faster for your evacuation plans. Uh you --------- should have multiple routes to get to the location you're planning to go to. Just because traffic-wise, traffic on 75 might be gridlocked. There could be some very good back roads to get to where you're going. Uh that could get you
there more quickly without being stuck in traffic. When you're making an evacuation plan, we usually tell you four different things. You should stay home if you are not in a zone that's being evacuated and if your home is built to withstand the forecasted storm.
If you can't stay home uh and you evacuate, your next option should be to go to a friend or family's home that is outside of the evacuation area and is structurally sound to withstand the storm. Third option would be go to a hotel. They're much more comfortable than our evacuation centers. Fourth
option would be to go to one of our evacuation centers. Sarasota County has 12 evacuation centers. Those can be found on their [Music] website. I'm Stacy Losio. I'm the emergency manager for the city of
Northport and I'm going to discuss first responders after the storm. So, it may take a while for first responders to get to after the storm and that's due to a variety of reasons. One being we pull first responders off the roads when tropical storm force winds are sustained for their safety. That is a standard
usually across the state and other states that have hurricanes as well. So, we will have a backlog of calls that have come in during the storm that we will prioritize based on urgency and they'll be responding to those as well as the calls that are currently coming in if they're urgent as well. Also, the
roads might be flooded. There might be debris in the roads. Our tactical first in teams will be going out right away to clear the roads of any hazards so that our vehicles can get through and respond as quickly as possible. Just keep that in mind when you call after a disaster
for assistance. We are coming You are very important to us. We care about our residents and their safety, but it may just take a while for us to get to you depending on the conditions of the [Music] roads. Hello everyone, my name is Mario Van Diddi. I am the planner scheduler
for the city of Northport solid waste. I got into this position um first I was a recycle driver for 5 years for the city of Northport and then I became the planner scheduler after taking an interest in educating the residents on how to recycle properly. In my position,
my day-to-day usually I start out by visiting the new residents that schedule garbage and recycle containers to be delivered and I will go see them and educate them on our solid waste guidelines. More or less, I'm more focused on the recycle part of it. After
that, I will drive around the city and I actually inspect recycle containers manually for contamination. And then I will take calls from drivers if there's any issues with uh repeat garbage in the recycle and I will go educate those people as
well. What I love most about the city of Northport is their residents are from all over the world and I get to learn about the solid waste guidelines where they come from as well as educate them on the city of Northport's solid waste
guidelines and how to recycle properly. [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music]
I decided to become a firefighter. I used to work in uh hospitality and group sales and I had always had friends that were firefighters and I decided one day that I wanted to change my job and serve people. So, I went ahead and went through a EMT
and paramedic program. Good afternoon, everybody. Today's Tuesday, May 27th, 2025. It's 4 pm. We're in city chambers and I call the solid waste district meeting to order. Commissioners present. Commissioner Dval, Commissioner Langden,
Mayor Stokes, Vice Mayor Emerich, and Commissioner Petro. There is a quorum present for the meeting. Also present, city manager Fletcher, interimm city attorney Goolan. Isn't that what I said? Excuse me. This is the road and drainage district
govern. It's the solid. Yeah. road and drainage district uh meeting. Uh we have city attorney, interimm city attorney Goolan, assistant city clerk pal, board specialist Lane, I believe Captain Harvey back there, and Chief Titus. Uh
we're going to get to uh to let's see, how about Julie? You want to do the honors for us? I alian to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God,
indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. All righty. Looking for a motion to approve the agenda. So move. Second. A motion by Vice Mayor, seconded by Commissioner Langden to approve the
agenda. If there's nothing to it, let us vote. That passes five to zero. Uh turn, let's see. Assistant city clerk, do we have any public comments? No, sir. Moving on to consent agenda. Uh
city manager, any items been pulled? No, Mr. Mayor. All righty. Um any public comment? No, sir. Go for a motion. I'll make it. I move to approve the items in the consent agenda
as presented. A motion by Commissioner Langden, seconded by the vice mayor to approve the consent agenda. Let's vote. And that passes five to zero. On to public hearings. Resolution uh
