septic issues coming into the city was the level of sucrose. um in the water. So, I just bring that up in that I believe we have very skilled, very knowledgeable staff. Um
and and I would like to see some thought given to what might we do testing or otherwise to ensure the quality of the springs for future generations. Um,
yeah. I mean, I' I've said that before. So, local control, yes. But I'd like you guys to take a look at what might we do to ensure that we are protecting the springs for future generations.
>> Thank you for this question, Vice Mayor. In my opinion, one of the best indicators would be consistency. right now as we already have established some data and evaluating whether this data is consistent or it fluctuates that can
tell us a lot as I mentioned earlier it's a unique water body this is why some of these standard criteria would not really apply um we are conducting uh some water quality testing for our canal
systems and we have an idea of what comes in and and what leaves the city. But this would not really apply with the unique characteristics of war%. That's why I'm supportive of local control and I think staff is the best
arbiter of of how we monitor the health of the springs moving forward because of its unique properties. So that's that's all I'm going to say. I know Commissioner Stoopes, who always has a lot to say, is getting very impatient
with my loquaciousness, so I will yield the floor. >> Commissioner Stokes, >> I don't know. I mean, I I've been listening to you and the same questions keep coming back again. Um, first of all, if we're spending millions of
dollars to fix the springs and to proceed on a conservation easement on the 60 acres, I sure don't support anything that's going to seed control to the state. I'm not comfortable with a lot of the control the state already
has. Okay, that's first. Second of all, this designation is not a good designation. I don't know why people seem to think that this outstanding springs designation somehow makes this a greater springs. It tells you you have a
problem with water quality. Thirdly, I heard you say it each one of you multiple times. The testing we do is a barometer of potential problem and it's the best
barometer we have to work with. You can say, "Let's test for everything." But the reality is that it's going to cost a lot of money, and we don't even know what the hell we're going to test for. This is different
than every other Springs. I heard every one of you say it. It requires a study, which costs the taxpayers money to investigate what it is we even want to test. Yet we already have a methodology by
which we can tell if there's some problem. Now we may not know what exactly the problem is, but if there is a problem, we can then proceed further. So as far as I'm concerned, option one in my book isn't a consideration. Three
isn't a consideration either because there's no need. Option two makes most sense. We pursue local strategies. We focus on our conservation easement ordinances and tailored solutions. If a problem arises, we address it. I I just
over and over you guys said it. And I don't know why it's so hard to understand. We don't know what else to test without studying it. If you this commission wants to vote for 50, 100, 200,000, whatever you want to spend to
investigate whether or not we should do certain other kind of testing, by all means. Where's the money coming from? So, you know, I'm I'm an option two guy and that's all I got to say. Commissioner Dval.
>> Thank you, Mayor. A lot of issues are discussed here and one of my very first questions is uh things are parameters are talked about like imperiling the flow rate.
This spring comes from underground and I don't know how anyone's going to be able to affect the flow rate in anything other than a bad way. Okay. I don't I don't I I couldn't see the
city, the state, anyone increasing the flow rate if the flow rate goes down. Uh, are we going to drive down 75 feet and drill a new hole in the wall? Um, I just don't see that. Now,
I've heard said that, you know, some people believe. Well, some of those people that believed were a past commission. A past commission asked to have this outstanding hearings designation
sought and that didn't happen and it wasn't a commission that changed that. What I've seen in the past is people wanting to do a P3 around the
Springs, build a hotel, commercial, in other words, make money. It's hard for me to believe that everybody's main concern is to protect the springs.
This commission took the conservation easement that was 60 acres, you know, that is now 60 acres. Um, it was larger than that, but the part that wasn't going into conservation
easement was, I believe, 12 acres and this commission raised it to 20 acres. That doesn't tell me that we're interested in protecting I this was
done with the in the past with the aspect of looking to protect and it is a different spring you know being that it's a mineral spring and it will be up to the legislature I mean all we're doing is asking the legis
legislature to make a basically a special exception. They're going to have to pass statutes because it doesn't come under the uh large flow rate and and you know the
the number ones and the number twos. This is this is a very special spring and for anyone to I mean it's if it's designated outstanding special
spring designation and and and you have to do some special things to protect it. Um that alone is just enough to say this really is special. It's something that no one else has. And you don't
think that that's going to draw people to want to come and visit it. Uh I'm for sticking with the path that was originally set down to seek this designation.
Thank you. >> City clerk. Any public comment? >> Yes. >> We have Robin Samosente, Pam Tokars, and Debbie Blackwell. Hello again all. Um, I had a whole thing prepared, but from
listening to the discussions up here, I just want to say that for the 10 years that I helped manage the springs, we did do testing. It did not cost us the amount of money that was discussed here. We that spring being the third highest
mineral content spring in the world attracts an international clientele who depend on that spring for healing benefits of the mineral content of that spring. We tested for the mineral content of that spring every 6 months. The criteria now is because it's an open
bathing area. So you have certain criterias that D puts forth like the bacteria and the fecal matter and all that that they were testing for. Um we provided I think Stefan we provided you with an independent testing that showed
that the phosphorus and the nitrogen levels were increasing over periods of time. Sometimes they would spike and sometimes they would you know go out depending upon the rain events I guess that we would have and the and the flow off. Um so we can strengthen our uh
oversight of the water. Again, you have that specific algae that is um part of that spring that's constantly being removed. Everything is a is is balanced within that spring and adds to the overall
benefits and the ecological health of that spring. So protections have to be in place on that spring. the designation with all the development that's going on those the all of Ortiz those wells are
only 40 50 feet deep I can't even tell you the problems we had um they're leaking everything is going to affect the overall health of that spring with all this development that's going to be
taking place um we have to protect the springs you have a responsibility to do that now is this the right time to seek the designation with the pending conservation easement. Well, maybe they can coincide with
making stricter guidelines on water testing so you actually have and you know what's going on there. Matter of fact, we didn't even let people go in there with suntan lotion because it changes the balance and the biodiversity of that spring. So, and we had um Steve
Ksky, I would have him come in and dive that spring and check the vents of that spring every so often just to make sure that there's no blockage. We have a lot of free divers who go in that spring and they mess around with the banks looking
for something or another. So, there's so many guidelines that you can put in place that would help that spring. And I'm available if you want to talk to me because I know everything about that spring. So maybe we do now. I'm sorry.
>> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Hi Pam Tokars. Um, when you guys make your decision whether you're going to go forward with the outstanding spring or not, I'm very happy to see that the staff's presentation gave you pros and
cons on the costs of what would happen if we did it and what would happen if we didn't. And um one of the things that I'd like to point out is there if we became an outstanding spring, are there any other funding besides that state uh spring funding that would be available
to for for an outstanding spring designation? And I do like what Vice Mayor Langden said stated um the city can develop something to protect the uh springs in the long term. And if we protect it on our own, then we wouldn't really need
the outstanding springs designation. And a couple other points that I'd like to bring up would be if we did go with an outstanding springs designation and there's an issue with the water. How long do those people have to hook up to
the water and sewer? Are they going to give you a time frame or what? You know, that might not be something you'd be able to uh meet if you couldn't hook them up all at once. And then also another thing to take into consideration since this is a Florida state statute the act what happens if they change that
act in the future and make the uh parameters for the outstanding spring a little bit more um I don't know the word I'm looking for heavier or more cumbersome to the city to do. So, take some of those things in consideration
with that. And based on what I've heard today, I'm not really too thrilled with going ahead with the outstanding springs because I think in the long run, we can hopefully with the natural resource division now develop a plan and protect the springs on our own. Thank you.
>> Thank you. >> Happy New Year. >> Happy New Year. Um Debbie Blackwell, big fan of the springs and a great advocate for what the uh parks and recreation department does to just take care of that springs in the water. Growing up
near Philadelphia, Ben Franklin is engraved in my brain. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Now, we a few months ago had speakers from the environ the Sarasota County Environmentally Sensitive Land
Commission speak to us about what's going on with Wellen Park by Tarpon Point and that land there. They want to build luxurious waterfront residences. Being a poverty-stricken teacher, I'm not up for it. Now, what would happen
there? It would be like building a dam and all that water on that west side of the river would dam the river in hurricane sessions. And you as you all were clearly speaking about septic systems that are antiquated that would seep out. Okay. Polio comes from
antiquated septic systems in case you've forgotten. So that damn water would go to the RV resorts. It would go to the warm mineral springs neighborhood. It would hit the it would flood out the warm mineral springs and Dear Prairie Creek. So yeah, you know, you don't have
to turn it over to the state, but you do have to do what's right to protect it. And are you going to let Well and Park destroy more of the natural environment, even though you might live in that neighborhood, or are you going to stand up and protect the water by not allowing that to go through? That is the number
one threat because I know that that water is being tested regularly because I speak with the people that are doing it. I know that there are invasive species right in the 20 acres that need to have the city bushwhacker go in there and whack them out and get them down. They're strangling out the natives and
that's what protects the water. Bushes and trees that are native protect our water. So, yep, you don't need to do an outstanding spring designation, but you do need to stop lolly ganging around. >> Thank you. >> That's all there. >> That's it.
All right. I'm going to request a motion. >> I'll make it. Mayor, >> go ahead. >> I move to direct the city manager to continue utilizing local protection measures instead of pursuing an
outstanding Florida spring designation. Okay, we have a motion on the floor made by the vice mayor to direct the city manager to continue utilizing local protection measures instead of pursuing outstanding Florida Springs designation.
>> Do I and I have a second by Commissioner Stokes. All right, let's vote. >> The first time, >> not me. >> And that passes 4 to one. Commissioner Dval, you have anything on your dension?
I think you know the the words I spoke you know before before we had I think that's sufficient. I think you understand why I'm why I'm not for this measure. >> That's fine. Just wanted to give you the opportunity sir. That's fine. >> Thank you. >> All right. We're going to take a 10-minute break and then we're going to
come back and finish this up. Uh, moving on. Item B26-0234. Um, discussion and possible action regarding lowering the tax rate that the city charges on Citizens Florida Power and Light FPL electric service bills.
This was requested by Commissioner Duval. Commissioner Duval, this is your item. >> Thank you, Mayor. When I moved to the city 2008, the city of Northport charged 2%
on Citizens FPL's energy bill. couple of years ago it was brought up, you know, to raise that tax and it ended up getting raised by 6%.
The result of that was the city got revenue of $4 million that year from that extra 4%. The next year it was raised from 6% to 10%. So, I presume that it
went from $4 million that the city got to $8 million. The city also charges a franchise fee. I don't know how many people understand what the franchise fee is, but I went to
FPL's site and FPL says franchise charge. FPL competes with municipalities and county governments for the right to serve electric customers. If a local government chooses, it can
enter into a contract with FPL that enables the government to charge residents a contractual amount. the franchise fee in exchange for its agreement to not form an electric
utility for the term of the franchise. And currently FPL says that that franchise fee is about 5.9% minus
any sales of government agencies going going to uh commercial. They say uh 5.9% of build revenues less actual write offs from the sale of electrical energy
to commercial industrial residential customers with the incorporated areas of the city. What I did was I looked at my most recent bill, which was a very small bill due to the time of
year, uh, not using the swimming pool in November, December, not using as much air conditioning. Um, I had a total bill of $116.24.
Of that $11624, the city of Northport got $15.52. I figured out the amount. It's broken down on your bill. If you look at it, the difference between the franchise fee and the city tax, the local tax,
it ended up being $69 or 5.24% 24% for the franchise fee plus the uh $943 for the 10% tax.
I've said this before. I represent the people in my district that are pretty much your average everyday working folks. retired people on limited incomes.
