Yeah, Madison, you're right. So, the crews that normally operate out of this fire station are just going to be a little ways down the road in a temp station with a temporary apparatus bay. And all of our administrative staff from fire rescue are moving into city hall, which is right down the street. And if you need anything from fire rescue, you
can go in the front doors of city hall, turn >> Morning. Today is Tuesday, June 9th, 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 Duval, Commissioner Stokes, Mayor Emerage, Vice Mayor
Langden, and Commissioner Pro. There is a quorum present for this meeting. Also present are city manager Fletcher, city attorney Fino, Deputy Clerk Powell, Board Specialist Linder. We have Police Chief Garrison, and Deputy Chief
Hurlehey in the back. I'm requesting that all commissioners, public participants, and staff maintain order and decorum throughout this meeting. City Commission policy 2021-03 states that attendees shall refrain from engaging in personal attacks and
boisterous, immaterial, inflammatory, obscene, profane, or disorderly conduct. Additionally, meeting attendees must refrain from obscene, profane, or disorderly conduct, including hand clapping, yelling, and
similar demonstrations. All of which deserves disturbs the peace and good order of the meeting. Thank you. I'm going to call on Mr. Powell. Will you lead us in the pledge this morning, sir? I pledge algiance to the flag of the
United States of America and to the stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all. >> Thank you sir. Going to request a motion to approve the
agenda. So move >> second. >> Have a motion on the floor made by Commissioner Stoke, seconded by Vice Mayor Langden to approve the agenda. There's nothing to that. Please vote. That passes 5 to zero. City clerk public
comment. Yes, we do have some. We'll start with e comments. Uh Aiden Marshall, our city should legally adopt a flag. Hosting a public flag contest would yield good designs. Flags give citizens a way to represent their city and unite people.
Next one is David Ionati. Hello. I am writing to support the preservation of the natural connection between Little Salt Springs and the Maka Makahhatchee Greenway. Thank you. Next one is Juno Enoch. I support creating a wildlife corridor instead of extending Spring
Haven Drive. Next one is John Parker. During the past four years that I've lived in Northport, I have witnessed that during city commission meetings, certain commissioners have been singled out and even cursed just because they have a different viewpoint. How do we how do we how you think that
the citizens of Northport feel about such behavior from their elected and non-elected city officials? I can understand why during meetings you act very sober and serious as it were a ticket to impartiality, but cursing and snarky behavior only demonstrates that behind the veil of being polite is a lot
of animosity that is going to negatively affect your ability to serve the needs of the residents. So, how to resolve the relationship issues? We all made mistakes and we need to give each other a break. Try smiling and bring joy into your meeting discourses even when you disagree with
each other and see what happens. One of the fundamental problems is that the city officials need to realize that the city exists to serve the needs of its residents and not the other way around. So when the recent referendums were defeated multiple times, how do you think the citizens feel when city officials are stating that they just
plan to find a way to find and spend the money anyways just because the city has needs? There must be a way to reach Northport residents and we the residents need to carefully consider what the city needs as well. But to just move forward and say you're going to find a way to spend the money anyways is not
respecting Northport residents. After the 2019 master plan was presented concerning the War Mineral Springs, the city paid tens of thousands of dollars for a survey, but some of the commissioners completely dismissed the results rather than following the voice of the people. I do appreciate the
city's effort to educate the residents on the issues, but I believe we need a fundamental shift by healing relationships and focusing our energies on a common vision of the city we all can embrace. Thank you. That's it for e comments uh in person. Robin Sanente,
>> good morning all. >> I'm just going to do a little introduction on the spring haven because you'll hear more from me later. Uh, but I did want to recognize the amount of work and effort uh that the natural resources department building and
planning has put into the recommendations and the presentation that you're going to be hearing uh today. Um, I wish that the agenda wasn't so long. I don't know why we have to have 12 pages of an agenda in one
meeting. Uh, I thought we were going to cut back on that. Um, but anyway, to get back to Spring Haven, I know uh eminent domain is not a pretty thing to go through. However, 15 years and longer is
enough on this particular 30 parcels. So instead of continuing to kick the can down the road like we've been doing for all these years, it's time that we make some kind of a decision that we seriously as a body look at all the work
and the effort and the negotiations that have been going into this with this particular developer and and secure this connector between Little Salt Spring and the Maka Hatchee because of its significance archaeological, hydraulically, paleontologically all of
that and we all know that. So, I just wanted to really thank natural resources and building department for all the work and effort that they put into it and you shall see me later. Thank you. >> That is all, Mr. Mayor. >> Thank you. Um, city clerk announcements.
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. One resident of Northport to serve on the Sarasota Manatee Metropolitan Planning Organization Citizen Advisory Committee. One resident
of Northport to serve on the Citizens Oversight Committee for School Facility Planning. If anyone would like more information, please see the city clerk's office. Thank you. >> Thank you. All right, we're going to move on to the consent agenda. City manager, have any items been pulled for discussion?
>> Yes, Mr. Mayor. Item A 26-0265. That's it. >> Yes, sir. >> Thank you. All right. I'll uh do we have any public comment, sir? >> Uh no, Mr. Mayor. No public comment. >> All right. I'm going to request a motion. >> I'll make it.
>> Go ahead. >> I move to approve the the consent agenda pulling item A 26-0265 for discussion. Have a motion on the floor made by vice
mayor to approve the consent agenda. U pulling item A for discussion. Do I have a second? >> Second. >> Seconded by Commissioner Stokes. There's nothing to that. Please vote. That passes 5 to zero. City manager, who pulled that item?
>> Commissioner Stokes. >> Commissioner Stokes, you have the floor, sir. Thank you very much. Um, reason I pulled this was, you know, I feel bad. We appreciate Miss Cook's desire to serve on this board. Um, but at present
until we know whether or not, um, we have the ability to borrow, it seems a bit premature to actually approve somebody for this board and have the clock tick on their term. Um, and there are other people considering at the time. I think it'd be great to get a
pool of candidates so we can look at credentials and see really who would best fit. So I would ask that we table this item uh until such point in time as we know whether or not the city has the ability to borrow money in which time we
then will have the need for you know this committee to be active. >> Thank you. >> All right. Anybody else? Any comments? I'll make a comment. >> Go right ahead. >> Um, thank you, mayor. Um, I I would
agree it does feel premature to me also. Um, but I also did a quick review of the debt management policy section 4-201 membership and there are some pretty clear requirements in terms of
background and experience. Um and so I want to make sure that we really adhere to this when it comes to approving um folks for this very important advisory board. So I do support tableabling this until a more
appropriate time. >> All right. Anything else? All right. Looking for a motion. Uh, I guess I'll make it uh make a motion to uh table this particular item until such
time as city knows whether or not it can borrow, at which time we can uh look to fill this uh debt management committee. >> Have a second. >> I have a motion on the floor made by Commissioner Stokes. City clerk, can you read that back for the record, please?
>> Sure. uh to continue item number 26-0265 until such time as the city is able to borrow money and is looking to add membership to the debt advisory committee. >> Thank you. And that was seconded by vice mayor. There's nothing to that. Please
vote. And that passes 5 to zero. Moving on to public hearings. Item CCDMA-23-249. This is a quasi judicial hearing. And city clerk, can you read the petition
title? Consideration of petition number DMA-23-249 PMC PA-23-000000249 Tuscola Commons Development Master Plan Amendment. Can everyone wishing to provide testimony please stand and raise your right hand? Do you swear or affirm the testimony
you're about to provide is true and accurate to the best of your knowledge help you God? Thank you. And Mr. Mayor, we do not have any agreed parties. >> All right. I'm going to ask for disclosure of exparte communications. Commissioner Dval? >> None.
>> Mr. Stokes, >> other than conversations in my oneonone briefing. None. >> I have none. Vice Mayor. >> Um, just in my agenda briefing, a very brief conversation on this. >> Commissioner Pro? >> I have none.
>> All right. We're moving on to presentation by applicant. >> She's just loading it up for me. >> No worries. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Hi, good morning. I'm Linda Stewart, certified planner with Pate Dawson,
representing the applicant uh for Tuscola self- storage project site. Uh this is an aerial view of the Tuscola Commons commercial subdivision with the project site located at the northeast corner of Tuscola Boulevard and Marillo
Lane north of US 41. The request is to amend the existing TCO Tuscola Commons Development Master Plan DMA23249 for a change on this parcel's proposed use to a four-story self-s storage
facility with a 29,29 square ft footprint. This vacant project site is located at 5632 Tuscola Boulevard and is a 1.29 29 acre parcel located within the overall
14 acre commercial subdivision. The project is currently zoned PCD. We are not asking for a reszoning of the parcel. Um the parcel is located within activity center number one according to the city
of Northport codes. Uh this slide indicates the existing uses within the commercial subdivision with an Hampton in to the east, a Lowe's to the west, and various other commercial uses um retail uses to the
south along US 41. The building elevations show a proposed building to be four stories with an F of 0.95 uh with the code limitations of 1.0 O F A which shows that this building is within the allowable use for the F
intensity for the project. Additional elevations show show the front of the building including the loading and load unloading area under cover from the elements. The proposed color palette is within the code requirements for the pattern book
for activity center number one. Traffic for the site is significantly reduced from the proposed previous use. This use is anticipated to generate nine trips in the AM and PM PM peak hour with an average daily total of 146 daily
trips. The previously approved use was for a 6,000q ft convenience store with 16 fueling stations, a hightrip generator. This previously submitted traffic report noted over 2600
daily traffic trips, a difference of over 2400 daily trips that will be reduced on the city's road network with this change. Auto turn was run on the site utilizing a garbage truck and a large fire truck to make sure they would maneuver through
the property efficiently. As noted, this was a positive outcome. Parking for the property um is based on the office square footage which is 1,500 square ft with six spaces required for the overall development and they are
providing above that with nine spaces. A neighborhood workshop was held on February 5th, 2026 at 6 p.m. The meeting ended at 6:30 p.m. since there were no attendees to ask questions.
The applicant to Skola Commons LLC has no objections to staff's conditions in the staff report. And in my expert opinion, the required modifications are within compliance of the city of Northport Unified Land Development Code and Comprehensive Plan.
And with that, we're available for any questions if you have any. >> All right. And now we're moving on to staff. Good morning commissioners. Adriana Silva, planner 2, planning zoning division and I have been sworn for your consideration. Today we have the Tuscola
Common Self Storage Development Master Plan Amendment through petition number DMA-23-249. Also PMCPA-23-000000249. The applicant on this is Matthew J. Morris through formerly Morris Engineering now Pape Dawson um represented by Miss Linda Stewart today.
The property owner is Daniel S. Oberki. Um he is the registered agent for Tuscola Commons. This request is to amend the Tuscola Commons development master plan to modify the site layout to accommodate the construction of a 29,29
square ft self storage facility. The address is 5632 Tuscola Boulevard and it is located at the intersection of Merillo Lane and Tuscola Boulevard with the total development master site consisting of 14 acres and the proposed
amendment on approximately 1 acre. The following conditions were recommended by staff and will be enforced at the time of site development and infrastructure plan amendment um application. The review of this request did undergo a pre-application meeting on
August 16th of 2023, followed by a formal submittal on September 26th of 2023. Staff has reviewed the request for consist consistency with the city's comprehensive plan and the city's unified land development code.
This is the subject site. It is the final remaining vacant parcel in the entirety of the development master plan. And this is the proposed development master plan amendment for the self-s storage facility. The request was reviewed for compliance
with the 2017 city of Northport comprehensive plan as this was the comprehensive plan in effect at the time of submitt. Goal one of the future land use element does state that the city is to ensure that the character and location of land uses maximizes the potential for economic benefit and the
enjoyment of natural and man-made resources by citizens while minimizing the threat to health, safety and welfare posed by hazards, new nuisances, incompatible land uses and environmental degradation. This site has a future land use of activity centers and these lands
are designated to provide an area for coordinated development of industrial, commercial, professional office, residential, public and recreational uses. Um that staff does find that petition number DMA-23-249 to Skola Common self-s storage
development master plan amendment is consistent with the future land use goal one of the city's comprehensive plan. Goal two states that the city shall promote an intensive mixture of employment goods and services and residential uses in the activity centers
to pro provide a wide range of residential and employment alternatives to achieve the highest standards of quality in the urban environment and to provide a balanced and healthy tax base. Policy 2.1.1 speaks to activity center one on US 41
and this activity center shall be established to provide for retail, office, commercial, and limited light industrial uses. This is a longestablished commercial area providing services to the surrounding neighborhoods and to the people you using the US 41 corridor. Staff does
find the petition number DMA-23-249 Tuscola Common self-s storage development master plan amendment consistent with the future of land use GOP policy 2.1.1 of the city's comprehensive plan.