2025-R34. Uh assistant city clerk, can you read by title only, please? A resolution of the city commission of the city of Northport, Florida as the governing body of the road and drainage district authorizing the purchase of real property located on town terrace and described as law 18 block 300 fifth
edition to Port Charlotte subdivision Sarasota County property appraisal parcel identification number 098930018 incorporating recital providing for filing of documents providing for conflicts providing for severability and providing an effective date. Thank you, sir. City manager, your
item. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. The Department of Public Works is seeking to secure land located on Town Terrace in the Macahi waterway that will provide access for the reconstruction of water control structure number 121. An appraisal of the property on January 15,
2025 has been done and the parcel is valued at $25,000. Noting the land value ranges from $16,200 to $29,000. We ask that you approve resolution number 2025-R34 as presented today. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
Commissioners, anything to this item? Commissioner Langden. Uh, thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um, this this parcel is adjacent to a parcel that the city already owns. Um,
and my question is, why do we need to double the footprint of that parcel in order to repair and maintain that water structure? Chuck Speak, public works director. So, if if you look at the aerial of that the
structure, we have the water control structure that's currently in place and then we have the bridge to the school which is directly next to that. So that sidewalk, all of that takes up some of that space. Uh when we rebuild these structures, we typically rebuild a
structure upstream. So we can still maintain control of the water during construction. Uh if we were to take that thing all the way down to have to rebuild in the same footprint, we would lose the control of that water at that location. Okay, I get that. Would we
have an opportunity to sell the parcel that we currently own once if we requ acquire a new one? That that's a possibility. I would recommend against it because in the future I don't want to have to buy that parcel back when we go to replace that
one in another 60 years. So, I'll still have to have access. I don't think you and I need to worry about that, sir. I won't be buying it back, but I don't want I don't want someone in my space to have to try to figure that problem out. Okay. Thank you. That's all I Yes, ma'am. Anybody else on this this item?
Any public comment? No, sir. Close this public hearing. Request a motion. Move to adopt resolution number 2025-R34 is presented. Got a motion by vice mayor,
seconded by commissioner to adopt resolution 2025-R34 is presented. Let us vote. And that passes 5 to zero. Moving on. Public comment. Any general public comment? No sir. And then at this point
it is 4:06 and I will adjourn this road and drainage meeting fire academy and then I saw Northport were hiring and I really liked what they had on their between their ISO
rating and their beliefs and values and everything. So I applied, they gave me an opportunity. Every day is different, but for the most part, we start off the same. We'll uh get our gear onto the apparatus and um make sure everything's
operational like our air pack. Then we also check the inventory uh make sure we have all our medical equipment um everything's operational. Um that way we can respond to any emergency so we're always stocked and ready to go. I think the best part is that everyone's
passionate about their job. So they come to work and they're ready to train and uh take care of each other and and teach each other. So everyone's sharp and on their agame. So it makes the job fun and I just look forward to coming to work.
[Music] Yeah. I'm Stacy Loio. I'm the emergency management coordinator for the city of Northport and I'm going to tell you the difference between flood zones and evacuation zones or in Sarasota County
we call them evacuation levels. So flood zones were generated by FEMA and they're used to determine the likelihood that you will flood and they're used to determine if you need flood insurance if you have a mortgage on your home. Now, the evacuation zones are based on storm
surge data that comes from the National Hurricane Center and they use topography as well as hurricane vulnerability for storm surge for the area and we use those to determine who needs to evacuate during a storm. So, it's important to understand that there is a difference. If you're interested in finding out what
evacuation zone you are in, which we highly recommend you do, uh you can use your search engine of choice and type in Sarasota County Know Your Level and that'll take you to the Sarasota County government website. Part: 2
Hello everyone. My name is Devon Pulis. I'm the aquatics manager within our parks and recreation department. We're here today at the Northport Aquatic Center just to talk to everyone about our Float for Life program. We recognize that nationally unintentional drowning is the leading cause of death for children that are under the age of four.