We have a section of the city, you know, Wellwood Park, there's a lot of wellto-do people there. Uh people own multiple homes. People are retired with good incomes. Uh some people own businesses. They probably don't notice
this mo so much. But the average person, the people who I see on my street going to work every day, to them this is a regressive tax mean
meaning that it affects those who can afford it the least the most. Now, Charlie, after I was elected, I had a conversation in my one-on-one with the city manager. You know, I told him, you
know, that I'd like to see that tax come down. And he said to me, "Well, how would you replace that money, that $8 million the city gets, you know, for that 10%. That's city. This city needs revenue. There's no doubt about that."
And he asked, "How would I replace it?" And when he asked me that, I did not have an answer. But about three weeks later, I found a possible answer. FPL put in with the public service
commission for a 4-year rate increase. I had to wait all the rest of this past year for the PSC to determine what those possible increases were going to be.
Well, now they're out. Now, it's not a simple issue. There are I was doing some research and you look at
Again, this comes from FPL. FPL says that a typical,00 kilowatt residential customer will have a monthly bill in January of 2026 of $136.64,
which is about a 2% increase. Now, if you look at other information that you can look up, other people, they don't use that typical 1,000 kilowatt hours a month.
I read the FPL customers, um, Northwest Florida, they're a little different. Uh but they say that currently the customers in a traditional service area
who use a thousand kilowatt hours a month currently pay 13414 and they say that under this proposal it's estimated to go up to 14237 and 26
14829 and 27 149 93 and 28 1519 in 29 2029. Um they also say that um they use words the average customer and they say the
average customer pays a lot more than that 136. FPL uses the word typical and then others use average. What I'm getting at here is when you go to Walmart or you go to any
other store in the city, you pay the state sales tax of 6%. Plus Sarasota County, we have that extra percent. Okay? So, you pay 7%. You go to Target, you're going to pay 7%.
But the city of Northport charges 10% plus another approximately 5.9% added on to your bill and I feel that's egregious
and I'd like to see it come down and I'd like people to just imagine that the headline in the newspaper says city of Northport is going to lower their tax so that as FPL's bill
goes up, Northport residents aren't going to see the results of that increase where people who live outside the city are. We can set it up so that the city keeps that $8 million.
Now, remember, they're increasing on that eight. We are increasing on that eight million each year as we're getting number one the higher rates and number two there's more people moving here.
Public works says we're adding 45 customers a month so more people are paying the tax getting more money for this year. I would like our city staff,
finance department to work on the numbers and see what can we lower our percentage rate to this year to keep those bills level so our citizens don't see that increase
and we lower it half a percent 1%. Now the next year that $2 and something increase is expected to be about $10 and that's just based on a thousand kilowatt hours.
Average people use closer to 150 kilowatt hours. So this is what I'm looking for and I'd ask my fellow commissioners to weigh in
Thank you. >> Um, Commissioner Stokes, >> I um I mean I certainly concur with Commissioner Duval with regard to trying to do everything we can to help the citizens. You know, FPL's got their rate
increase and there wasn't much we could do about it. the fact that we tack on this 10% you know it will increase our revenue and the idea of creating a revenue neutral approach isn't a bad idea so I looked at the numbers and I
said okay you know let's assume it's it it's you know on the thousand kilowatts I mean it's you know it's a couple two and a half bucks three bucks four bucks you know maybe it'll go up to 10 bucks but when you look at it and you multiply
it out and you look at what we're going to save the average homeowner over the course of a year, I just feel like we could do better. And while this may be part of that answer, it's
addressing it as a oneoff I'm not so as comfortable with as making this part of the budget process. We need two things. One, we need to make sure that we can balance our budget this coming year with
all the challenges we'll have to face. And two, maybe it's not enough just to balance the budget. It's what if anything we could do to actually put some more money back in the pockets of our citizens. I don't know if that's
realistic. We tried last year. I asked, but there was no way it happened. It, you know, it just didn't happen. Every year we face 5,67 million worth of increased costs just just just from salary increases that are union
mandated and benefit increases and and the increase in cost of materials. We have that hurdle to overcome just to get to a balanced budget. So to me this conversation is part of our budget process. I don't I would hate to do a
oneoff on this only to find that there may be better ways. We need to give staff direction on what we as a commission at least this is my opinion. What where do we want to be next year? What do we want to do? We got two things. Balancing a budget and also what
do we do to help our citizens? You know, right now everybody feels they're paying more than they can afford to pay. So this would be a way to return some dollars or at least to create a revenue neutral situation. Maybe we could do more than that. And I don't know how we figure that out until we get into our
budget process. So, you know, it's I don't want to say no to this at all. I I support the idea trying to find ways to save our taxpayers money in this city, but I think we need to do it in a bigger way. And I think that this year we all better be
ready for what that's going to entail. And if we want to help our citizens out, then let's just cut through all the crap and accept the fact that it's going to have enormous impact on the services we provide to the city. That's where this discussion should go in my book. And the
sooner we start having it for this next budget year, the better. So, I'm supportive in trying to do something, but I don't think we ought to jump on this at this point. I think we ought to make this a a integral part of our budget process because there's a bigger
fish to fry here. So, thank you, Mayor. That's all I got to say. Thank you. Um, Vice Mayor Langden. >> Yeah. Thank you, Mayor. Um, city manager. Well, let me start. Um, I I philosophically
agree with Commissioner Duval. I think what you're suggesting is a roll back rate. So if we're, and I'm making up these numbers, if if the city is currently getting $8 million through these search charges or whatever you
want to call them, and FPL's base rate is going up, then what we would collect would go up, unless we sort of say, okay, let's maintain at a roll back rate. Um, that might be one way. So, to
Commissioner Stokes's point, that could very well be one way we choose to soften the impact on our on our residents. So now my question to city manager,
would it be possible by the time we start our budget conversations that we would know how much revenue are we giving up if we go to the roll back rate? Um and then that would be one of the options on the table that we could
evaluate during the budget cycle to soften the tax situation. >> Yes, ma'am. >> Okay. then then I would I would go for that. I I wouldn't although I'm very supportive of the concept. I think it's
really creative thinking and I thank Commissioner Duval for coming up with that. It certainly can be won in a variety of ways that we either cut costs or um but I think it belongs in the budget
cycle with a a broader choice of options. My two cents. >> Commissioner Petro. >> Thank you, Mayor. I agree with Commissioner Dval um not only