Policy 2.1.2 does speak to the access road and cross access easements to be established to promote internal traffic movement and limited re-entry directly onto US 41. The Tuscola Commons Development Master Plan amendment is consistent with future land use goals
and policies 2.1.2 of the city's comprehensive plan. Objective three speaks to the economic base being increased and diversified through planning and development activities that attract new businesses and ind industries while also encouraging the expansion of existing
businesses and industries as indicated in the economic development element. Policy 3.3 is to promote the overall sustainability and taxbased diversification stating that the city shall pursue a goal of at least 18% non-residential development. and staff
does find that the petition DMA-23-249 is consistent with the future land use policy 3.3 of the city's comprehensive plan. The transportation element roadway level of service does state that staff that the city must have a determination as to
whether the existing roadway can adequately serve the existing and future demands and it is predicated on the ability to estimate the maximum amount of traffic a roadway can safely accommodate. This development master site was originally approved for a more
traffic intensive use. So staff finds that petition number DMA-23-249 staff Tuscola Common self-s storage development master plan amendment is consistent with the transportation element roadway levels of service in the city's comprehensive plan.
Chapter 11 is the economic development element of the comprehensive plan and policies 1.1.5 and 1.1.6 Six um speak to recognizing the value of establishing land use regulations that allow industrial and commercial uses in
appropriate locations that have limited options for locating in other areas of the county or region and that they employ best management practices that reduce negative on and off-site impacts and are appropriately buffered from other potentially incompatible land uses.
And 1.1.6 Six speaks to diversifying its tax base through the implementation of programs to attract additional commercial, industrial, and mixeduse developments and encourage the development or redevelopment of vacant and underutilized parcels. As this is the final remaining vacant parcel on the
development master plan site, staff finds that the DMA-239-249 Tuscola Commons self-s storage development master plan amendment is consistent with economic development GOP's goal one objective one policies 1.1.5 and 1.1.6 of the city's
comprehensive plan. In the same manner, this application was reviewed for consistency with the 2010 unified land development code as this was in effect at the time of submittal. Chapters 53 sections 103 through 114
apply to this application. The subject property is is zoned planned community development which provides an area for coordinated development of industrial, commercial, service, residential, and government uses within a park-like setting. The DMA as
presented complies with the applicable 2010 unified land development code requirements and compliance with the chapter 53 sections 53-103 through 114 of the ULDC for height buffering landscape and screening requirements must be demonstrated and
will be required to be further detailed at the time of site development infrastructure plan application. Notice of public hearing and public meet and neighborhood meetings were held. Notice of public hearings by postcards were mailed to the owners and property owners within 1,320 ft radius of the
subject property on May 19th, 2026. The petition was also advertised in a newspaper of general circulation within the city of Northport on May 19th, 2026. Pursuant to section 53-5E of the Unified Land Development Code,
the applicant did hold a neighborhood meeting on February 2026 26 at 6 p.m. virtually via Zoom and no residents were in attendance. The neighborhood meeting was properly noticed by uh ULDC requirements.
the planning and zoning division recommends. Oh, um, prior to recommendation, I do want to verbally um, advise the board that the planning zoning advisory board did recommend approval of this application. However,
due to the agenda timelines, um, the agenda was posted prior to the planning zoning advisory board meeting to make sure that we had a timely hearing process for the applicant. The planning and zoning division does recommend
approval of petition number DMA-23-249 PMCPA-23-00000000249 Tuscola Commons Development Master Plan Amendment. Thank you. >> All right, switching back to applicant for rebuttal.
>> H yes, Linda Stewart again. I just wanted to clarify that the footprint of the building is 29,000 ft² and then there's four stories to that. So it's over 100,000 square feet in total square footage for the overall building site.
>> Thank you. Staff rebuttal. >> No rebuttal. >> Thank you. City clerk. Public comment. >> No public comment, Mr. Mayor. >> All right. Commission questions, discussion. Anybody? Vice Mayor? Um, thank you, Mayor. I have
a question for Miss Stewart. What type of market analysis do you perform in order to assess the demand for another storage facility in the city of Northport? >> Uh, we personally do not perform those.
The applicant performs those um as part of their due diligence to decide whether or not that this is something that's feasible for them to do. Um, but that's not something that I perform. >> Okay. Thank you. >> That's it. >> Commissioner Pro.
>> Thank you, Maya. Just a question on how many jobs would this project bring as opposed to how many jobs was projected? How many jobs were projected in the previous design when >> I did not work on the previous design.
this one. Um, we have people who will work in the office and then they have, you know, maintenance people, lawn care, electricians, things like that that will work on the facility. Um, but the full-time people will work 8 to 5 in the office on site.
>> How many employees? >> Probably two. >> Two employs people besides, like I said, all the other um people that will be employed, you know, for other uh contractors and things like that that are needed in order to make it operational.
U the thing is the self- storage facilities facilities are not typically allowed in the activity center one and uh this board consistently promote is promoting you know jobs uh
for the local economy. Uh this this project is not job focused in my opinion. Um so >> but it's it's somewhat consistent with a convenience store. I mean, and all of us go into them on a on a daily basis, and
you'll have one or two employees at a time working in a convenience store, and that's the same that you'll have with the self-s storage facility. >> This is the applicant. >> Sorry, my name is Dan Berski. For the record, just to clarify some elements of economic benefit and job creation, um
that site would have anticipated a build cost um for its prior use somewhere in the range of two and a half to $4.5 million. Our baseline cost for this is over $10 million. So from an economic benefit and job creation, I think it's arguable that we have employment in
place as well as a value creation to the city of Northport that exceeds the prior use. And uh this question was um raised by Vice Mayor LinkedIn about the analysis or market analysis as far as the demand
for the storage facilities project. Can you answer that? Um we analyze based on occupancy and rental income um as well as future growth and so understanding what is in place what potential future uh development it is difficult to
develop storage in the uh village of or in the city of Northport and so we believe it's a long-term strong stable opportunity for um both the uh opportunity in that sits in place as well as once the bridge is connected over to the residents to the north from
a convenience and service perspective. U yes I'm just not too convinced about the project uh besides that bridge is still in a discussion or negotiation >> understood >> stage so and there's no foreseeable
confidence of that bridge being built um but uh it's just you know we as now speak on um on behalf of myself because I represent the constituents and you know it's another storage facility and
you are uh tonedeaf and not listen you don't listen to us uh what about some more economic driver as opposed to storage facility. So, I'm not too convinced about the project or changing
the the use of that project and this is just my uh view of it. But I do appreciate your petition. >> Commissioner Petro, just just as a reference, the property has been on the market for the past 10 years. Um, and so
if other economic interested parties had an interest in it, we absolutely would have contemplated that. um in that 10-year period, we do not have an active pursuer of an alternative use for that parcel. So, it's creating more benefit and jobs than sitting there as vacant
land is the best answer I have although it not being your preferred mechanism. >> And I understand that and to to re reply to that response u that is like a major hub of commercial
attraction in our city. Um, and if it was on the market for 10 years, maybe there was no demand because of the pricing, but I'm not here to judge the price or marketing strategies of that parcel to be sold. Um, I'm just saying
what we constantly hear from the citizens and constituents that bring us somewhere we can enjoy life, bring us more jobs or economic development as opposed to storage facilities. And almost every major I would say every
major road or roadway in our city is you know pack storage facilities. >> Commissioner pro if I may cl provide clarification on the use. Um per ULDC section 55-15
the personal storage is a permitted use by right in the activity center 1 district. And I did want to speak to um the comprehensive plan economic development element and as the applicant had mentioned this parcel has been remaining vacant for um an extended
period of time and is the final vacant parcel on the site. So as this is a permitted use by right and they would be um providing an appropriate commercial use to provide service for the residents in the area that is um the the analysis
that staff finds that this is a very compatible use and and a good economic development for commercial use in the in the property. >> So can I ask a question about clarification of the intended use? You said it's allowed and >> yes >> to what extent it's allowed and
>> it is allowed by right the reason this is um this needs to go before commission hearing is because it is a development master plan site so it had a previous use designated which was also a commercial use and since we are changing the the site layout to allow self
storage the use was already allowed by right on that parcel that it's just the amendment to the development master plan that forced it to come before commission the the nature of the of the development
site. However, the U the unified land development code in effect at the time of submittal does establish personal storage use as a permitted use within activity center 1. >> Does it specify the storage number? >> Yes, personal personal storage. >> I'm sorry, the number of stores of
>> of units. Yes. So they will be within the maximum building height for the activity center one district and the previously approved development master plan. >> Nevertheless, the board has authority to deny the petition of a changing of the master plan.
>> Yes, the board has the approval to deny approval uh provide approval or denial based off of >> Okay, thank you. >> Of course, >> Commissioner Stokes. >> Yeah, I'll be sure. Um, I I I truly appreciate that this complies with the
comp plan in the ULDC, and I appreciate that it's been sitting vacant for all these years, and I appreciate that probably it's a better use than a gas station. But um again, it's it's a disappointment that such a prime piece on Route 41 couldn't uh couldn't find
its way to something that was a bit more appealing for our residents in the way of amenity um as well as job creation as Commissioner Petro said. So, you know, I'm disappointed once again being handcuffed by the law and what we're
required to approve. So, um, you know, I just want to go on record of saying just another disappointment. Thank you, >> Commissioner Dval. >> Thank you, Mayor. Um,
I too wish that a development, you know, in in a space would have something that, you know, provides more jobs, you know, something, you know, like a light manufacturing. Um, but I'm very familiar with that area where this location is
and uh as commission as commissioner Stokes mentioned uh you know a gas station Tuscola Boulevard is already crowded, you know, with the traffic coming from uh some of the businesses that kind of front 41. Uh Lowe's is
right across the street. Um and this use is not going to generate very much traffic on any given time. Um secondly, you know, with the size of
the property, the number of parking spaces, you know, if we were to put, you know, office space there, you know, that service customers, there's just not that room much room there for parking. Um, and added to that, you know, this is
another storage facility, but I don't see any of them going out of business. So, it must be people are using them. Uh, I do have one little question uh for
staff. Do we have any kind of estimation of what revenue the city will get from this? Uh, you know, real estate taxes, business taxes. Yes. One moment. And the staff report did speak to
Okay. So in the staff report in our analysis of consistency with um the comprehensive plan objective three for the economic tax base and policy 3.3 to promote overall sustainability and taxbased diversification that the city shall
pursue a goal of at least 18% non-residential development. Based on the construction cost of the project, the city estimates an advalorum of $62,658.20 20 cents over the first 5 years post construction. This does not include
non-advalum assessments aligning with the city's objective to increase and diversify its economic tax base through non-residential development. >> Thank you. Um you know wishes were horses beggars
would ride they say. Um, you know, and I do and I do wish, you know, that we for economic development, you know, in this city, we we had, you know, some some white industries. Uh, but it is what it is. And I I just don't see how this
building uh goes to the detriment of the city. Thank you. >> All right. Yeah. I just want to remind the board that we are in the middle of a quasi judicial hearing and we must follow the law and we must follow the
competent substantial evidence in this case. So when we render our decision, that's what we must follow. Um moving back to closing arguments. Um stat >> um I did want to clarify one final
point. The personal established uh the personal storage use is a permitted use by right in the previous code and in the current code for activity center 1 and staff does recommend approval of the petition DMA-23-249.