So we have an awesome program here called Float for Life. Float for Life is a program that we teach that starts with the fundamentals of floating before we actually learn swimming. This program is targeted for those children that ages six months to four. And what we want them to do is we want them to get
comfortable in the water and if they accidentally fall in the water or find themselves in a trouble situation, they can roll over their back and float. When we launched this program, uh we were the only one in the state that was actually teaching this milestone program. So do want to give a shout out to our
Northport Rotary as well who sponsored this program here at the aquatic center and actually paid for a trainer to come in all the way from Nebraska where this program originates there. We practice and we go through what's called milestones here. So, as soon as the kids progress through the milestones, we can
continue moving on through them. And at the end of it, it's a pretty awesome program when they graduate. It's one of the final things that they do is they jump in fully clothed and they have to turn over, roll over on their back, and actually be able to scream for help at that point in time. It's just an awesome
segment program that leads right into our learn to swim program. So that way we can make sure we're keeping our kids safe in, on, and around the water. They're trying to get [Music]
Oh my gosh, this is going to be great. [Music] [Music] So, I always get very excited when anybody asks me about my job and where I work and what I do. It's not a secret that I love working for the city of
Northport. I worked for Charlotte County and I felt that I needed to do something different and I wanted something more and I wanted to offer my skills. So I I told my friend I'm I'm don't know what to do and I was thinking about my next steps and she said, "Maria, did you think about applying to a job at the
city of Northport? They have a different vibe here." And she says, "I'd love it." And I said, "Oh, I didn't think about that." So I applied and I started my first position in planning and zoning in our development services department. I'm partnered with the building department
because my my the fees are assessed off of the building permits and it's strictly for new construction, new development. And uh the first thing I do is to check the spreadsheet to look at the permits and determine which ones
need me to estimate their impact fees. And that's where I start with that. Then I go to numbers that I have to put together and I put together the invoices for our developers. Often times I'll get phone calls to give quotes before their
um the development comes through and so developers want to know how much they can budget for. So sometimes I put through proposed estimates to help them with that. And the bulk of it is is making sure that the fees are in the
system as fast as possible. I love the aspree decor that I experience. Just how everybody team worked together. I uh enjoy knowing that I'm can make a difference for the city and that my position can have a positive impact in
for our city. [Music] Oh, you're swimming in the pool. Okay. [Music] [Music] I'm Stacy Losio. I'm the emergency management coordinator for the city of
Northport. And we're going to Good evening everybody. Today is Tuesday, May 27th, 2025, 6:00 p. p.m. We're in city chambers and I call the city commission regular meeting to order. Commissioners present. Commissioners
Duval, Commissioner Langden, Mayor Stokes, Vice Mayor Emerich, Commissioner Pro. There's a quorum present for the meeting. Also present, City Manager Fletcher, interimm city attorney Goolan, Assistant City Clerk Pal, Board Specialist Lane. Believe we have Chief
Garrison, and Chief Titus in the house. Uh I'd also like to acknowledge uh some dignitaries here, previous county commissioners Charles Hines and John Baxton and retired fire chief Taff.
Welcome. With that, uh let's see who's going to do the pledge. Mr. Hines, would you do the honors? Thank you, sir. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the
republic for it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Thanks. Alrighty. I'm looking for a motion to approve the agenda. So move second. Got a motion by the vice mayor,
seconded by Commissioner Langden to approve the agenda. Let's vote. And that passes five to zero. Uh, assistant city clerk, public comments. Okay. Uh, we do have some in-person and
e- comments. Start with the e- comments. Uh, John Parker, why were the referendums defeated by voters? The solid waste transfer station would have saved money and helped the environment. Being able to borrow money for emergencies makes sense and our policies and our police and utilities also need
sufficient resources in order to serve the needs of our community. But the rejection of the referendum items by voters is not evidence that we have a funding problem in Northport. It means that we have a relationship problem between the voters and city government. Northport simply does not have a united vision about the future of our
community. This is the perfect time for city commissioners to survey voters about what we the people envision for the future of Northport instead of just rushing to seek alternative funding options for the referendums. Why not take time to find out why voters rejected them? Perhaps Northport voters
are an untapped source of subject matter experts that the city officials can utilize to help find the best solutions to the challenges we face. Many voters are concerned about out of control over development, which is like a runaway train. Do we really want Northport to become completely built out and more