philosophically but practically speaking um not only this is the right thing to do I think it's as the board we have to do we have to do it um and since the topic of the budget was brought up u maybe we perhaps we can take a look um
back and see what the previous commission did um and what the previous commission did was when they had a shortage in the budget to balance the budget They raised the the rate from 6% to 10%. And correct me if I'm wrong, but that's that was um that was to close the
budget deficit of about slightly over a million dollars. Now the budget was passed and the year goes by. We never went down. We just left the rate unchanged and never came down instead of cutting other
expenses. Um and in this case um the the logical question raised by city manager what were you going to replace with and this is the time what we can do practically speaking um and not only in
a bigger way we can start with the budget process we can start in small steps to show our citizens that we care um and I think the FBL is raising This is the this is the point and I want
to make uh when the FBL FPL raised the day rates uh starting January 1st 2026 that we can do an offset and it's only a matter of math uh and we will know and do exactly what they did
instead of increasing our revenues as a city we would adjust to the FB FPL rates because I in my opinion this is unfair to the residents. Um that's one. Um the second
point we don't have to wait for the budget process to to start. We can help our citizens right now right this minute by talking and taking action right now. So I think um by showing the seriousness
of our um fiscal responsibility and this is only makes sense if the percentage rates are increasing we would decrease our rate because um and frankly enough this is a lot 15% of
roughly rough uh on average FPL bill that's a lot I I think as a city and um being our own municipality, we have many fees, many taxes, utilities, franchise,
you name it. And this is this would be only fair to do it now. And I'm in full support with Commissioner Dval to proceed and not wait till the budget talks. >> Thank you. >> All right. I'm going to go a little bit before you do since I didn't have my
turn. Now, I do believe waiting for the budget process is the right way to do it because I don't think staff has had time to diagnose the numbers to where we would come out at the even, you know, the neutral rate. I think that we would
have to look at that and have those numbers. But the other thing too is is I believe it was either Vice Mayor or Commissioner Stokes that said, "Don't we have like three different um scenarios out there that are that we've raised up
to the 10%." Over time, we've got different items that we add like the 10% to. >> I'm not sure I follow. What do you mean? >> Like did we add two utilities or this that and the other? I mean, Mr.
Yarborough, he usually explained it, but didn't don't we have other things that we uh added on to? We brought them up from 6% all the way up to 10%. >> You mean not just that one? >> Not just the one you're talking about? >> No, there's there's an annual increase
in most of them. Uh some of them stay um where they are, but if you remember, we had a city fee structure study that was done about a year or so ago that sort of made sure our fees were in alignment to where they need to be. But the this tax is not isolated by any means,
>> right? And and the cap was at 10% on on most of these. Correct. What I'm trying to get at is is maybe revisiting them all during out the budget process to see where we're at. >> Well, now you do get to vote on that city fee structure every single year.
Correct. So that's part of your budget process. >> I understand that. But I'm just saying we're we look at it as a whole picture again rather than I'm just agreeing with Commissioner Stokes rather than doing a oneoff. Let's look at the big picture to see where we're at to be revenue neutral
going forward and still stay within the guidelines of our budget. It's there's a lot of map to figure out to rather than just say yes today is what I'm trying to get at. There's it's a much bigger picture to look at. The normal process is to have this rate conversation in
alignment and in perspective of all the fees that you have in this city. Um to the conversation of the point of if you change the rate or if you lock the rate in now, how would you do that not knowing the context of the environment of whatever is going to be um active by
the time we get to our budget? So, we as a staff um we have not done any sort of research or work regarding this item because we were not consulted on the item, but we would put this in our budget process and in a normal year, >> right? And I think that's the proper way of doing it rather than just settling it
today. But let me ask a question and maybe Mr. Yarborough would know this as well. I'm not sure. But on that franchise fee that that we're charged, isn't that to keep the competitive bids down like they said they wouldn't have any other power structures out there to
where that would actually be a savings to where it wouldn't inflate the rates going forward >> and I am not sure about the answer to that >> because usually that's what a franchise rate is. you know, it locks in the premiums.
>> Good afternoon, mayor, commissioners. Jason Yro, deputy city manager. Um, yeah, the franchise fee is it's a twofold. It's the um it the way I've always understood it is is for the city not to get in competition with the utility provider. Also, it's permission
to use the rightway because usually the utility is in the right the city's rightway. So, it's kind of a multiple things are being and as far as your previous we've done a payment in le of franchise fee for solid waste. Um, typically if we outsource uh
solid waste, you would have a franchise fee for that. uh anywhere from five to 10% and then we also have a payment in lie of tax for um on the water um revenue and that is if we had a private water provider you would be taxing their
assets. So those are the things >> I just wanted to get that information out there because we're looking at two separate numbers and I wanted to let people know the wise behind that. Yeah, you have a lot of different sources. And >> one of the things you may also want to
um think about is you may want to see what happens to your property tax before you start reducing revenue. But that's just something to think about. >> No, I agree with that. And that that stuck in the back of my mind, too. I just I hate to put you on the spot for these questions without consulting you, but I just wanted to get that information out a little bit, you know,
on on the wise on why we would go through this process going forward. Absolutely. Okay. Commissioner Stokes. Yeah. Um, you know, I mean, I concur with Commissioner Pro and Commissioner Duval. I mean, really, everybody, all of us want to try to do something here. I
don't think this is enough. I mean, if we did it now over the next handful of months, I mean, it's not even what it'll cost you to buy a cup of coffee at Dunkin' Donuts. We need to find a way, you know, I if if
if commission gives staff direction to cut fees, I mean, that's where we're supposed to be given staff direction on what we want to do. And if and if we do these isolated oneoffs, it it doesn't have it
doesn't really do enough and we need to do more. It seems to me if as a commission, as an elected body, we say, "Look, we want to look at all our fees and we want to cut them 10%, 20%, 50%, whatever we decide to give staff
direction to go do." Then they go do it, come back and say, "These are the impacts and implications of making those cuts." But we can then look at this and say, "How much would this really mean to our citizens? $3 a year on a $2.50
increase by FPL is nothing. People need more than that. The the response of our citizens who many of us seem to be very sensitized to will be seriously $3. I can't even buy a cup of coffee for that.