Thank you. >> Applicant. >> Yes, sir. >> Thank you. All right. I'm going to close this public hearing and request a motion. >> I'll give it a shot. I move to approve petition number
PMCPA-23-000000 245 in >> 249. Thank you sir. Incorporating the four requirements identified in the staff report and finded that based on the competent substantial evidence the
development master plan complies with the unified land development code. Second. >> Have a motion on the floor made by Vice Mayor, seconded by Commissioner Dval. City Clerk, can you read that back for the record, please?
>> Uh, to approve petition number PM CPA-23-0000249 incorporating the four conditions in the staff report and find that based on the competent substantial evidence, the develop master plan complies with the unified land development code.
Thank you. There's nothing to that. Please vote. >> And that passes 5 to zero. Thank you all very much. >> Thank you. >> Moving on to ordinances first reading. Ordinance number 2026-09.
I request a motion to direct the city clerk to read by title only. >> Second. Have a motion on the floor by Commissioner Stoke, seconded by Vice Mayor to have the city clerk read by title only. Please vote. And that passes 5 to zero. City clerk.
An ordinance of the city of Northport, Florida, providing that failure to appear at a code enforcement hearing constitutes an admission and waiver and authorizes an imposition of penalties and costs, amending the code of the city of Northport, Florida, section 2-508, providing for fightings, providing for
conflicts, providing for severability, providing for codification, and providing an effective date. >> Thank you, sir. City manager, this is your item. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Proposed ordinance number 2026-09 is intended to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the city's code enforcement hearing process
by addressing situations in which an alleged violator fails to appear at a proper hearing. The change is intended to create a more consistent and predictable process while supporting timely enforcement and enhancing the city's ability to protect the public's health, safety, and welfare through
effective code enforcement. We recommend that you choose option one, which is approve ordinance 2026-09 as presented and continue with your second reading on June 23rd, 2026. Thank you, sir. >> Thank you, Commission. Any questions, discussion?
Vice Mayor. >> Thank you, Mayor. Um my my only question during my agenda briefing was whether or not existing properties would be impacted by this change. Um and I was assured that none would. Um I can
imagine for either residential or a business having their address changed could be problematic. So um I was assured that no existing structures. I'm getting a no from city manager. That's the next item, madam vice mayor,
regarding the street naming change. >> This is the one regarding the um code enforcement for the violators. >> I am so sorry. That's okay. >> I am so sorry. Um the violators, how will the violators be
notified of their hearings? Good morning. Elena Ray, director of development services. Uh, the violators do get notice from the code enforcement division regarding the results of the hearing. Uh, prior to the hearing, they
get notices of the hearing date and time. There is sufficient time for them to request an postponement. If there's some reason that we uh they can't make it, we do accommodate their schedules regularly. So that we frequently postpone uh cases in order for them to
be able to attend. >> And how is the notice delivered? Is it certified mail or US mail? >> It is posted on the property and it is delivered um by US mail. Uh we do require return receipts. >> Okay, great. Thank you. >> And madam madam vice mayor,
>> yes, >> those are the current uh practices that are in place. Those aren't new practices, >> right? There's no change to any of them, right? >> Okay. Thank you. That's all I wanted to score. >> While we're on that subject about, you know, requesting postponements and this
that and the other, what if there was an emergency situation that they were unaware of and they couldn't make it? And >> we will rehear the case if they make us aware that, and we've had that happen. We've had people who have had a death in the family and couldn't uh make it to
the hearing. uh as long as they um notify us even after the hearing uh we will reschedu and have a rehearing for them >> and that's what I had thought I just wanted that put in the record so while we were on that subject >> we do try to be very accommodating
>> yeah I know you are so uh commissioner Dval did you have something I saw you up there they erased it >> yes thank you mayor um we were saying in the past that
if you don't enforce a law, you shouldn't have that law. Uh same goes with raising a child, you know, if you tell a child not to do something and there's no consequences if he does it, then you're wasting your
time. So, to that end, I think this is a good proposition. Thank you, >> city clerk. Public comment. >> No public comment, Mr. Mayor. All right, I'm going to close this public hearing and request a motion.
>> Anyone? >> Go ahead. >> I move to continue ordinance number 2026-09 to a second reading on June 23rd, 2026. >> Second. >> I have a motion on the floor made by Commissioner Pro to continue ordinance
number 2026-09 to second reading on June 23rd, 2026. That was seconded by Commissioner Stokes. There's nothing to that. Please vote. That passes five to zero. Moving on to ordinance 2026-17.
I request a motion to uh have the clerk read it. So move >> second. >> Have a motion on the floor made by Commissioner Stoke, seconded by Vice Mayor to direct the city clerk or deputy city clerk to read by title only. Please vote.
That passes 5 to zero. City clerk. >> An ordinance of the city of Northport, Florida regarding street naming and property numbering amending the code of the city of Northport, Florida, section 70-55 through 70-58. Providing for findings, excuse me,
providing for findings, providing for conflicts, providing for severability, providing for codification, and providing an effective date. >> Thank you, sir. City Manager, this is your item. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. The City of Northport Street naming and prop property numbering regulations are codified within the code of the city of
Northport, Florida, section 7055 through 7058. These regulations do not align with current practices and inter agency emergency response systems and contain outdated provisions that are no longer applicable to the addressing system. The proposed amendments would achieve the following of aligning the current
practices that have advanced due to technology. Address government facilities within multiple buildings. Provide for limited administrative authority to depart from certain provisions when such departures are in alignment with emergency response system requirements and provide for due process
for those agreed by addressing decisions. We recommend that you approve option one which is approve ordinance number 20 26-17 and continue second reading on June 23rd, 2026. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. >> Thank you, sir. Commission. Questions?
Vice Mayor? Now my big moment, my concern was um any existing properties being disadvantaged by um a numbering change and I was assured that there would there were no existing buildings that would be changing as a
result of uh this ordinance. So I'm okay with it. >> I remember hearing that somewhere. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Echo. >> Nobody else. City clerk, any public comment? >> No public comment, Mr. Mayor. All right, I'm going to close this hearing and request a motion. >> I'll make it.
>> Go ahead. >> Make sure I have the right one. >> I move to continue ordinance number 2026-17 to second reading on June 23rd, 2026. >> Have a motion on the floor made by vice
mayor to continue ordinance number 2026-17 to second reading on June 23rd, 2026, seconded by Commissioner Dval. There's nothing to that. Please vote. And that passes 5 to zero. Moving on to
ordinance number 2026-18. I request a motion to direct the city clerk to read by title only. >> So move. >> Have a motion on the floor made by Commissioner Stoke, seconded by Vice Mayor to >> direct the city or the deputy city clerk to read by title only. There's nothing
to that. Please vote. That passes 5 to zero. City clerk. >> An ordinance of the city of Northport, Florida, amending the non-district budget for fiscal year 2025 through 2026 for use of state of Florida contraband forfeite funds in the amount of $55,000,
providing for findings, providing for posting, providing for conflict, providing for severability, and providing an effective date. >> Thank you, city manager. This is your item. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Pursuant to the act, expenditures above $15,000 involve a critical obligation and a minimum of
25% of the funds must support or operate programs related to drug treatment, drug abuse, education, drug prevention, crime prevention, uh, safe neighborhoods or school resource officer programs. The local law enforcement agency has the discretion to determine which programs
will receive the designated proceeds which have been outlined in the event summary. I we recommend that you choose option one today which is approve the ordinance number 2026-18 as presented and move to second reading on June 23rd 2026. Thank you Mr. Mayor.
>> Thank you commission questions discussions. Commissioner Dval. >> Thank you mayor. Um I understand this is forfeiture of funds and there's certain ways they can be used. Uh,
as I was looking through some of the background material, I noticed that uh, National Night Out, $26,000 for t-shirts. Um, that's 2600 shirts at $10 a shirt. It's
1300 to $20 a shirt. um uh giving away shirts to the citizens, you know, that attend, you know, maybe that's not such a bad thing, but um gee, I wish there were some
little more beneficial uses to those funds. Uh that's all just $26,000 seems like an awful lot for t-shirts. Thank you, >> city clerk. Public comment.
>> No public comment, Mr. Mayor. >> And I'm going to close this public hearing and request a motion. >> I'll make it. Go ahead. >> Uh I also make sure I'm on the right one. I move to continue ordinance number 2026-18
to second reading on June 23rd, 2026. >> Thank you. Do have a motion on the floor made by Commissioner Stokes to continue ordinance number 2026-18 to second reading on June 23rd, 2026. Do I have a second? >> A second.
>> Seconded by Commissioner Devel. I have nothing to that. Please vote. That passes five to zero. Moving on to second readings. Ordinance number 2026-13.
City clerk, can you read by title only, please? >> An ordinance of the city of Northport, Florida, amending the code of the city of Northport, Florida, appendix A, city fee schedule, amending parks and recreation, general fees and facility rental fees, providing for findings, providing for conflicts, providing for
severability, providing codification, and providing an effective date. >> Thank you, sir. City manager, this is your item. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Junior City Commission regular meeting held on May 19th, 2026. There was a motion made to
continue ordinance number 2026-13 to second reading on today, June 9th, 2026, which passed on a 50- vote. Ordinance number 2026-13 was provided to the city clerk's office on June 4th for signature subject to city commission approval. We
recommend on second reading today for you to choose option one, which is to approve ordinance number 2026-13. on today, June 9th, 2026 as presented. Thank you, sir. >> Thank you, sir. Commission questions, discussion. >> City clerk, public comment.
>> No public comment, Mr. Mayor. All >> right. I'm going to close this public hearing and request a motion. >> I'll make >> Go ahead. Move to adopt ordinance 2020 uh 2026-13 is presented. >> Second. >> Have a motion on the floor to adopt
ordinance number 2026-13 as presented. made by Commissioner Stoke, seconded by Commissioner Duval. There's nothing to that. Please vote. That passes 5 to zero. Moving on to ordinance number 2026-16.
City clerk, can you read by title only, please? >> An ordinance of the city of Northport, Florida related to city solid waste services amending chapter 6 62 66 chapter 66 of the code of city in Northport, Florida. providing for findings, providing for conflicts, providing for severability, providing
for codification, and providing an effective date. >> Thank you, sir. City manager, this is your item. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Uh during the city commission regular meeting held on May 19th, 2026, the city commission approved a motion 4 to one to approve the ordinance on first reading and continue
to second reading on June 9th, 2026. Today we ask that you take the recommended action of option one which is approving ordinance number 2026-16 on today June 9th 2026 as presented. Thank you sir. >> Thank you. Commission questions discussions.
Not seeing any. City clerk public comment. >> No public comment. Mr. Mayor. >> All right. I'm going to close this hearing and request a motion. >> I'll make it. >> Go ahead. I move to adopt ordinance number 2026-16 as presented.
>> Have a motion on the floor to adopt ordinance number 2026-16 as presented. Baden by Commissioner Dval. Do I have a second? Second. Seconded by Commissioner Stokes. Nothing to that. Please vote. And that passes 5 to zero. Moving down
to third reading, ordinance number 2026-10. City clerk, can you read by title alone, please? An ordinance of the city of Northport, Florida, relating to impact fee collection and the impact fee deferral program, amending and renumbering chapter 58 of the code of
the city of Northport, Florida, providing for impact fees, purpose and authority definitions, payment of fees, impact fee schedules, exemptions, appeals, reporting and reviewing of fees, refunds, developer reimbursement and credits, amending the deferral program, providing for eligible
development, timing of application, application contents, agreement and payment schedule, providing for findings, providing for conflicts, providing for severability, providing for codification, and providing an effective date. >> Thank you, sir. City manager, this is your item.
>> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. During the city commission regular meeting on April 21st of 2026, the city commission voted 5 to zero to adopt ordinance number 20 2610 as amended to eliminate article 2 in its entirety. Due to this substantive change, the city attorney's office
determined it was required to revertise the ordinance and bring it back to commission for consideration at a third reading. For the third reading required, staff also removed language in chapter 58 that was associated with the option to defer impact fees and definitions that only applied to article one to
reflect the commission direction to remove the deferral program in its entirety. Today, we recommend that you choose option one, which is approving ordinance number 20 26-10 as presented. Thank you, sir. >> Thank you, sir. Commission, questions, discussions?