than double our current population? Impact fees for new housing and increased revenues generated from commercial development are not providing enough money to pay for more police, utilities, trash, and more city employees. Unchecked development is turning our Northport green spaces into killing fields for gopher, tortoises,
birds, rabbits, bobcats, and trees. At the same time, city officials are trying to take care of needs in so many areas of our city, and yet there isn't enough money. The defeat of the referendum def de demonstrates that we need a course correction. And therefore, I strongly urge our city commissioners to find ways
to bridge the gap between voters and city officials and help us come together to formulate a new vision for Northport, which will enable us to move forward together in a positive direction. Ron Orlowski, what genius came up with idea to place direction arrows at several intersections on US 41
in Northport? Seriously, if we're in that lane heading in that direction already, why waste money on something so useless? Not only that, the arrows are so wide you can't straddle your car tires to avoid having to run over those reflectors that have proven to damage your tires over time. And not to mention
the annoying noise it makes. At this point, an easy suggestion costwise would be to just scrape off all those reflectors and leave the stupid arrows. I put this on Next Door website and had over 5,000 hits and that 95% of the comments made agree with me. Run your
own survey and you will see what I'm talking about. with money needed for so many other things here in Northport. This was a pure waste off it. And please don't tell me that it was DOT that did it because someone from the city surely knew about it. That is, if I'm not
mistaken, was your answer when I came up who came up with the alternate left turn arrows as that one is mind-boggling to say the least. Robin Sanente, good evening. I would like to comment and voice my concerns on the Warm Middle Springs
proposed conservation easement. I do it under general public comment because you have discussions prior to the citizens comments concerns under a specific agenda item. At first look, the conservation easement is good and I thank all those involved. My comments concerns are as follows. One,
conservation easement runs with the land and is enforcable by grantee against grantor. However, what happens if grantee dissolves their nonprofit and is no longer? Does grantee have the right to sell transfer their rights to the easement? Is there a separate contract outlining contractual operational
guidelines? Two, under 2A, it is stated protection of the geological, archaeological, cultural, and historical resources and features of significance. Who determines the significance? Don't like the way that is worded. Three, prohibited uses unless specifically
identified as a permitted use. See my concerns on the permitted uses below. Four, permitted uses. What exactly are the improved versus the natural areas on the conservation easement allowing for these uses? It is not delineated on the proposed parcel map. Five, item C4,
allowing for similar enhancements, thereto following the 2019 plan. That wording, in my opinion, is too broad and opens the door to all sorts of enhancements. Six, item 4D, public amenities, including, again, my concerns are that it is too broad of a statement and leaves the door open. Seven, I don't
see anywhere that this conservation easement may not be amended, altered in any way by either party without the direct consent of both parties. Additionally, any alteration should be brought before a city commission at their regular special meeting so that the public is fully aware. In closing, I will state again that I am grateful that
the spring and its surrounding land will be protected in perpetuity. Thank you, John Rawlings. On May 13th, our community voted for five referendum items. All were rejected. This result reflects the public's voice and must be respected. But it's just as important to
understand what that vote means and what it doesn't. Under the leadership of our commissioners and city manager Jerome Fletcher, who has served since October 2021, Northport has made real progress all while keeping the mill rate steady for 5 years. That's a rare achievement for a growing city and a sign of strong
fiscal stewardship. But a no vote doesn't eliminate the infrastructure, environmental, or safety needs for those referendums addressed. It just means the city must now find other likely costlier and slower ways to meet what the EPA and state agencies still require. Voting no no takes tools away. It doesn't take
away the responsibility. As a resident of over two decades, I've watched Northport evolve. With growth comes challenges, and we must meet them with clarity, not confusion. Get informed from the source. Don't rely on social media voices, especially those who silence
disagreement or no longer live here. to shape your view of our government. Disagreement is healthy, but deliberate but deliberate must mistrust rooted in personal agendas or past roles for its progress. Words matter. Attacking or inflammatory language doesn't build
dialogue. It sews division and distrust in those trying to serve. We can disagree without tearing down. We can question without assuming the worst. Let's get back to that. Let's rise above the noise, focus on the real solutions, and move forward together. I'm proud of Northport. Let's keep growing with
facts, with integrity, and with each other. John Rawlings, citizen of Northport since 2000. Okay, now on to in-person public comments. Uh Brian Soder over here. Over here, and you just have three minutes.