You know what is that a token offer? That's what it is. It's a token offer. Now, conceptually, philosophically, all five of us seem to be in lock step that we want to do something to help. We've got to do something to help. I wanted to do a $3 million cut and give
it back in lower property tax. We couldn't figure out a way to do that. So, I say as a commission, start thinking about the direction we want to give staff. How what do we want to do? I mean, we have the power to do it, but
there are consequences to doing it. And if we're going to give money back to our citizens, if we're going to cut their taxes and cut their fees, there's consequences. They may be worth taking. They might be worth accepting.
If we're all willing to accept less services in this city to give money back and make it more affordable for people, then we should do it. But that's how you approach this. In my book, you don't do a one-off. It's a great idea. We should apply it to a lot of other areas in the
budget process. I say start the budget. Well, we already are starting the budget process. I mean, staff's already working on this stuff. This is an important year. And I just say I want to do more than this. I'm not against this. I just think we need to do more. And and I'm
hesitant to want to make a vote now on something like this because it makes it easier to ignore it when we get to the budget. Well, we already did that. We already gave people Yeah. $3, $5, $10. That's not enough. So, if we want to give money back to the citizens, let's
do it. Let's do it and see what happens. Want to cut taxes? Let's cut taxes. State may help us do it anyway, but there's other areas we can cut. So, you know, this great idea though. Thank you, Commissioner Dval. Cuz starting a
conversation. So, I'm all for like let's address this thing like as quick as staff is ready to start talking about budgets, we'll start talking about and let's look at all the things we can do to help our citizens. Thank you, Mayor. >> All right, Commissioner Dval, you're in the queue.
>> Thank you, Mayor. Um, Commissioner Stokes used the term one off. Recently, we did a one-off as far as the waste transfer station. We're taxing the citizens one time.
Okay. pay for that station so that we can get the citizens a better rate on things in the future. That's going to pay for itself. My this idea of the, you know, the $2 or
whatever, you know, that's what's FPL's number on someone using a,000 kilowatt hours. Well, people use more than a,000 kilowatt hours, but that is for me just the beginning.
The idea of charging a 10% tax plus a 5.9% franchise fee altogether it's almost 16%. I want to see that number come down and I'm asking to try to my idea is to try
to do it gradually so that we do not affect the services in the city. Okay, this year FPL rates go up, you know, by a couple of bucks. Next year it's going to be five times that. Okay, and then
there's two more raises after that. So, I'm saying if we could ask staff to gradually bring it down. It's 10% on the tax now, 9% next year, maybe eight or until we get back to what I consider
quote unquote a normal tax rate of 6 or 7% like you pay when you go to Walmart and buy a new jacket or a pair of sunglasses. Uh, I just think in this spot we're we're
overcharging our citizens and I'd like to see us and by doing it slowly over the four years, okay? The city revenue is going to be increasing with the rates and with the added number of houses that are going to
be paying those rates. So that's it. Thank you, Commissioner Petro. >> Yes, I guess I will conclude with this. Um but um I agree with Commissioner Dval. If we if we want to take it
further, let's do it to 6%. Um but my like it had to be. But my my proposal or my proposition is um maybe we should tie the any rate increased by the FPL. that would automatically offset because
they're going to do it over the four I I forgot is it four years so let's do it so the rate would not be increasing when the FPL rate is increasing to the
customers to the residents after all um if we don't want to take a small steps or small leaps of faith let's do it let's let's lower it all together to 6% because it it was one time hike to our citizens from 6 to 10 and
then the year passed and never talked about lowering that because we just closed the budget deficit and that's it. I say we take action round but obviously it's by the will of the majority of the board.
>> Thank you m Commissioner Stokes. >> Yeah, I like that. So if we cut, let's let's play that out because cuz commissioner Petros like addressed my concern which is it's not enough. So if we were staff city manager, if we were
to cut 6% if we were just to make a decision today, we want that number cut by 6%. >> Down to 6% >> down to 6%. Okay. One, do we know how much that will cost us? And do we know
what if anything service-wise would be impacted by it? Do we know the answer to that question now? >> No sir. >> How long would it take to get the answer to that question? >> And then when we start. >> Okay. So you see in in effect you guys I
mean I think we're saying the same I mean I want to think we're saying the same things that you know I don't even think revenue neutral is enough and and I think everyone else would concur but it's there's a lot of pieces to this puzzle
and without knowing the dollars without knowing how it impacts services I think that's a dangerous thing to do or not a danger. I I don't think it's a prudent fiscally prudent thing to do when there we may find there's other things we
could do that are even bigger than dropping this to six. I don't want to kick this can. We're we're already most of the way through January. Staff's already starting to work on their departmental budgeting thought. They they've got to be and you
know it's it's we're talking one two months where we're into the process already. I I really think we could do better and and I agree. Maybe it should be to just keep it revenue neutral. Maybe it should be bite the bullet and
cut it back to 6%. Maybe there's other things we can cut. We have to decide really how much we want to do for our citizens and and are we really there yet? I just, you know, I know it sends a good message and and there's nothing
wrong with that. And something's better than nothing, but how much is it really going to save the average citizen for the next 60 90 days, you know, if if if we could do more, I want to do more. And I just think it's a bigger discussion and and staff hasn't, you know, doesn't
have the information as city manager says to really assess how much we're talking about here and the impact of doing it. And if we could go to 6% now, that'd be great. But
how's that going to affect us? What's it going to cost us service? I don't know the answers to any of those questions. I like to have the answers before we voted on this. That's my only concern. You know, maybe we can have some I mean, obviously, you know, we're not going to
not start to look at this as as as a city. You know, we're thinking about it. We're working on it. I I just I just want to do more than this. This is just such a token. It's just a It's not enough. Thank you. Oh, just just to
add on the one thing that I heard um Commissioner Dval said he wanted to do it in a slower way, a gradual way, this that or the other. Maybe when we do go to the budgets and we discuss the budget and I'm going to try and rope in uh Commissioner Pro's goal too, he wants to
get it at 6%. Well, we can get to projections and numbers and say, "Okay, next year we're going to take it down 1%. The following year it'll go down. It'll go down to 9%, 8%, 7%, and by year four, it would be at 6% as their rate
has gone up. But we need to know what the projections are and what it's going to affect the budget at, like I said, going forward, which is not a bad idea, but at least we would have that information. So, I agree with you, Commissioner Stokes, as well. We need to have that information. So, if the final
goal line is getting it down to 6%, what's that look like? You know, that's that's where I'm at on that. So, Commissioner Pro, you're up again. >> This would be my last one, but I guess we don't have to have any effect on the
city finances if we do exactly what uh Commissioner Dval proposing is proposing, and that is if the FPL raises its rate by let's say 2%, the city would need to lower its charge from 10% to 9.8%.