City clerk, any public comment? >> No public comment, Mr. Mayor. >> All right. I'm going to close this public hearing and request a motion. >> Go ahead. >> Which one of us? >> I don't care. Somebody, mayor, >> I move to adopt ordinance number 2026-10 as presented.
>> Second. Have a motion on the floor made by Vice Mayor to adopt ordinance number 2026-10 as presented. Seconded by Commissioner Stokes. If there's nothing to that, please vote. And that passes 5 to Z. Moving on to
resolution number 2026-R32. Deputy city clerk, could you read by title only? A resolution of the city commission of the city of Northport, Florida, accepting the transfer of water and wastewater infrastructure and improvements and associated warranties in Maninnesota Beach Ranchlands Plat
number one, providing for incorporation of recital, providing for filing of documents, providing for conflicts, providing for severability, and providing an effective date. >> Thank you, city manager. This is your item. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Uh section 78-31
of the code of the city of Northport requires developers to provide or pay for the capital costs including land costs of the required capital improvements for utility infrastructure associated with the new developments. Section 5.3 of the amended and restated utilities agreement with West Villages
Improvement District dated February 27th of 2007 outlines the requirements for design, review, construction, inspection, and conveyance of water and wastewater facilities for this development. The agreement also outlines the city's responsibility to accept ownership of
the infrastructure once improvements are completed in accordance with approved plans for Maninnesota Beach Ranch Ranch Lands Plat number one. The developer has constructed the required water and wastewater infrastructure, dedicated the necessary easements, and provided warranties to the city. The improvements
have been inspected and approved by the utilities department. Under the executed developer agreement, the city is required to accept ownership of the completed infrastructure. We ask that today you take the recommended action of option one, which is approve resolution number 2026-R32
as presented. Thank you, sir. >> Thank you, sir. Commission questions, discussion, anything. >> City clerk public comment. >> No public comment, Mr. Mayor. >> And close this hearing and request a motion. >> I'll make it. Go ahead.
>> I move to adopt resolution 2026-R32 as presented. >> Second. >> Have a motion on the floor to adopt resolution number 2026-R32 as presented. Made by Commissioner Stoke, seconded by Vice Mayor. Nothing to that. Please vote.
There we go. And that passes 5 to zero. Moving on to resolution number 2026-R38. Uh, city clerk, can you read by title only? A resolution of the city commission of the city of Northport, Florida, initiating the process for negotiating an interlocal service
boundary agreement with Sarasota County, Florida, pursuant to part two of chapter 171, Florida statutes, providing for findings, providing for subjects of negotiations, identifying municipal service area, providing for transmitt, providing for conflicts, providing for severability, and providing an effective
date. >> Thank you, sir. City manager, this is your item. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So uh an interlocal service boundary agreement which is called an ISBA uh is a joint agreement between two or more local government bodies for the purpose of
ensuring proper coordination regarding land use provisional services funding and other impacts related to annexation of public property. Florida statute encourages local government participation in and is but to jointly determine how to designate future land use to provide services to residents and
property in the most efficient and effective manner while balancing the needs and desires of the community. to promote sensible boundaries that reduce the cost of local government to avoid duplicating local services to increase political transparency and accountability and to prevent
inefficient service delivery and in an insufficient tax base to support the delivery of those services. Northport does not currently have an ISBO with Sarasota County and therefore annexation of property and determination of service delivery delivery is often fraught with
uncertainty and inefficiency. The city's comprehensive plan also recognizes the important of pursuing such an agreement. Uh city staff has been working with county administrative staff uh for several months in order to work in
partner to make sure that this ISVA is created in a way that will benefit the city and the county collectively. Uh we believe that we've outlined the information in the ISBA that will allow you to take the recommended action which is approve resolution number 2026- R38
today. Thank you Mr. Mayor. >> Thank you sir. Commission questions discussion commissioner Stokes. Yeah, just um so people understand a little of this um you know for a very long time a lot of
that the these areas um that sit presently in unincorporated Sarasota County um are areas that especially in the area of first responders we are first on the spot to we have as I understand it pretty much just a general agreement that who's ever there first
jumps in provides their services and helps city of Northports and its taxpayers get no benefit whatsoever, financial benefit whatsoever from the services we we we offer up and and
perform in these areas. So this eventually will lead to our ability to actually get compensated properly for the the kinds of services we provide. So you know I I am supportive of this. It's the beginning of a process. Thank you.
>> Thank you, Vice Mayor. Uh, thank you, mayor. Yes. To pile on um a little bit on that, I I think in a lot of different instances, the the county and and this is not any comment on the ability of the
county to service these areas. they're they're fully capable, but the distance they need to travel to perform these services um really make it difficult for them to provide timely services down here. So,
um this is nothing new. We've had areas targeted in our comprehensive plan for annexation for years, if not decades. Um, and this is simply a mechanism that will make it easier and more efficient
for us to do that when the time is appropriate. So, I'm very supportive of approving this item. >> Thank you. I see no one else. City clerk, public comment. >> No public comment, Mr. Mayor. >> All right. I'm going to close this
hearing and request a motion. >> I'll be happy to make it. >> You go right ahead, sir. I move to adopt resolution 2026-R38 is presented. Have a motion on the floor to adopt resolution number 2026-R38 as presented. Made by Commissioner Stokes. >> Second.
>> Seconded by Vice Meer. There's nothing to that. Please vote. And that passes 5 to zero. Moving on to resolution number 2026-R41. Um, deputy city clerk, could you read by title only, please? >> Uh, resolution of the city commission of
the city of Northport, Florida, initiating the process for negotiating an inter local service boundary agreement with Sarasota County, Florida, pursuant to part two of chapter 171, Florida statutes, providing for findings, providing for subjects of negotiations, identifying a municipal
service area, providing for transmitt, providing for conflicts, providing for severability, and providing an effective date. Thank you, service city manager. This is your item. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. The city has received an annexation request from Winchester, Florida Ranch LLP, the owner
of approximately 3,146 acres of property, also known as Winchester Ranch, currently located in unincorporated Sarasota County. Portions of this property lay outside the Sarasota County Urban Service Area, as it was shown on the future land use map of Sarasota County, dated November of
2006. As such, according to the Sarasota County Charter, the city of Northport does not have the authority to assign future land use designations to such portions of this property. However, Saras the Sarasota County Charter allows the city of Northport and Sarasota
County to enter into an ISBA that would designate and control the land use for the property and establish delivery of service provisions following annexation. Uh we ask that you take the recommended action of option one which is approving that pathway and approve resolution
number 2026 at R41. Thank you sir. >> Thank you sir. Commissioners any question discussion. Commissioner Pedro. >> Thank you mayor. I've noticed in this resolution there's no mentioning of how the
infrastructure will be built and I not sure if it's a legal requirement. Um, but I did find on page three that the delivery and funding of the following essential municipal services for the Winchester property, public safety, fire, emergency, rescue,
medical, water and wastewater, road ownership, construction, maintenance, conservation, parks and recreation, storm water management, and such other municip municipal services as determined by the city of Northport. Uh my only concern is um you know this
is a first public discussion as opposed we did have a presentation by the developer at the workshop uh not too long ago but um we have not a public discussion as a board or the
presentation from the staff how the infrastructure will be built and that's the concern our residents continue to voice. um and uh who will pay and what who will maintain and what not.
So I'm not sure is it and would this would be my probably a question referring to legal is it required to to convey the methods of uh providing the infrastructure itself before opening
a door for annexation of a area that is not developed. Is it that is not developed at all and what would be the cost and financial uh burdens on the cities and uh any
methodology traffic my only concern is that and I'll try to be short is infrastructure of the roads and providing the essential services to that area and um We all know that the that is
evac evacuation route and South River Road they've been talking about widening that road for I don't know how many years decades and and longer and it has not been addressed practically.
So in my opinion for the resident's sake and for the city staff to kind of make a presentation and instead of doing this resolution and I know this is the first step to do that
but how do we do that as a city? Will city incur additional expense? city be bound by such, you know, unrealistic financial burdens and whatnot, all this stuff. So, this is my concern and I'm
just conveying my concerns publicly. I wish we had the presentation by the staff prior doing this. Um and I'm in full support of the first ISBA. Uh but um this one, you know, we
are very vague in our message how we're going to support that area, especially Winchester Ranch because it's primarily be residential as opposed to commercial. So these are just my two cents
on this agenda item. >> Go ahead, ma'am. >> Morning, Elena Ray. Director of Development Services. First, this resolution does not bind the city to anything. This simply starts a discussion with Sarasota County regarding what um
the county's responsibilities and the city's responsibilities would be regarding services in this area should this area be annexed by the city, which is ultimately an the annexation is a legislative decision that the commission
would make down the road. As far as who pays for what um whether the developer pays or the city pays for infrastructure, that is something that can be discussed and determined at time of comprehensive plan and reasonzoning and u site development plans. However,
this property is intended to be developed in the same manner that Wellin Park has developed, which is that WVID funds and maintains and constructs all infrastructure within the development.
So the city would not and has no intention of spending anything for u infrastructure within the Winchester uh development should that property ultimately be annexed into the city.
Those are discussions and presentations that staff will provide um in depth at those times upon um annexation discussions, comprehensive plan, land use discussions um should it get that far down the road.
>> Thank you. I appreciate it. >> Right. I see no one else. Oh, vice mayor. Let's be a little quicker next time on this Tuesday. >> Sorry, mayor. Um, just for the record, this is not the first time we've discussed this. We discussed this in
excruciating detail at a workshop which is a public meeting and the community is invited to it and it's broadcast and recorded and all of that. So, there should be no surprises about what might be coming.
But again, as as director Ray said, this just allows us to have conversations with the county on who does what to whom and when. So, um I'm in support of this. It it makes perfect sense in my mind
based on all of the information we discussed at the workshop. So, I'm a yay for this. >> Thank you, city clerk. Public comment. >> No public comment, Mr. Mayor. >> All right. Going to close this hearing and request a motion. I'll
>> make it. >> Go ahead. I move >> to adopt resolution 2026-R41 as presented. >> Second. >> Have a motion on the floor to adopt resolution number 2026-R41 as presented. Made by Commissioner
Stokes, seconded by Commissioner McDall. Please vote. Or excuse. Sorry. And that passes five to zero. I don't even know where that one came from. PTSD maybe. I don't know. >> The chair.
>> Resolution number 2026-R40. City clerk. Can you read by title only? A resolution of the city commission of the city of Northport, Florida, granting a non-exclusive permanent easement located on a portion of the parcel lying in section 30, Township 39 South, Range
21 East, Sarasota County, Florida. Property appraiser parcel identification number 0996-0000-10004 providing for incorporation of recital, providing for filing of documents, providing for conflicts, providing for severability, and providing an effective date. Thank you, city manager. This is
your item. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. The city of North Florida owns a parcel of land acquired for the development of the utility admin and warehouse facility. The existing primary power service provided um by Florida Power and Light currently runs along a portion of Children's Way and it
terminates at the end of a current dead end in a roadway. Uh because the building site is located further within the parcel, it's necessary to extend the overhead power line along Children's Way to a point adjacent to the project site. From that location, the underground
power conduit has already been installed by the contractor through directional boring and is prepared for the next phase of the electrical service installation. Upon approval of the required easements and the execution of the agreement with FPL, the utility provider will complete the final installation and connection of
electrical service to the utility building site. We ask that you re you choose recommended option number one which is approve resolution number 2026 R40 today. Thank you sir. >> Thank you sir. Discussion anybody? City clerk public
comment. >> No public comment. Mr. Mayor >> close this hearing and request a motion to make it. Go ahead. >> Move to adopt resolution 2026-R40 as presented. >> Second. >> I have a motion on the floor made by Commissioner Stokes to adopt resolution number 2026-R40
as presented. Seconded by Vice Mayor. Please vote. That passes 5 to zero. Moving on to resolution number 2026-R42. City clerk, can you read by title only? A resolution of the city commission of the city of Northport, Florida,
approving the city's acceptance of the conveyance of fire station number 87 and associated vehicles, equipment, and improvements effective upon the issuance of the final certificate of occupancy. Accepting associated warranties and intangible property, entering an
indemnity agreement for future final payments to contractor, providing for filing of documents, providing for conflicts, providing for severability, and providing an effective date. >> Thank you. Uh, city manager, this is your item. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Uh, fire station
87 is located at 17890 Prado Boulevard and will permit public safety emergency response units from Northport Fire Rescue to provide a high level of service to the city of Northport residents keeping pace with the growing needs of the area. We recommend that you
choose option one which is a ch approved resolution number 2026-R42 approving the acceptance of the conveyance of fire station number 87 and associated vehicles equipment and improvements effective upon the issuance of the final certificate of occupancy uh
presented. Uh thank you sir. >> Thank you mission questions discussions city clerk public comment >> no public comment Mr. Mayor. All right, I'm going to close this hearing and request a motion. >> I'll make it. >> Go ahead.