Welcome, sir. Good evening. My name is Brian Sodre. I am a general contractor and owner of Minneapolis. We're dedicated to building affordable housing and the way that we do that is by reducing the footprint of the homes that we
build. We're fortunate enough to have a resident in your city call us to build one of our homes. We will be building the uh Florida's first 3D concrete printed tiny home. It's currently under
construction. I'm here today one to give you the exciting news for thank and thanking you for allowing me to grow my company into your city. But two, I'm having some issues. Right now, the minimum building
square footage in Northport is 900 living square feet. Well, our models currently range between 500 to 750 square ft. This customer opted in for the largest model which is three bedrooms, two
bathrooms. Well, because of the city ordinances, uh, zoning ordinances, we had to meet the 900 minimum living square feet. And the way that we did that is adding an additional bedroom slash uh, multi-use
uh, garage area to the house. Well, and it it's cooled. Well, now that we're trying to finish it, they're requiring us instead of putting a garage door because he likes to use it for multiple things, have an indoor outdoor
access, they're making us put doors. After we get our CO, then they'll allow us to convert it into a garage door. Here's the issue. Our goal is to build affordable housing. When we have
to throw away thousands of dollars on a door and then get back guys back out there to replace it for a garage door that you then will allow it doesn't help meet our goal of building affordable homes. I'm here today because I'm asking
for help. There's anybody that can help me here. Please, I'd love to give you more information and see how we can work together to make a difference in your city. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Scott Smith. Good evening, Commissioners. My name is
Scott Smith. I am the vice president of the Southwest Florida Police Benevolent Association, the union that represents the men and women of the Northport Police Department. Tonight, you find yourselves in a position that you have made clear that you do not want to be in. However, here we are. The recent
special election, although a disappointment, should not deter you from your original plan to build a new police headquarters. You face a difficult decision to move forward, but I am confident that you are 100% committed as you are more than aware of the issues at
hand. You can continue with this project that you have already invested over $8 million in, or you can kick the can down the road for some other time. We all know how that ends up. The issue is not going away. Money will need to be spent to hold the line, such as bringing in portable structures
to maintain rooms for staff officers and building another building for property and evidence storage. All these things are temporary solutions. They come with a price. How long will we you'll be spending money on a band-aid that could have gone to a new
facility? The longer you wait, the more this will cost. I hope that tonight you will renew your your commitment to continue with this project and move the city into the future. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Debbie Blackwell.
Good evening. I'm Debbie Blackwell. I live in the Warm Mineral Springs neighborhood and I'm kind of the ring leader for the Adopta Park up there. And tomorrow we're going to put a whole bunch of plants in which is going to be fun which is you know when you look at the parks and wrecks part of their goal is to build up
the community. So really like working together with wonderful people in the parks and reccks department to make that happen. I'm glad and joyed overjoyed about the conservation easement going through and I really hope with all my heart and soul that you dedicate yourself to seeing to it that it's
carried out to its greatest fruition because that's a really beautiful neighborhood up there. Planting a botanical garden with Florida ma natural plants, native plants would be a good goal as you look down the future and just stick to it and don't
cave into anything that might divert your path. Thank you, ma'am. All the good evening. I am Ali Hollander. I come here in peace and I am not a
criminal. I have a dignity. Please I am instructing you to respect it. Sto I am instructing you to remove police off my back. Let it go outside or sit
here. Stop assaulting me. All of you, you have no consent to move forward unless I'd heard what I said. We the people in Florida have a right to instruct our representative, not what
those previous people saying here in last special election. People instructing you five times. I am in to stop financial assault on the
people. I am instructing you again. Don't bring those five question back to the agenda. Respect people instructions. How many times I instructing you to ride the authority
with which agenda you discuss? Are you approving agenda without stating the authority? Who are you? How much time I have left? I going to give you definition of reasonable
man through some militant feminist might proclaim this as an oxymoron. The reasonable man is concept critically essential to the very
framework of our civil judicial system. The reasonable man is the fictitious person. In real life, there are very few if any person male or female who are
could be said to re reasonable in every regard. Our civil law invented reasonable men to serve as the standard for us. Either we live up to the standard
set by the reasonable man or the court will may find us to be unreasonable. In torque law, for example, negligence might be defined as the failure to act
reasonably as a reasonable man would act. A reasonable man exercise care not to injure others either by force or financially. That's what you're doing here. Are you reasonable?
Thank you sir. Eve Alexander. [Music] Good evening, commissioners. My name is Eve Alexander. I'm a 15-year resident of Northport and I'm here to speak about the recent reszoning of my property near
Yorkshire Road. I don't understand how hundreds of properties could be quietly reszoned without a single letter, hearing, or chance for public input. I'm curious to know whose vision is guiding this
change. Why would you impose an artificial urban style plan onto an established suburban community? It's not in keeping with the authentic character of Northport. Entire neighborhoods planned, purchased, and invested in as
res residential have been reclassified as commercial. It's as if city planning has become a game of monopoly. Properties being shuffled, reclassified on paper without regard for
the real people, investments, and intentions behind each parcel. What is the city's plan for addressing this unfortunate situation? Are you prepared to assist those of us with lots we are no longer permitted for
their intended purpose? I'm not here to fight. I'm here to ask for clarity and ideally collaboration. If Northport is being reimagined, residents deserve to be part of the vision, not casualties of it. I
respectfully ask this commission to revisit the process and move forward in partnership with the people who call Northport home. We're not asking for favors. We're asking for fairness. Thank you. Thank you, ma'am. That is all.