uh and my numbers could be off but to collect the same amount of money. So no finances would be affected citywide uh only if we tie the rate of increase of FPL uh and to tie the city's collection
which would be lowered by 2.02%. um which effect effectively sends the message to the residents and our community that if FPL is trying to increase your rates, we're not going to increase your rate. We're
going to collect the same amount of money and that's actually the the central of uh argument right now or discussion I should say. It's just the city is going to collect the same amount of money but we care for the citizens. We're not going to go along with FPL and
raise you another 2% along or whatever that comes to, but we will be collecting the same amount of money yet we are conscious enough that we're not going to project this hike onto you via FPL. Um
because it's all it's all fair to do it. I mean, we're just getting free money and then the citizens are being charged more just because FPL raises the money uh the rate. That's all I wanted to say because
essentially we're not losing any money as the city. What we'll be doing is tying up the mathematical formula which is very easy. Um not collect more than they raise. Correct me if I'm wrong, Commissioner Develop, but that's I think
that's your intent in this and waiting for the budget. Yeah, we can do it, but then we have to cut even more because we're getting used to more money coming in. Um, I guess it's in all fairness, I don't see any problem any problems
because the again I'm repeating myself, but the city's finances are not going to be affected if we scale down based on what they scale up. Thank you, >> Vice Mayor Lang.
>> Quick question. If we made a decision today to proceed along the lines of, you know, cutting what we add on to FPL's fee, how
long would it be before residents of the city would would see it in their bill? So, we'd have to do an ordinance. It would be two readings. >> I'm not sure anyone can give you an
accurate answer on that. >> I mean, they're not going to feel it right away is my point. [Music] >> Yes. >> Because then it needs to get implemented in FPL's system. >> Yep.
One second. >> An answer cometh. >> Maybe >> maybe >> she's hesitating. >> Hello. Good afternoon. Ireina Kohareno, finance director. We'll have to look if it's ordinance or resolution. If it's ordinance, there will have to be two readings. So, probably three to six
months is kind of an estimate. And then >> let's say second reading, we go for it. How do we have any idea or rough estimate? We have to communicate the rate change to FPL. They need to
implement it in their system. I mean, I guess what I'm getting at is whether we make the decision now or two months from now in the context of a broader budget conversation, we're not really saving
anyone much of anything. Yeah, we have not dug into really know like what the steps will have to take because this is not something that we brought. Um, so we'll have to do a little bit more digging how long this all would take and what are the requirements to notify the
FPL and when it will actually take into effect. >> Yeah, I would like to know that. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Can I uh >> go ahead >> please? Um
kind of to try to answer your question is how long did it take to implement when we raised the tax from 2% to 6% and then again from 6% to 10%. How long was it before the citizens saw that in their
bills? Well, it was done during the budget cycle, so we had, you know, plenty of time to notify and do all of the processes. I don't have that information right now to actually provide you exact uh time frame. I'll have to look at it.
>> But it was done in the past during the budget cycle. >> Thank you. >> All right. City clerk, any public comment? >> Yes, we have Robin
No, not on this one actually. >> All right, I'll request a motion. >> Go ahead. >> I'll make a motion. I thought that's what you were going to say. So, >> yeah. Uh, I'll make a motion to direct staff
to look at a revenue neutral approach and an approach to reducing this event or this to 6% and to look at the impact
um to the citizen in terms of dollars and the impact to the city. >> Yeah. in terms of lost revenue and uh to do it in as timely a fashion as
possible. Let's put it that way. >> Okay. I have a motion on the floor made by Commissioner Stokes. City clerk, can you read that back? to direct the city manager to review revenue neutral approach and an approach to reducing to 6% and to review the impact on citizens
in terms of dollars and impact to the city in terms of lost revenue as timely as possible. >> I'll second that. >> And we have a second by Commissioner Dval. All right, let's vote. Three times,
>> maybe four. >> Some money in the budget to fix these. >> There we go. Four. Four score. And that passes five to zero. Cool. All right, moving on.
See where we at here. Item 26-26 026 board discussion and possible action regarding advisory board recommendation memorandum from the charter review advisory board regarding bond issuance during declared
disaster or emergency without voter approval. Um Miss Fost this is your item ma'am. >> Yes. So on December 22nd, commission received the ann the annual report to city commission and it included it it
discussed during the charter review advisory board meeting on December 18th, 2025, the board wanted to take um action and recommend to commission to the following language. In the event of a state of government declared disaster
or emergency, the city may issue general obligation or revenue bonds solely to restore the city to the state prior to the declared disaster or emergency without voter approval. This motion was approved by the board and so forwarded to commission for your review and consideration as a referendum question.