>> I move to adopt resolution number 2026-R42 as presented. >> Second. I have a motion on the floor made by Vice Mayor to adopt resolution number 2026-R42 as presented. Seconded by Commissioner Stokes. There's nothing to that. Please
vote. And that passes 5 to Z. Moving on to general business. Item 26-0767. Um, city clerk, this is your item.
>> The city clerk's office received one application from Richard Vance on May 1st, 2026 and one application from Anne Lane on May 14th, 2026 for appointment to the environmental advisory board. We have submitted these applications for review and consideration to appoint one applicant as a regular member and one
applicant as an alternate member of the board. Thank you. >> All righty. The only question I have is uh I believe Mr. Vance put in his application first. >> Correct. So Mr. Vance submitted his on May 1st and Miss Lane submitted hers on
May 14th. >> Right. And normally we usually go with whoever puts in first as you know the would be the member and the second one would be the alternate. So Vice Mayor, you have the floor. >> Uh yes, mayor. and and I I do agree with
the mayor that has been our practice when we judge both applicants as equally capable. Um and and although um Mr. Vance got his application in first and I do believe that that most
hunters have a deep respect for the environment and for the critters that exist on that environment. Um, Miss Lane has both the education and practical experience in
environmental matters. She's been teaching environmental subjects at Northport High School for years. Um, so in my mind, I think that tips a a jump ball in my book. Uh, and so for those
reasons, I would suggest that we make Miss Lane the regular member of the environmental advisory board and Mr. Vance the alternate. >> There's no one else. Public comment. >> No public comment, Mr. Mayor.
>> All right. I'm going to close this and uh request a motion. >> I'll make a motion. >> Go ahead. >> I move to approve the appointment of Ms. Lane to serve as the regular member of the environmental advisory
board and Mr. Vance as the alternate member both to serve a first term on the environmental advisory board from June 9th, 2026 to June 9th, 2029. >> Have a motion on the floor to approve
the appointment of Miss Lane to serve as a regular member and Mr. advance to serve as an alternate member to serve a first term on the environmental advisory board from June 9th, 2026 through June 9th, 2029.
Do I have a second? >> I have a seconded by Commissioner Stokes. There's nothing to that. Please vote. And that passes five to zero. Welcome aboard. Board members moving on to 26-0642.
City manager, this is your item. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This item is discussion and possible action regarding initiating imminent domain for 30 parcels located within the natural corridor between the Little Salt Spring and the Maya Akahhatche Creek uh Spring Haven Drive area. We do have a staff
presentation by Mr. Stefan Caleb who is our natural resource manager and I will turn it over to him and his team. Thank you, sir. >> Good afternoon, commissioners, or good morning, excuse me. Stefan Kaleiff, natural resources manager with the city
of Northport. So today I will speak about the eminent domain consideration for 30 parcels located within the natural corridor for Spring Haven Drive area. Some background.
Back in 2014 September, the extension of the Spring Haven Drive project was approved for fiscal year 2014 2015 budget. Then February 12th, 2015, a memo
was provided outlining project details and prior analyses for this project. Now in May 24th, 2016, an agreement 2016-2 was executed with chart engineering and
surveying for design and permitting. August 25th, 2016, first public meetings were held at the Morgan Family Community Center. Supplemental agreement number one was approved to modify the existing
environmental resource permit back in October 25th, 2016. A complete hydraulic analysis was also done as of then. Now, on May 4th, 2017, Friends of Little
Salt Spring presented their concerns to commission about wildlife impacts to this area. On March 6th, 2018, city commission considered terminating
roadway projects and relocating funding to land acquisition. April 24th, 2018, commission directed city manager to stop all clearing in the Makahhatche Creek Greenway.
May 3rd, 2018, commission terminated roadway project and directed city manager to pursue acquisition options. Back in 2018 on July 24th, commission
approved 1.5 million sir tax funding for parcel acquisition. June 17th 2019 commission discussed land acquisition and impacts of roadway cancellation.
Later on September 12th the same year, city purchased five parcels from Q Smith Homes LLC for the value of $55,000 combined for all five parcels.
April 14th, 2020, city nominated 30 privately owned parcels through Sarasota County's Environmental Sensitive Lands Protection Program. Later, April 23rd, 2024,
commission discussed corridor funding and environmental issues, withdrew 5.945 million from the resilient SRQ request, and directed this item under a future
agenda return on April 1st. natural resources staff uh conducted um a meeting, an informal meeting with the Sarasota County's Environmental
Sensitive Lands Protection Program. And upon that meeting, news were delivered from county staff that uh funds cannot be used by them due to the owner's price requested far exceeding
the appraised value for these properties. Apologies for the long background. There were few other events from my understanding as well. But um I I just wanted to get everyone up to speed as much as possible.
Now what is the Northport Natural Corridor area? It's a continuous ecological and cultural greenway. It's extending from Little Salt Spring to Makahhatchee Creek, also known as Big
Slooh. Of course, the corridor supports wildlife movement, protects existing archaeological resources, and preserves one of Northport's most significant natural landscapes. It's certainly a
unique property, and I will explain why further in this presentation. So this area illustrates the area of uh discussion for today's meeting. It's highlighted in red and as you all
know is currently privatelyowned. To the northwest we have the University of Miami's currently owned uh s little Salt Spring parcel. Then we have the middle school directly to the north and
then an area owned by the Sarasota County School Board. Just wanted to point out that that area that you see highlighted to the north west of the red highlighted area is approximately 150
acres combined. Then to the uh south and southeast of that property, we have the Makahhatchic Creek Greenway. Why this corridor matters? It provides habitat for diverse wildlife species
that have been recorded in this area. It provides a natural flood plane function and flowway connectivity. It supports community identity and environmental stewardship.
It prevents fragmentation of sensitive habitat and it it it is identified as a significant wildlife corridor based on documented citizen research. Quick overview of the Spring Haven site.
It's 9.3 acres in size and it's consisting of 30 vacant lots. It's located around the west side of Makahhatchee Creek. It's also adjacent to Butler Park, Morgan Family Community
Center, Heron Creek Middle School, um, and Northport High School. It's surrounded by existing residential neighborhoods to the south and west as well. Here we have a closeup depicting the
parcels. Uh the 30 privatelyowned properties by SKS Investment Properties LLC are highlighted in uh bright pink or purple and uh the city owned properties are
highlighted in light green. This uh aerial intends to illustrate how this site of interest functions as a bottleneck. It's connecting two larger natural areas. I'm sure that most of you
are aware but um I believe that we want to illustrate how significant uh these properties are. Although not that large, their connectivity is really
a key um to bring these two habitats together so to speak. A quick ecological description of this site. Currently, it's a fairly overgrown
scrubby flatwood habitat dominated by pine and scrub species. It's bordered by the Makahhatche Creek to the east. Storm water ponds are directly to the north and west.
The habitat supports foraging for the golfer tortoise and other animals. It's potential habitat for Florida scrub jays and as mentioned earlier it's a significant wildlife corridor I would
say an unique property for Northport. The conservation importance I briefly touched on that but uh the scrubby flatwoods they are increasingly rare within our city. There has been Florida
scrubj presence documented less than a mile away at least in 2000 2004 to and 2006 documented surveys. It's it protects habitat for state and
federally listed and threatened species. And uh additional importance, last but not least, it expands native habitat along the Baka Hatchee Creek, which is one of the remaining uninterrupted
wildlife corridors within our city. for potential future considerations. Uh there are different uses and management considerations, but the key here would pertain to habitat preservation.
Uh perhaps uh some type of hiking opportunities for our residents. It's a beautiful area that certainly has a lot to provide. Um there's opportunities for birding, wildlife viewing
and uh as mentioned earlier the greenway is directly connected by these parcels. So potential future management needs may involve public access planning and coordination with residential areas that
are adjacent to this project. cultural and archaeological significance. Uh we have the little salt springs little salt salt spring site that contains evidence of human activity dating back a long time ago. I even
recognize some experts here in the room uh who may have additional details there. uh middle archaic period. Uh that's there's some significant archaeological artifacts dating from at
least that period as well which is 5500 to 8,000 years ago. Uh, so the Little Salt Spring area is recognized as a nationally significant archaeological sites site, excuse me,
and protecting the corridor preserves um, potentially irreplaceable cultural heritage of this area. Wildlife has been documented in many cases. Um there has been documented sightings
of bobcat, wildtail deer, wild turkey, raccoon, armadillo and various other wildlifees. Uh scrubj was also mentioned earlier, golfer tortoises of course. So many of these species rely on
uninterrupted habitat connectivity. Generally the larger the uh the species the the more territory they need which ideally could be uninterrupted. Um we're all aware that our city is
experiencing habitat fragmentation. We see um unfortunately all the uh roadkills along our roadways. That's simply because our our native species
don't have enough connected habitat and they have to uh go through some of these precarious conditions. So, possible development uh threats to the corridor as I mentioned earlier, habitat
fragmentation, increased potential for future wildlife uh to end vehicle collisions, loss of ecological connectivity, noise and light pollution, inability to place conservation
easements on privatelyowned land without the consent of the owner. Multiple property owners complicate efforts to achieve a unified conservation outcome. So, quick status update. As mentioned
earlier, Sarasota County staff determined that the environmental sensitive lands protection program funds cannot be utilized. And the reason for that is that the property owner requested above appraisal value for
these properties. There's limited or no other public acquisition mechanism um other than a voluntary um voluntary sale or the one that we're
currently discussed. So eminent domain may be the only practical path to ensure future corridor protection. So we have two options for commission's consideration today. Option one would be
to provide direction to city staff to pursue eminent domain. And here are some of the pros that we have for you. This option ensures long-term protection of a critical ecological and cultural
corridor. It eliminates uncertainty created by stalled negotiations and fragmented ownership. Prevents future incompatible development that could sever connectivity.
Provides a clear enforcable path to secure land needed for public benefit. strengthens the city's ability to implement adopted plans and conservation goals. It creates a consistent
management framework across all parcels in this corridor and subject to the availability of funds and project priorities. The acquisition initiative could be funded by the environmental protection
fund. Of course, this option comes with some downsides as well. Pursuing option one may generate public concerns on or opposition from affected property owners.
It will require significant staff time for legal coordination and case preparation. Legal challenges to eminent domain could extend the timeline acquisition or result in a determination that the
project lacks legitimate public use or other outcome preventing acquisition. This option may also set a precedent that could influence expectations for
future land acquisition projects. Option two to consider would be to decline the provides decline to provide staff direction to pursue eminent domain. Pros here. Prevents escalation of
tensions with owners who oppose public acquisition. Reduces short-term workload for staff by not initiating a complex legal process. Also maintains flexibility if city
priorities or commission direction shifts later. The negatives of option two potentially could be continued uncertainty around long-term protection of the corridor. If the commission chooses to initiate
eminent domain in the future, acquisition costs will likely increase. Risk of irreversible impacts if owners author, clear or develop the land.