Okay, moving on to announcements. Good. The results of the city of Northport special election held on May 13, 2025 are as follows. Referendum question one regarding debt issuance to respond to declared emergency or disaster. Florida
local governments may issue certain debt for various governmental purposes, the city charter requires voter approval before the city issues any debt. Should the charter be amended allowing the city to issue debt payable from funds other than property taxes without voter approval to respond to a declared emergency or disaster? The whole number
of votes cast was 11,435. Yes, amend the city charter received 4585 votes. No, do not amend the city charter receive 6,840 votes. Referendum question two regarding removal of residency requirements for city clerk
and city attorney positions. The city charter requires that the city clerk and city attorney establish res residency in the city of Northport within one year of being hired and that each maintain residency in the city while in the position. Should the charter be amended to remove the residency requirements for
the city clerk and city attorney positions? The whole number of votes cast was 11,440. Yes, amend the city charter received 2,768 votes. No, do not amend the city charter received 8,672 votes. Referendum question three
regarding general obligation bonds to finance a new police department headquarters facility. To finance a new police department headquarters facility, shall the city of Northport be authorized to issue bonds in one or more series in a total aggregate principal amount not to exceed $115 million
maturing no later than 30 years from issuance bearing interest at no more than the maximum lawful rate and payable from advalorum property tax levied, an amount sufficient to pay debt services on such bonds. The whole number of votes cast was 11,427. Yes, four bonds received
3,638 votes. No, against bonds received 7,789 votes. Referendum question four regarding bonds to finance a new solid waste transfer station to finance a new solid waste transfer station. Shall the city of Northport be authorized to issue bonds in one or more series in a total
aggregate principal amount not to exceed $14 million maturing no later than 30 years from issuance bearing interest at no more than the maximum lawful rate and payable from the revenues of the city solid waste district. The whole number of votes cast was 11,372. Yes, four bonds received 5,426
votes. No, against bonds received 5,946 votes. refer to question five regarding bonds to finance capital improvements to a wastewater treatment facility. To finance capital improvements to the city's wastewater treatment facility located on Panama American Boulevard, shall the city of Northport be
authorized to issue bonds in one or more series in a total aggregate principal amount not to exceed $17 million maturing no later than 30 years from issuance bearing interest at no more than the maximum lawful rate and payable from the revenues of the city's water and sewer utility system. The whole
number of votes cast was 11,420. Yes, four bonds received 5,584 votes. No against bonds received 5,836 votes. There is no public comment for this item. Mayor, thank you. Uh
looking for a motion to accept the election results. I'll make it move to accept the election results as presented. Second. I have a motion by the vice mayor, seconded by Commissioner Langden to approve the election results as presented. Let's
vote and that passes 520. Moving on to B uh 25-2300 uh announcement of current advisory board and committee vacancies. 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, environmental advisory board, firefighters pension trust fund board of trustees, historical and cultural advisory board, joint management advisory board, parks and recreation advisory board, veterans park advisory
committee, one resident of Northport to serve on the citizen advisory committee. If anyone would like in more information, please see the city clerk's office. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Moving on to the consent agenda. Um, city manager, any item has been pulled?
Yes, Mr. Mayor. One item, item 4 A, D A-24-113. Okay. Um, so I'm looking for uh public comments on the consent agenda exclusive of a No, sir. Nothing. Uh, then I'm looking
for a motion. I'll make it. I move to approve the items in the consent agenda pulling number 4A DAG-24-113. Uh, for discussion. Got a motion by Commissioner Langden, seconded by Commissioner Duval to um
approve the consent agenda excluding item AH-24-113. Uh, with that, let's go ahead and vote. Reboot. Let's clear it. Let's try it again. Let's vote. Voice.
Yeah. Yep. All right. Let's go by voice vote. Uh, Commissioner Petro. I'm a yes. Mayor's a yes. Uh, Commissioner Lang done a yes.