>> Thank you, ma'am. Uh, Commissioner Stokes and we keep flashing back to the past. Um, yeah. Let me get to this because I wanted to pull up the language
>> on their recommendation. All right. Um, in the event of state or government declared emergency or disaster, the city may issue general obligation or revenue
bonds. I do not believe that we have the legal right to issue general obligation bonds without a referendum. That's a state law. Um solely to restore the city to the state prior to the declared disaster. Restore the city to the state
prior to the declared disaster or emergency. That's like saying any other infrastructure project we may want. Um, I mean, conceptually we need the ability to
borrow. Let's face it, sooner or later we need to. The language here falls short in my book. I appreciate and and the fact that the Charter Review Advisory Board took this on because I know that in their hearts they know this is this is
something that a tool we need in the toolbox in the event of emergencies. But you can see the difficulty with that language. If we had to take this to referendum, restore the city to the state prior. Good grief.
Even as a commissioner, I would have some fun with that one. How could you define what that is? Does that mean like we're going to if the aquatic center gets half shellacked, we're going to devote money to do that? Are we going to replace and repair everything in the
world? This just way the language really needs to be worked. We worked this so hard during two referendums to try to get the language so tightened down that we would hope our citizens would support it. A lot of people said they didn't
support it for reasons of trust. I dare say that a November referendum on this item probably wouldn't be the smartest thing in the world. Talk about tonedeaf. Yet, don't get me wrong, the charter review board is mandated to look at
these things and work on these things, and I appreciate all the work they did on this, but boy, this is not one I think ought to be on November referendum. Let's see what the county does with the county's request cuz they're going to have it on their referendum and let's see how successful
they are at getting it passed at that level and then we figure out whether this should go on for 28 if any of us are still around. But this language is, you know, this language needs some work in my estimation. Thank you, Mayor. >> H Vice Mayor Langden.
>> Yeah, I'll I'll sort of echo what Commissioner Stokes said and the real issue around restoring the city to the state it was prior. Often times we need to improve the condition of the property
because of FEMA regulations. So I I agree. Um so I'm I'm split brain on this. I mean I think we need to work some or or suggest that the charter review board give them our input and see
what they come back with. But in other meetings I've stated I think this should be on every referendum until it passes. And I think whether we beat the drum or not as a city or a community is
secondary. I just think it needs to be on every referendum until it passes. That's it for me. >> Commissioner Dval. >> Thank you, Mayor. Um, I spent four years on the charter review
board and the commission did not carry out one item that we brought up in four years. Now, that being said, Vice Mayor Langden kind of touched on
this. Maybe we should talk to the charter review board. um by one- on-one with city manager. We talked about this. you know, maybe we should have a a joint meeting uh with the charter review board
to explain that their input is important and we are looking at it, but along with Commissioner Stokes, this isn't the time, you know, November is not the time to bring this back up
for a third time sometime in the future. and and you know and the wording getting that correct. You know that's where maybe a uh a meeting with the charter review board you know to give some direction to try
and uh get the language so that it will pass one of these days. I'd like to see it passed. Um yeah, but it for this item today, you
know, it's November is not the time for that referendum in my estimation. >> Is that it? >> That's it. >> Thank you, city clerk. Any public comment on this one? I'm sure there is.
I'm just going to put a wager out there. >> Robinson first. >> All right. I have nothing to say because you said it so eloquently. >> There you go. >> But at least you got to say that. So that's still public comment. Thank you very much. >> Hi Pam to cars. Well, maybe third time
is the charm with this. I know we do need this for emergency borrowing for the hurricane, especially after going through Ian. Uh, what I'd like to see with the discussion is maybe a cap. And I know you really can't put a cap on an emergency, but you can look around and
see what buildings in the city are not rated for a category 5. And I'm going to say this building right here is probably not rated for a category 5. Find out what what you need to replace. So, you know, you're going to have to do a bridge. You know, you're going to have to do a water control structure. You know, you're going to have to do
probably a main building um for city offices. find out how much it would cost to replace those. There's your cap right there. And you'll also know that during Ian with the um I know uh city manager Fletcher had stated multiple times that
there were a lot of loans that we missed out on the zero percentage um or no interest loans. maybe put in your um resolute your um referendum question that we would apply for loans for this amount so that people would see that we really weren't putting ourselves in debt
for like a 6% loan with that. And then also with that being said, you guys are going to have to sell this with a nice big marketing campaign um for this and then maybe 2026 might not be the year, but I'd hate to see it get pushed off
even further because the hurricanes are not waiting. >> All right, I'll entertain a motion. I'll give it a shot. >> Okay. >> Sacrificial lamb, right? Um, I
I move for I guess it's city clerk to create an agenda item bringing the city charter review board to a
future commission meeting to discuss this item. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> So, in order for their board to meet and all of them to come here and back and forth, it needs to be in a one of their meetings as well. So, it would need to
be a joint meeting unless it's just going to be one representative from the board coming to talk to you. >> Joint meeting. >> Don't we normally schedule a joint meeting with all of our boards at least yearly? >> No. >> No, we don't do that anymore because I remember meeting with the boards when I first got on the board.
>> Yes. They that's one of their options for their annual report is to do it as a as a joint meeting. But >> so if we add joint >> to schedule a joint meeting with the charter review. Yes. >> Okay. I have a motion on the floor made by
vice mayor. City clerk. Can you uh read that back since you made it up? Ma'am, >> to direct the city clerk to schedule a joint meeting with the charter review advisory board to discuss this item. >> Second that. All right, I have a motion on the floor
made by the vice mayor and seconded by Commissioner Dval. Please vote one two times and that passes five to zero. All right, moving on.
Item D, 26-0274, discussion and possible action regarding approval of the appointment of Tim A. Drum or Tiffany Arnold as a regular member to serve on the community economic development advisory board from
January 13, 2026 through January 13, 2029. Uh, Miss Fel, this is your item. >> Yes. So, we had received two applications. Mr. Drum applied on May 19th, 2025, and Miss Arnold applied July
17th, 2025, and we do only have one opening. I will add that when Mr. Drum did apply previously. Another applicant was selected over him as well due to veterans preference and we placed him on the environmental advisory board at that time and let him
know that he could apply when another opening came available. And so this is now in front of you to determine which applicant you'd prefer. >> Okay. Well, I'm going to say one thing. I don't want to kick him to the curb
twice, but go ahead there, Commissioner Stokes. >> Yeah. No. Uh I mean I don't know either of these individuals except I read through the information. I think uh I think Miss Arnold would make a good pick because I like her background and I think that with some of the development
growth that's going on in the city in the healthc care health related fields. I I think it'll be I think she'd be a good fit for that. I think she'd add a nice perspective to it. So I'm I you know my votes with her. Thank you.