Also, this option would weaken regional ecological connectivity again if these parcels get altered, cleared or developed. I'll go over the summary of benefits versus drawbacks real quick if I may. Um
again the benefits of the eminent domain direction to staff include ensuring long-term protection of a critical ecological and cultural corridor. Eliminating uncertainty from stalled
negotiations and fragmented ownership. Preventing incompatible development that could sever wildlife connectivity. providing a clear enforcable pathway for acquisition after years of stalled
negotiations, strengthening the city's ability to implement adopted conservation goals. Drawbacks potential for public concern or opposition from affected property owners require significant staff time
for legal coordination and case preparation. Legal challenges could extend the timeline or prevent acquisition may influence expectations for future acquisitions. Staff's recommendation
um the commission is asked to provide direction to staff on whether to pursue eminent domain under option one or decline to provide such direction option two. The Spring Haven corridor remains a
critical ecological and cultural resource which uh requires long-term protection. There's voluntary acquisition efforts that have been um unsuccessful. Unfortunately,
no al alternative public funding or acquisition mechanism is currently available. Eminent domain is the uh remaining mechanism available should the commission directionction directs staff
to pursue it and funding is potentially available in the environmental protection fund if the commission chooses to proceed. With that being said, I wanted to thank you for your time and um I would love to
answer any questions that you may have. Commissioner Stokes, >> want to thank you very much for that very complete presentation. Appreciate it. Um, you know, speaking personally, um, I
consider this an extremely environmentally sensitive area. Um, I was dead set against any roads being built or any development taking place and I still feel that way. But I don't agree with uh the two options that are out there. I think there's a third
option. I'm I'm not comfortable with eminent demand at this point because I just think the idea of taking property is just something that goes against my nature. It just is in my opinion a wrong thing to do, but this area needs to be
protected. And um certainly uh you know I actually read an email that came to all us commissioners from Jono Miller which I thought was spoton >> and um I thought that it might behoove us to think about a resolution that
signals the importance of this connection uh points out how environmentally sensitive it is. Um so the city is on the record. Additionally, I would be curious as to whether or not we could reszone this property in any
way, shape, or form that would prevent development there. But um certainly it can't be developed without commission. I would say at least from this commission standpoint, if my fellow commissioners agree, I would like to make a you go on strong record as saying, you know, this
is not acceptable. I I just I have a real problem taking somebody's land and it's going to blow up into a lawsuit which is going to cost us taxpayers a lot of money and a lot of time and a lot of bad publicity for which I don't think
we need it. I just want to stop any opportunity for anybody to mess with that land. And in time, I believe if the county gets its financial house in order, there may well be funds available down the road to help do something with regard to this property. Plus, if we
send a really strong signal to this property owner that owns these 30 parcels that this city, at least this commission, has no intention of allowing any development there, that may impact his or her, whoever they are's perspective on what they consider to be
the appropriate valuation for this property. >> Thank you, Mayor. >> Commissioner Pro. >> Thank you, Mayor. uh not to repeat what Commissioner Stokes said. I almost agree in its entirety what he said, but my
question well first great presentation and I really appreciate the homework you guys did as far as timeline very informative. My question is you mentioned um that there are
multiple uh owners of those 30 lots or was >> no no sir currently there's one owner of all 30 lots >> but some somewhere in the presentation you verbally said that the the drawbacks
or whatn not that there are multiple owners which I checked there's only one um but uh my question is to what extent an effort we the city staff um
go did that go into acquire at the proper fair market value those those lots to what extent was it negotiations or was it one effort or multiple efforts
and the timing between the efforts if there were multiple efforts >> good morning Elena Ray a director of development services. Um the city has not entered directly into negotiations with this owner because we have not been authorized by commission to do so. So
that is something that we seek, you know, we would have to seek authorization from the commission. Sarasota County has negotiated multiple times with this owner and the amount of um compensation that the owner
demanded was far above appraised values. Um and the was not willing to sell for less than than what they wanted. um this the county could not pay that much because we're bar the government's
barred by law as to how much we can pay for a property. Um I do need to clarify that the city cannot downzone this property. Um so we couldn't zone it to conservation or anything else. We are barred by Florida statute from doing
that. Uh you can upzone without property owner approval. You cannot downzone. Um, additionally, this property is these these lots are pre-platted. Um, the streets are platted as rightway. Uh, even though the streets aren't there,
uh, and the lots are pre-platted. So, if the developer wanted to come in, put the street in, and not Spring Haven, but they can access from the south. If they wanted to build the street, and get building permits, the city would have to allow them to do that. It wouldn't come to the
commission. It is a um the the building permits would be the same as any other person would apply for a building permit on a pre-platted lot. Um so we we are limited in what we can currently do to prevent any development
on that property. We can the city can decide not to build Spring Haven which is obviously the city commission has made that decision. Um but the there is legal access uh rightway access from the south through another neighborhood to these platted lots and the city would
have no choice but to issue those building permits if they were applied for. >> So to answer um or to address what you said, I appreciate that the information you provided. Um would it be possible to and I don't like option one or two
because for the same reasons uh Commissioner Stokes said it it's it's not I don't think we can do this. I mean we can but I don't think it's a viable option at this time to go and forcefully take the land from the legal owner of
those lots. But have you thought about teaming up with the uh Sarasota County and maybe do a joint venture, if you will, and maybe approach u as a team to to have resume to resume
the negotiation and acquiring those critically environmentally sensitive um in my opinion lots. We have met with Sarasota County on these properties. They um at this time
are not interested in continuing negotiations or pursuit because of the um unwillingness the previous unwillingness of the seller in in even speaking with them on it. So, um there are there are a couple of options. I'd
like to um make everybody aware, public included, that when a jurisdiction does uh declare that they are going to condemn a property and pursue imminent domain, the very first step is a negotiation with the property owner. Um
it is uh something where the the jurisdiction goes out gets survey and appraisals for the property, presents that formally to the property owner to attempt to negotiate a a a willing sale.
Um, if those condemnation proceedings have started and the owner doesn't agree to that negotiation uh or and and doesn't there's no way to come to a an agreement, then it proceeds through um
the more formal uh con condensation condemnation and imminent domain process um in which the uh city can pursue forced uh acquisition. But the very first step is always a negotiation um and a willing sale. That
is the first step of any condemnation proceeding. Um if the commission would like for staff to reach out to this property owner to in an attempt to see if we could get a winning a willing sale outside of the imminent domain process,
we could certainly do that. Um, we don't have any surveys or appraisals, current appraisals for the property at this time. So, it is it would be difficult for us to make an offer to the uh seller without those appraisals. We would need to invest something uh in order to get
that and we would need commission authorization to do so. >> Thank you for that information. I wasn't aware that you know this would be a strategic step to kind of corner the the owner into uh you know the the stage of negotiation. Now I guess I have a
question for the legal um can you tell us the process of eminent domain and what this entails? I think uh director Ray essentially laid it out. The first step will be a resolution by the commission to decide that there's a public purpose and a
public necessity involving whatever the taking will have to be. After the resolution is passed, we will enter into what director describing the law calls good faith negotiations with the uh property owner
may and if those negotiations do not result in a um a sale, then if you want to move forward, you do file a lawsuit like against anyone else. the um there's two
processes through which you can achieve title to the condemned author to the condemned land. One's known as a quick take, one's known as a slow take. The quick take process means that if you elect to do it that way, you go before a judge, get an order of taking. Judge
will find that there is a public necessity and on a public purpose and you will get title to it. In which case, you will have to deposit a good faith uh estimate of whatever the judgment amount would be into the registry at that time. If you do a quick take, you cannot
voluntarily dismiss the lawsuit at any time. You have to go all the way through with it. If you the slow take is you don't have that step. You just go right to a trial. It allows you to dismiss at any time. The trial is um amongst a jury
of uh your peers. Unlike most civil and criminal cases, it requires a 12 person jury. And the only other uh type of case that I know of that has out of capital cases where in criminal cases where death penalty is involved. So you have a
12 person jury. You select the jury. You go through a trial judge and the um the jury decides uh essentially what the the value of the judgment will be. If the uh value of the property will be that enters that
verdict is entered into a judgment along the way. you will be required in on top of whatever the judgment amount is to pay the petitioner or the uh property owner's attorney's fees and cost. Um the attorney's fees are in a couple
different routes. The statute says that if there's a difference between your presuit offer and the judgment amount, then the uh attorney's fee award for the first $250,000 difference is 33% of that
amount. Uh then it goes to 25% between 250 and 500. Then it go I'm sorry, between 250 and a million. And then it goes from 20% from um a million up. So, if it's $2 million, you're looking at something like $180,000 in attorney's
fees on top of whatever you pay. And even if the um amount that the that the jury awards the property owner is the same as what we offer at the pre-suit amount, you will
still probably be required to pay attorney's fees under another subsection of the enemy domain statute because what the Florida Constitution requires is full compensation of the um to the
property owner which is essentially defined as whatever it would be if the property own if there was a free entailment of the property exchange and the law doesn't want doesn't presuppose that we can just come in and take it without some that some piece of property
that someone doesn't want to sell. So, what that means is that on top of the attorney's fees that could be awarded under that mathematical formula that I just described, there could be additional fees or fees that would be applied. It's based on basically an hourly rate. Um, you pay all that.
you'll pay your uh your um the petitioner the property owner saying petitioner the property owner as well as our um car cost which will include expert fees which are appraisals and and stuff like that and then you probably end up having a fiveday jerry trial on
the matter. Uh I apologize for the long explanation but yes a bit of an open-ended question. So I hope that uh explains the um the main process to you. Thank you for that. A follow-up question to that. Um, and then I'll have another one for you. Will, you said that there's
a 12 person jury. So, it's not really guaranteed uh outcome of >> there's never any guaranteed outcome whether it was a 12 person jury or it's a bench trial. >> So, yes. And u my question to Elena Ray,
will this will you see this as a viable option to approach the owner and say listen we are considering something as eminent domain. Would you be willing to uh enter a
negotiation and if we do that does does this bound us to actually do the process of eminent domain? So, we would if the commission chose to direct staff to contact the property
owner to see if again we could negotiate something. Um, staff likely would not position that short of a resolution of condemnation from the commission. staff likely would not say the commission
might uh condemn your property. We we likely would say that there was a presentation to the commission regarding this property and discussions were held as to how the city might acquire the property and we were directed to reach out to you to see if we could negotiate
a sale. Um, we would, as I said previously, we would need the um, appraisals and survey for the property in order to um, come to a number that the city would be able to pay. Um, but you'll you'll note in your presentation
there there's a reason why the staff did not make a recommendation for eminent domain. It is the nuclear option and it is the option of last resort for any jurisdiction to acquire property. I I've only seen one eminent domain case go to
trial and it wasn't pretty and it was very extended. In all of the other cases that I've worked on and I've worked on quite a few for um land acquisition for infrastructure projects, it has been uh a voluntary sale. Um but you always have
sometimes you'll have someone who is a hold out. Um and it is a question of uh how far does the commission want to go in order to secure the property if that is something the commission wants to do. We are happy to make every effort to reach out to the property owner to have
an initial discussion and then if um if he seems amenable, we could uh we could come back for authorization to do the the survey and the um and the appraisals and enter
into negotiations, formal negotiations. But um we're happy to have that init we're happy to reach out and have that initial discussion. Um the owner is local. Uh so it it you know would be should be fairly easy to reach them. Um
but we are more than happy to to do that as an initial step. >> Thank you. And I'll conclude with this. You know, in my opinion, everything has a price and uh maybe we should start with a peaceful negotiation or whatever the terminology, legal terminology is.
Um because I'm not in a a very I'm not in approve of these two options, although we do need I think we like to get that land to be protected. Um but also I was I was going to mention this
that there are some foundation that are willing to you know chip in if you will and make u you know and whatever the the format is it is grant or maybe we should approach
and some of those uh foundations and um also I would not discount the county because county has more weight to maybe just even as a partner not if they're not willing to contribute that's okay but as long as they're our partner
because they are you know represent we are part of the county I would strongly recommend the the participation of the county um and involvement of any foundation that are willing to contribute to the to the asking price or
whatever but everything has a price and maybe this is the right time because it's not really we all know what the market is so maybe this is perfect timing. Thank you >> vice mayor.