Commissioner Duval, yes. That passes 520. City manager who pulled a um Commissioner Duval uh pulled it. I would like to sort of introduce it if you don't mind. Certainly. This is the termination of the transportation impact
fee reimbursement agreement regarding the Tuscula Boulevard bridge. Um item DAG-24-113. So it was last fall of 2024 around November uh 27th where our departments of planning and zoning received information uh regarding the
Tuscola bridge. The original agreement in 2019 said the estimated cost of the bridge was roughly $2 million and the most recent engineering call says the bridge construction is $3 million. Uh so public works have concluded that the constructing of the bridge wasn't
necessary as well as a traffic impact study but there was a large public voice that was heard when this item was originally approved. Uh therefore we believe that it is necessary for that public voice to be heard and hopefully work in conjunction in the future with
the developer to have a more centered conversation regarding um how to move forward either with or without the bridge. to have this item on consent only because the way it was approved on consent uh means we still should have some more community engagement regarding
this item knowing that there's a strong feeling in our public that this item is necessary for it to be a successful project. Um and Mr. Dal I'll turn it over to you but I just wanted to say that and we as a staff urge you to sort of um defer this item to a later date
after those things I just mentioned occur. Mr. Duval, it's your item. Yes. Um, when I first noticed this item, uh, it was listed on the consent agenda and considering that this had been voted on
by a prior commission, um, first I was surprised that it was going to be on a consent agenda. Uh then I started to do a little bit of research about the item and then I did
meet with representatives of the developer. Um and then I started seeing more and more reasons that this should be discussed. Uh, one of the reasons, my
reasons was that I wanted to hear what my fellow commissioners had to say. When I meet with developer, that's a one- on-one with me and the developer, but I do not get to talk about this with my
fellow commissioners unless we're in a public meeting like this. So I definitely wanted to hear what my fellow commissioners had to say. And secondly, I started looking into some of
the possibilities of having this bridge actually built. Uh some of those were easing of traffic on Sumpter and Northport Boulevard, easy access to
businesses over off of Tuscola Boulevard. And I'm just going to list a couple of them, a few of them here. Um, if that bridge was built, residents on the north side of the Cocoa
Plum could easily access businesses like Blue Tequila, Sharks, Lowe's, McDonald's, Culver's, KFC, My Trucking, Tacos, and they would not have to go on Route 41.
They would not have to go out to Sumpter and go to the stop flight at Sumpter in 41. They could go to those businesses directly. Um, it's possibility they might even want to walk
across. Um, so for these reasons, this is why I had the item pulled. Thank you, Commissioner. Uh, vice mayor. Yeah. Uh, I had my one-on-one with the city manager and pretty much the same thing that Commissioner Dval said. I had
the same questions on and I knew that, you know, back in the day there was a lot of input from citizens and I I even explained it to the developers in meetings that I had with them that I wanted their input. I wanted to have the discussion. I wanted to make it available for the citizens to be able to
weigh in. Um, I did receive quite a few emails and I have talked with quite a few citizens regarding this project. So, my intentions were to move it to have a larger discussion, but in hindsight, I'm
ready to make my decision. So, whatever this board decides tonight to either move it or discuss it and see where we go from there, I'm good with it. So, that's all I have. Mayor, thank you, sir. Mr. Langon. Uh, thank you, Mayor. um a comment and a question. I do agree
that the developer needs to have conversations with the community because this is a substantial change um from what was contractually agreed to between the developer and the city. Um, but my
question is I understand there was a traffic impact report completed. Um, and I I if I'm remembering correctly, it involve traffic impact to Appamatics and
Greenwood. Did it also include Sumpter? Sorry. Yeah, thank you for the question, Commissioner Langden. For the record, I'm Gabriel Quintis, assistant development services director. Um, would you mind repeating the the last part of your question? Yes.
Did the traffic impact study also include Sumpter, the traffic impact to Sumpter if the bridge is not built? Um, I can look that up right now as as we're uh speaking. And then a related question
before or after the Heron Creek development of Sumpter? I think I know the answer to that one. So, Commissioner, I can confirm that the study impact area included
um the following following roadway segments. So, Sumpter Boulevard from US41 to Price Boulevard to Price. Yes, ma'am. Um, and that study was done before the Heron Creek development by the
intersection of Price and Sumpter. This was done in November 2018. Okay. Yeah, a lot has been going on on Sumpter since that traffic study was done.
That's all I have. Mr. Petro, thank you. Mayor, I also met with Williams Parker, representative of the developer uh and I went met my uh when I was at my agenda briefing, I wanted to
pull this item, but it it was already pulled. Um I have the same concerns as Commissioner Dval and Commissioner Emed. Um, I respectfully accept your request,
the developers request for to terminate the agreement. However, I do not think it's in the best interest of the city. Um, and quite frankly, it's not in the best interest of the community that being developed. As a city, we try to do
connectivity streets. We've done studies for connectivity. We try to alleviate the traffic walls and um this is um I understand where you're coming
from and we probably should mention why you are requesting to terminate the agreement so the public would know. Um and in short the construction cost has risen significantly on your part.