Bet you never thought I'd be that quick. >> No, I would. I didn't. >> There you go. Run that as >> I'm assuming Commissioner Pro. There he is. Go ahead, sir. >> Yes. I would like to um nominate Mr. Drunk. I don't want to kick him twice
because he was trying to do it last time when we gave the preference to the other candidates. So this time I think it's not to discourage but to give him a option to be on this board and to give him a preference this time and I think
he has more of experience in that realm of experience that is needed for that specific board. >> That it. >> Yes. Yes. >> All right. Is there any public comment?
>> No. Good. I'll look for a motion. >> I'll make it I make a motion to uh appoint Tiffany Arnold as a regular member to serve on the community economic development advisory board January 13 26 through
January 13 29. >> I'll second. >> I have a motion on the floor made by Commissioner Stokes. Um city clerk, you want to read that back? to approve Tiffany Arnold to serve on the community economic development advisory board as a Northport resident.
>> And that's seconded by vice mayor. Let's vote. >> And that does not pass. and nos take it three to two with Commissioner Langden and Commissioner Stokes in favor and the us other three dissenting.
I'd be looking for another motion. >> I'll make it. >> Go ahead. >> I move to approve Tim to serve on the community economic development advisory board as Northport resident. I have a motion on the floor made by
Commissioner Pro to approve uh Tim Tim Drum to serve on the community economic development board advisory board as a Northport resident. Do I have a second? Ah, okay. Seconded by Commissioner Dval.
If not, I would have seconded. All right, let's vote. And that passes three to two and imagine that the fi final item the board worked good. All right. So thank you. Do we have any general public
comment? >> Answer please. >> Hi. I just wanted to address the consent agenda especially today. Um, is there a way we can make sure that the items that go on the consent agenda that would affect neighborhoods be pulled separately? Specifically, I'm referring
to the hospital one because even though that was on the consent agenda and you always have the option to pull something like that, this was an item that really affected the neighborhood around it and warranted a separate discussion instead of just being lumped in the consent agenda. So, like going forward because
that one and then I think we also had the other one about the uh what was it the um land the animal thing going back and forth but that road over by the um high school was also in a consent agenda before. So just going forward something like that just do it separate. That's
it. Thanks. >> All right. Thank you. >> That's it. You said >> all right. Communications Commissioner Pro. >> Um I attended um Minnesota League of Cities.
>> That's about it. >> Okay. Vice Mayor Langden. >> I'll pass today. >> I'm passing. Uh Commissioner Stokes. >> Yeah. Uh I'll take this opportunity to do two things. one uh apologize for not having pulled that hospital item cuz I need to and then there was a lot of
discussion and I just slipped by um but I wanted to make the point that uh you know it's going to take like 3, if I remember the number 37 truckloads a
night. There's three nights a week they want to pour concrete. If we were to try to do this during the day, the nightmare that would occur at that intersection would be so draconian that as much as it is inconveniencing citizens, I
appreciate that. I understand. Same way prices price widening, the same way everything affects us all. You know, it it was to me the only thing we could do. Secondarily, I'll take my time and then I'll shut up and let whoever else
>> I know you can appreciate that mayor. Wait till I'm mayor again. >> Um I would also um and I will make recommendations that we take a hard look at this advisory board stuff. um the
ability to do virtual um looking at the meeting schedules um and looking at a way that we can recruit um you know we're very reactive and in the way we advertise and and I know Commissioner L
vice mayor has done a good job in in advocating and going out there and to trying to identify people that she thinks would be well suited. I've done the same thing on a number of occasions and I think as a city we need to take a more aggressive approach towards these
advisory boards. They are valuable and and and it's interesting to hear Commissioner Duval say you know in this time on the charter review commission never you know did anything about any recommendations. We need to address this the advisory boards with all that we're
going through and the growth this city's experiencing we need better boards. There are mechanisms and I think I would hope that um uh the public comment regarding um how people are removed there are some rules
and there are some processes probably that could be improved but there are also some in place. So you know I'll be talking more with city manager and then seeing what we might be able to bring forth to the commission you know to take a look at. But I just wanted to get it
out there that you know I hear you. >> Thank you. >> Apparently not good enough. You got to talk with uh Miss Faust about that, not the city manager. >> Oh, I'm sorry. >> I meant I'm sorry. >> Yeah. I'm just so used to dumping everything on a city manager. I
apologize. >> Thank you, Mayor Commissioner Dval. >> Yes. Um, I'd like to concur with Commissioner Stokes, uh, about that. The hospital, the concrete pour, uh,
I've witnessed concrete pores, you know, building a a nuclear power plant, cooling station, the continuous pour process is very important. You know, they can't just stop at 1:00 or 4:00 in the afternoon and say, "We'll pick it up
tomorrow." That concrete already poured is setting. Okay, it's uh I' I've literally have watched hundreds of trucks in a line just like ants back and forth in a line. It's just it
has to be done that way. And I do understand what an inconvenience it is to people, you know, that have to listen to the noise and trucks, but this is something that has to be done. Um, the only other thing I've got is I did attend the fire departments and anyone
that didn't go out and see our fire department. Uh, the the the things that you really miss something. Uh, the equipment. Uh, watching them, you know, descend from a tower. Uh, really great watching someone uh, descend from a
tower on a cable and then have a whole group of kids come up and give them high fives as he was doing it. Uh that was an amazing display by our fire department and just seeing you know being able to go into that tower where
they do training. Uh to get an idea of even just doing training what they're going through um is something all our citizens should take a look at. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> City manager. Anything for the good?
>> No sir, Mr. Mayor. >> I expected that. Uh, city attorney. >> Thank you. >> City clerk. >> All right. It is 219 and uh we're