>> Oh so many thoughts and questions. So um couple of statements first. I also don't like in theory eminent domain. We are a very strong property
rights state and it does fly in the face of that. But it is the job of this board to balance out what is
I can't say legal but but what is a more theoretical concern versus what is in the public good. And in my experience on the board, we've been in that position a number of times. The
most recent time has been the reasonzoning of this city. We reszoned current property owners property in ways that they weren't thrilled about. But at least in my mind, the balance of
the current and future public good of this city warranted that. And I look at this as a very similar situation. I mean, everyone knows I'm I'm not a bleeding environmentalist. I think that would I'm looking at my
friends. I think most I see some some heads nodding. But in this particular instance, this property is so integral to Little Salt Springs and the Mayaka
Hatchee Creek. I am willing to go on a limb and I would not take eminent do domain out of the question um because of that and again I think the public good the environmental importance of this property warrants that we
seriously consider it. Um having said that I I do have some questions and and Miss Ray I know you you address some of these. Um, so right now we really don't have Well, let me back up. It's my
understanding that eminent domain at a minimum we're required to pay fair market value for the property. Am I correct on that? So, not assessed value, but at sort of a starting point, fair market value. Correct.
Chapter 73 of the Florida statutes does require that the first step is that we obtain appraisals and present those appraisals to the to the owner and >> and we've not done that yet. >> We have not that >> we really don't know. >> Correct. Um of this we likely because of
the size of the property we likely would spend 50,000 or more in getting the documentation needed to make an offer to the owner. We do have a real estate specialist on staff, do we not? >> We have a real estate coordinator um who
would help us arrange uh that process, but as far as the the surveying and the appraisals, those would be outside certified professionals. So today, we really don't know if we have enough
money in the environmental fund without jeopardizing our tree planting programs and all of that. We really don't know that we have sufficient funds or revenue dollars in that fund to be able to
purchase this property. based on recent sales. Just looking at recent sales of similar lots in the area and aggregating that um those sales, we do believe there is more than sufficient money in the uh
fund to do that. Um including attorney's fees and um surveying and everything. Uh but until appraisals are done and a negotiation is held, there's simply no way to predict what the amount would end
up being. Um I also heard that by state statute um the city cannot pay more than market or could you explain
that? Are we allowed to pay a certain percentage above market? >> As far as as what statutes allow, I'll defer to the city attorneys. The the city policy that the commission has adopted states that the city will not
pay above appraised value. Uh I'm not certain. Uh and >> because we have done that. I mean, we've had parcels come before us and we have paid we voted to pay a premium for them. that I would defer as far as what the uh
state statutes may allow. Um but the simply the city policy and of course the commission makes that policy. Uh city policy is that the um city does not pay more than a price value >> unless the commission
>> it is your it is your policy. Yes, ma'am. >> Okay. Okay. Um, so to date, no one in the city has had a conversation with this property owner around the acquisition the county has
over the years. Correct. >> Not recently. I I don't know what my predecessors may have done or what our predecessors may have done as far as city communications, but um my myself and my current staff have not had those
conversations. We do have some institutional knowledge here. Our deputy city manager might recall any early conversations with this property owner. I don't want to put you on the spot, Julie, but
okay. So, let's just say we haven't had any conversations with the property owner. Um the quick take and the slow take. City attorney is is there any difference
in legal outcome of those? I mean would you have any recommendation on which approach? >> It not really. It just matters. You take a you generally do a quick date when you want to get started on a project.
>> So then you can get title immediately and then you don't have to worry about going through a full um trial and getting on trial docket etc etc. >> You keep a slow you do a slow take if you don't really care about those things and if at any time you want to dismiss the
>> Okay, thank you. Um, I think I got most of We've had some really good questions up here and I think I have most of my questions answered. Um, I'll I'll just make a couple of other statements. Um,
I've gone on record and I still do not support the use of tax revenues to acquire environmentally sensitive land. So really the only reason I'm on board with this is that the funding would come
out of the environmental fund and I think that that's appropriate. I I think it would be really wise um and I think Commissioner Pro mentioned this. Um
I would still approach the county. I I think the more bullets in the gun we can have when we approach this property owner um we have some strong environmental advocates here in the city. We have
strong environmental support from the Gulf Coast um foundation. I think we muster a consortium of people who can approach this property owner. Um, I I do like
a soft approach to begin with since we've not had a a current conversation with this property owner. I think for me that is a logical first step. Um, but I have no problem with this property owner
knowing we are actively considering um a a take of of the property um that we're open. We haven't decided, but we're open to considering that course. Not that we want to do it. We really
don't want to do it. So, um I I guess I'm settling on I'm very supportive of property for environmental use. I think it would be just incredibly damaging to
not do that. Um, I'm open to whatever means we have at our disposal to do that, but I think having a friendly conversation with this business, with
this property owner, with some compatriots um, arm-in-arm with some other influential folks would be my recommendation for a first approach. um and perhaps
table the eminent domain for the immediate future. Again, I wouldn't rule it out, but maybe not go that far in our first step. I'd be interested in in what my colleagues have to say. >> Commissioner Dval.
>> Thank you, Mayor. Uh we started with Commissioner Stokes and he mentioned John O Miller. John O Miller is known for his environmental views around here. In reading some of his one of his emails
uh he mentioned 43 years and one of his statements is eminent domain last resort. The short story for me on this is I'm looking at both options and saying no.
No domain now. No, just giving up on this idea. I heard in the presentation a number of times the word fragmentation, you know, and I did look up and see who
owned these lots, you know, and they all 30 are owned by one entity. But if you look at the map, we have an added problem. This is definitely an environmentally
valuable area. You're looking at my m the greenway, the big slooh, this section of land, University of Miami's land on Little Salt Springs. But in between those with the word
fragmentation comes to me that there's a piece of property there called that belongs to Sarasota County School Board. Have we done any investigation or do we have any guarantees that after we went through this that Sarasota County School
Board wouldn't decide to cut down all the trees on their property and build a a soccer field or you know any kind of a school you know to keep this pro all these properties from being fragmented.
I believe we have to work on that question also. Um I've heard the words ne you know the first one was you know eminent domain the second one was ne negotiation and the third one that our
vice mayor was mentioning is you know conversation. I believe we should be starting these conversations with the property owner um including Sarasota County School Board, you know, some conversations
there to see if you know we can get some guarantees that they don't just cut things apart for us in the future. Uh that's why I believe that eminent domain at this point in time is the wrong way to go. And I also
strongly believe in property rights. You know, I can just imagine how I would feel if the city came along and said, you know, we're taking your spare lot. I wouldn't be happy about that. Um,
one thing you know we me uh that's been mentioned is uh that the original asking price wherever whenever that was was way above you know do we have any current idea of what that
price is? Right now, the appraised value of individual lots in that area are about 225. But you take one lot that's worth 225, you put a second lot next to it at 225. Now
they're both worth $30,000. >> And I have one of my neighbors bought two lots, paid $30,000 for each of them. So getting that I believe getting that conversation going about you know what
is fair what we can do comes first and in the meantime I have my wild ideas like just to make sure that nothing happens in the meantime is there possibility we could lease this land from the owner for a number of period of
years until we could get things situated and as they said that's just a wild idea Mike. Um, but I as I started, I do not support either of these options,
but I would like to see us, you know, I definitely want to see this protected. And for us to start the conversation, I think, is the thing to do. That's all I've got. >> Thank you, Commissioner Pro. Thank you,
mayor. Um, question about the the pricing that whatever that was above, how much do we know how much they came back and to the county and >> Yeah. Yes, sir. The county advised us
that um and this was sometime in the air around 2020. Um, the property owner wanted $200,000 per lot. >> Oh, wow. And just to put things into perspective,
if I may, the city acquired those five properties within that same area combined for 55,000. All five properties. Now, they vary in size. Some of these parcels may be larger, but this
is just this information came up from conversation between city staff and county staff. >> Um, and also I have a question about well appraised value, you know, looking at the
current um layout, there are no roads. So I do believe that the appraised value would reflect that you know to develop that property it would cost much more and that should be taken into consideration
and not noted to the owner. But um I think we should do a third option and um and I guess we all kind of coming to this conclusion. I did see Sarasota County School Board as a and I noted
that but I didn't think about them being you know whatever they're gonna do. So that brings me to this, you know, emphasis again that we should do this as a joint v uh effort. Um county Sarasota County School Board and the
city um and you know everything has a price and maybe we can involve more people invol involve more foundation and utilize our environmental fund. I forget the exact name
environmental font which is formerly known as a tree font and we do have um means to pay for that. It depends how much we're willing to pay. Uh but we should start the process right away in
my opinion and the sooner the better. um because the longer we wait some factors might come into play which I'm not going to say publicly but u you know and could adversely affect us as a
city to acquire that land because we don't want to have any you know wild wildlife to be diminished in that area and I see a big need for that and I think we should act now
question is what how and I I'm done. Thank you, >> Commissioner Stokes. >> Yeah. Um I believe, correct me if I'm wrong, to begin discussions with this party, whether they're gentle, warm, fuzzy over a cup of coffee and a meal or whether it's with a lawyer sitting at a
table, we would have to go out and commission a appraisal of this property, which will cost us in the area of 50,000. add on all the other stuff, we're looking at $50 to $100,000 of expense incur before we could even sit
down with these people. Um, if we were to wait until the property owner made any overtures towards the city to try to develop those 30 lots, could we at that point in time then
commence an action for imminent domain? So, if the property owner walked into the building division today or went online to a sella and submitted a building permit, we would have to issue it within a certain number of days. And
typically those permits are issued in 5 days or less. Um, so we would and any application submitted prior to an action by the city would require us to issue the permit.
>> Okay. So, that's not an option. Um, we did reszone this city. We did a major uldc rewrite. Why can't we simply find some legal way to make it virtually
impossible for this property owner to develop this land? >> So, under the Bert Harris Jr. act um which is the private property rights act of Florida statutes. The city can any juris local jurisdiction can upzone a
property to add more uses to um change it to a more intensive use. Um that is not considered a taking. Um that is actually considered um availing a property owner of more
property rights than what they have previously. But when you take away all possible uses of the property for um the benefit of the owner, that becomes a Bert Harris Act and then we are back
into just compensation plus attorney's fees and everything else for the property, >> which is what we would have to pay anyway if we moved forward via eminent demand. >> Yes. However, under the Bert Harris Act,
the property owner can sue us and our damages the damages that we pay could be substantially higher. and they I'll let the attorney speak to the legal ramifications of that, but >> I guess my struggle with this is, you
know, one, I know conversations went on with the county, $200,000 a parcel versus what's probably >> in reality, I mean, 10% of that number is probably more realistic when it comes to it,
>> correct? to expend $50 to $100,000 of taxpayer dollars to go out and secure appraisals to sit down and talk with somebody who clearly has no interest whatsoever in in in
negotiating in good faith I think is a waste of taxpayer dollars and I couldn't support it. I also at this point don't support eminent domain, but um you know I uh
I really got a hard time authorizing any action other than this city commission issuing a resolution that clearly goes on record pointing out how environmentally sensitive this corer is
and um then perhaps pursuing as as uh one of my fellow commissioners said, talking to some of the the the organizations out there that that that advocate for environmental properties, environmentally sensitive properties.
And perhaps there are some third parties out there that may see this as important as we do and may have the resources to come in and add a whole new variable. I think talking with the county at this point I've matured. So, I will say not
useless, but I think that that they have other priorities. I I believe that they've taken their negotiations as far as they can. I I don't think it'd be a prudent use of our time and efforts to do, but there are organizations out
there. I mean, PE if if we go on record with a resolution and then we publicly advocate for interest on the part of parties who might want to come in and take a look at this and see if they they might not want
to pay over market to some degree. I mean, it's an awful lot of pressure that can come to bear on this property owner before we reach a point where we want to pursue eminent domain. I'm just hung up on that. It is a horrible precedent to set. As you said, it's it's almost never
used. And, you know, so I I I would avail ourselves to every other possible option here. But I I do think trying to negotiate with this man at this time is is not going to prove fruitful. It's going to cost us a lot of taxpayer
dollars at a time when everybody's saying watch how much money you're spending of our tax dollars. I I just there's no way I can support this. So thank you, mayor. That's all I got to say. >> City clerk public comment. >> We do have a few. I will start with e
comments. Sally Ree, please leave this wildlife corridor alone. Way too much of Northport's natural habitat has already been destroyed. It is ruining the quality of life in Northport and is contributing to disastrous climate change.
Next one is from Maria Leslie. Eminent domain is best most ecologically conscious decision in this case. The presentation for this agenda item is short, sweet, and detailed. The rampant overdevelopment in Northport has very negatively affected our sensitive wildlife populations.
With these parcels being of so much importance to the floor and fauna of this area and the availability of funding, please pursue this option. Ecological impact is far more important than the opinions of the land owners who will be fairly compensated for their parcels. Next one is from William Kurs.
It is imperative that wildlife be allowed access that's unfettered between Makahahache Creek and Little Salt Springs. This inability to easily access the springs will have a huge impact on Florida native species, especially endangered ones. Keep the last corridors
open to our even more diminished native animals. The city should look into even more green belts and raised greenways between major vehicle arteries for animal migration. River Road is a death trap for native animals and as our population increases and roads widen and cars run at all hours, it will become
more hazardous for both people and wildlife. Don't pave paradise coexist with it. General development had huge parks in every neighborhood, sometimes three or four platted multi-acre parks. The areas have been all turned into residential lots. How is it that general
development was far more forwardinking in the 50s and 60s than we are now? As we shoehorn and hamstring houses into an ever growing urban island heat domes, plants and animals are imperative for our future. Are we not Tree City, USA?
Next one is from David Ionati. Hello, I am writing to support the connection between Little Salt Springs and the Makachi Creek Greenway. I think it'd be most effective to first amend the ULDC to prohibit any extension to Spring Haven Drive. Thank you.
Next one is from Gino Enoch. I support creating a wildlife corridor instead of extending Spring Haven Drive. All right, and last one. Jill Luke, this natural corridor is vital, vitally important to the survival of our natural environment into the future. I supported
this project before going into office and of course while in office. I knew all the details to this project then, but after being out of office, I don't know what has occurred after the seller wanted too much money for the property. I do know that the city currently has enough money to purchase the property
with the tree fund money. I stated this fact to staff not too long ago. The use of those funds needs to be made possible. What I don't know is what has been in the works since I left office and when it was last done. I'm aware of Juno
Jonno Miller's email to you and he has some very wise and detailed facts in this email. Depending on what has been occurring with this project, you might be at the last step of eminent domain. I don't know if the other steps have been done and there is no other resolve in sight then in my opinion it has to be
done. It is time to be able to close this project and get that area protected. We have the resources currently to create the corridor that was envisioned in past by the staff, friends of Little Salt Springs and the Shark Brothers and other environmental advocates. You as a commission have the
ability to be the ones to put the final stamp on the process. Thank you for seeing the future with preservation. Now for in-person comments. Robin Samente. Thank you for all your comments. I know everybody is concerned about this area.
Um this is a critical area of concern and it can be uh designated as such uh through resolution. Um, we definitely need to start the ball rolling because we can't keep kicking it down the road.
It's been way too long. It's getting very dangerous. Uh, he could come in, like they said, to the building department tomorrow and then what? We've waited too long already. We need to act now. So, we need to provide staff with
the direction to begin the negotiations. Although I know I know the owners and they're almost like Nona Springs. They're not going to budge. They want what they want. So now what do we do? If it's designated as a critical area of
concern, we can take the next step and go through a slow take. I mean a quick take is normally for like FDOT and stuff like that to do it quickly. But the money is there in the environmental fund. We can't keep waiting. We have to
act now. It's too dangerous to let it keep going. Like I said, we need to act now. So, let's give the direction to staff to proceed with maybe designated as a critical area of concern through a resolution, get it in that way, and then start the ball rolling with
negotiations. The county has done all they can do. The guy's not budging. They want what they want. So, here we are in the dilemma. So it's up to you to act now in the environmental stewardship that is
needed on this particular area. It is a critical area of concern. So please give the staff direction in order to proceed and if nothing else is uh going to happen then eminent domain. This is
definitely where eminent domain needs to be done if all else fails. Thank you. Steve Ksky. >> Good afternoon, commissioners, city manager, attorney, clerk, assistant
clerk. Um, it's difficult for me to explain the multiplicity of significance of Little Salt Spring and this Greenway quarter and my makahhatchee greenway quarter in three minutes. if I have that. Um, it's
a complex multiaceted situation and uh and I also read Jonah Miller uh comments who were very uh concise and acute. I'd like to thank Northport staff for putting together such a well done
presentation on this. It was exceptional and I understand the concerns about eminent domain and I don't have any answers regarding that. However, um you know, in my 35 years of uh involvement
at Little Salt Spring with the University of Miami and well, Mineral Springs with Florida State University, I can certainly attest to the significance of this site and the corridor and the fragmentation, the word of the day of of this oasis
uh surrounding Little Salt Spring and the burgeoning city of Northport as a holysine a pleaene holysine continuum of over 18,000 years since the sinkhole was
formed and its ecosystem uh which has basically been uh this continuum of plants and animals that have been arrived. So it's really great but this is way beyond that uh in my opinion. Um the the uh there are
three major components of this. the environmental and public uh benefit of ces creating a natural passive component which protects the land of buttering a budding Butler Park which if you look at the map uh while Butler Park is great it has no
uh environmental access expanding the Makahhatchee greenway corridor which aligns with Northport's comprehensive plan and Makahhatchee Creek Greenway master plan and creating a extended linear greenway corridor along Spring Haven Boulevard
to Pan-American as a passive and both as a passive uh resource for the citizens of Northport. No lights, uh trails, uh educational experiences. So, this is really a trifecta of significance for the city of Northport and the pe people
of Northport to extension of Butler Park, a greenway passive corridor. Uh this will allow generations who appreciate the beauty of the area uh to enjoy this extension in this uh area and
uh if lost there's no going back. There's no going back. We can't put Humpty Dumpty together once it's fallen off the wall. Um so this is part of your legacy now uh the Northport Commission's legacy to uh move this forward. Thank
you. talking English. Good day. Hope you're having a blessed one. Um, I'm going to be simplified. Emment domain is a nuclear option. I believe that you should consider
tableabling it until such times you do enter into some form of mediation or negotiation with the property owner so it's still available to you. You have heard how critical and important this
piece of property is to the Makache Creek Greenway master plan. The only other thing I want to put forth is you keep hearing the word fragmentation of the environment. Well, that
fragmentation of the environment is putting the wildlife and directing to kill zones is what you're developing. Consider that. But mediation, negotiation
is an option. but table the eminent domain. So, it's still in the toolbox. Thank you. >> That is all, Mr. Mayor. >> Thank you. I'm looking for >> Looking for a motion. >> I'll go. >> Go ahead.
>> Um I actually have three. So, first I move to direct city manager to pursue negotiations for the acquisition of 30 privately owned parcels located within the natural
corridor between Little Salt Spring and Makahhatchee Creek subject to applicable legal requirements and the availability of funding. >> Have a motion on the floor made by vice mayor. City clerk, can you read it back,
please? I might have to request if you could read that back again, please. >> Sure. Thank you. >> I move to direct the city manager to pursue negotiations for the acquisition of 30 privatelyowned parcels located within the natural
corridor between Little Salt Spring and Makahahache Creek subject to applicable legal requirements and the availability of funding. >> I have the motion. Do I have a second? >> I'll second.
Have a second by Commissioner Dval. Um if nothing to that, please vote. And that passes 4 to one with Commissioner Stokes descending. Commissioner Stokes >> not willing to spend taxpayer dollars on this.
>> Go ahead. Motion number two. Um, I move to instruct city manager through staff to approach the county school board regarding their options and or plans for
their property in this area. >> Have a motion on the floor made by vice mayor, city clerk. Did you get that one? >> I did get that one. uh to approach the county school board regarding their options andor plans for their property in this area.
>> And that was seconded by Commissioner Dval. Nothing to that. Please vote. >> That passes five to zero. >> Okay. And lastly to instruct to instruct city manager to work with staff to build a coalition of
interested parties who are who commit to actively supporting the conservation of this property. A motion made by vice mayor, city clerk >> to direct senior manager to work with
staff to build a coalition of interested parties who commit to actively supporting the conservation of this property. >> I second that. >> And I have a second from Commissioner Stokes. Nothing to that. Please vote. That passes five to zero.
>> I have a motion also, Mayor. I'd like to >> go right ahead. Um, as I was listening to everybody speak, there was one thing that I hadn't thought of. Um, and so I'd like to make a motion that we instruct staff or city manager to reach out to
state and federal uh, parties to see whether or not this property might be designated something that would prohibit. While we can't reszone it, perhaps the state or the federal government might see this as an
invaluable piece of property that has such environmental significance that they may be able to change the law or override whatever, you know, local laws prohibit us from reszoning it. It's almost in keeping
with your third >> motion, but it's more specific because your motion was very regional in nature. This is Let's see what the state and and federal representatives have to say about this property. So, I have a motion
on the floor made by Commissioner Stokes, city clerk. >> Uh, kind of word smith that a little bit. So, let me know if this is okay to direct the city manager to reach out to state and federal parties to see whether or not this property may be designated in a way that would deem it
environmentally significant. >> That works for me. >> Have the motion. Do I have a second? >> Second. >> Have a second by vice mayor. Nothing to that. Please vote. And that passes five to zero. Any other
motions? City manager, are you good? >> Yes, sir. >> With direction and where we're going and where we're not going. >> Yes, sir. >> All right. Moving on. Final public comment.
>> Uh Well, good afternoon, commission. Um, the the people of Northport. Uh we have we have a lot of responsibility pe uh I know the commission's been
working to try and get some industrial into into our area so the tax burden isn't on us so much. uh the the presentation for this storage unit
and Commissioner Petro says it's going to create two jobs. Thi this is not the kind of industrials uh or people that companies that are coming into our to our city that are going to make any kind of
uh are going to benefit us at all. We have so many storage units. I just took my stuff out of a storage unit along 41. 90% of that storage unit is empty. Where you people are saying there's so
many people moving here. What I'm seeing is for sale signs, foreclosures are starting. People can't pay rent. Those apartments down by Walmart aren't even full. Um and and I have a couple questions about this um storage unit. I
don't know if you've done a traffic study on how to get out of Lowe's, but it's awful. There's only one way to turn left on 41, and that's at that light. The other ways you can only go right. So, you'd have to
go and make a UI. On a Saturday afternoon, if you pull out of Lowe's, that parking lot and and that strip to turn left, you're on the other side of the street because there's nowhere else to put your car to get in the left lane.
So, something has to be done just about that little annex right there just to get on 41. Um, another thing, uh, Wellland Park has been has kind of, um, taken over and the rest of us in the
city of Northport have taken a back seat to that whole development with the Benderson Building um, company that's going to come in there and build this small UTC mall um, on the corner of 41 and and uh, and River Road.
Why? Why can't that builder seem to come and fix that eyes sore on the corner of 41 and Sumpter? That's what I'd like to know. That's been there. I've lived here for uh 14 years and that building's been empty and sitting like that for that
long. And that's a disgrace to this city. You know, I just I don't know. I'm tired of looking at it. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> That is all, Mr. Mayor. Thank you. Commissioner Communications, Commissioner Petro,
>> I have none. >> Vice Mayor, >> I have none. >> I have none. Commissioner Stokes, >> Commissioner Dval, >> not at this time. >> City Manager, >> nothing, Mr. Mayor. Thank you. >> City attorney,
>> nothing. >> City clerk, >> nothing. Mayor, thank you. >> Thank you. 12:43, I join this join this meeting. your left where economic development just moved into and you'll see a friendly face from Fire Rescue ready to help you out. >> That's great. Continuing to provide that
exceptional customer service. So, I really appreciate all the information, Chief. Thanks for joining us today. >> Thanks for having me.