However, that doesn't mean that doesn't mean that the city should give in into the terminating the agreement. Uh, moreover, I do believe it's in the best interest of that community that is being developed. Uh, from what I was told,
there's uh the number is over 500 houses plus businesses. Um, and we only have two exits. Um it's not a lot. Um it's going to be a it's just a
matter of time to face the reality of and regret of granting the termination of the agreement. So I would like to discuss it more and maybe hear your
presentation as a developer. Uh but I do believe the traffic will be significantly impacted on Sumpter. Even right now to get on Sumpter, it takes up to two three
minutes to get out. Um and it's going to be worse with 500 houses being built and uh completed. Um, moreover, as a developer, I do
understand your concern eating up those costs. However, being a small contractor, I understand. I do believe that those costs will be passed to the end user and
you will not suffer significantly or financially in that regard. That's all for me unless we engage into more discussion. Thank you. Um yeah, I uh I read through the DMP. I read through the uh the impact reimbursement
agreements. I read through all the exhibits. Um I did also meet with the developers uh representatives. And um you know my concern here is that um clearly the DMP was conditioned on
building this. It says it right in the uh transportation impact reimbursement agreement and I'll read the bloody language. It says that says that these parties are
entering this agreement to memorialize the developers agreeing to design, permit and construct the bridge for the city and to establish the manner in which the city shall reimburse developer for all costs associated with the design, permitting and construction of the bridge from transportation impact
fees collected by the city. In other parts of the agreement, it talks about that if the cost of this project exceeds what was projected, which obviously it has by over a million dollars, city's only obligated for 10%
of of reimbursement through impact fees for that differential. So, this is clearly a developer who doesn't want to pay the other 90% of that uptick. And this project was conditioned on building this. There are hundreds and hundreds of
property owners and residents in and around that area who supported this project because of that bridge. Anybody who's gone onto something from Greenwood and Appamatics knows that it is not the
easiest thing to do at certain times of the day. If this project is built without this bridge, it is just going to add an extreme burden. It is my position and I am prepared to vote for it tonight. I don't see any reason to
kick this around. It's clear that the citizens want this bridge built. I believe it's the obligation of the developer to build this and I think we hold fast and hold them to their agreement. As far as the city goes, I have some interesting concerns about why
city staff didn't make any recommendations here. And if they have, what is it they have planned for the roughly $3 million worth of impact fees that they would like to hear redirect now to some other project? Not that it isn't needed, not that it doesn't make
sense perhaps, but what is concerning to me is that citizens of this city relied on the fact that these impact fees were going to reimburse us. So this bu bridge could get built and now here we are as a city considering shifting this burden
elsewhere shifting these funds elsewhere and this bridge doesn't get built and what we have is a whole lot of unhappy people with 500 new homes here. So how many question I have is how many of these homes have been built? I know that
before the 251st is built or issued a certificate of occupancy this bridge is supposed to have been completed. How many cos have been issued in this project so far out of 500? We can uh commit Mr. Mayor, we can um
estimate about 50 about 50 out of 500. Okay, that's good. That's good because my take is as far as I'm concerned if this bridge doesn't get built then I support rescending the DMP and killing
this deal. That's how I feel and I'm prepared to vote on it tonight. I'm not happy with the way this was presented. I'm not happy how this was handled and I think the citizens, yes, they should be a party to it, but I think we already know how they feel about it. So, if we want to delay this and kick the can, it
just gives more time to delay and more time for more cos to be requested and more properties to be built. So, you know, that's my take on this. City manager, I see you're up. You'd like to be heard. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, before you make your final decision, I just want to point out that the approval
order for the DMP contains the following conditions relevant to the Tuscola Bridge agreement. For a two-lane bridge, including multi-use path on both sides of the roadway over the Cocoa Plum waterway extending the Skola Boulevard
north connecting to Greenwood Avenue is to be constructed by the developer. An associated agreement between the developer and the city whereby costs of the bridge are to be paid by the developer and reimbured by the city through transportation impact fees is to be executed as part of this development
approval. The width of the multi-use path to be provided and the timing of construction of the bridge shall be specified in such agreement. If an agreement to construct the bridge cannot be reached, the applicant must provide the transportation system improvements
identified in the alternative scenario presented in the traffic impact statement. But was there not an agreement executed by both parties to build this bridge? It was that said if the bridge wasn't built, it had to be done by alternative methods. There was
no agreement that said the path had to be built or else. But this commission does have the authority if that bridge doesn't get built to resend the development master plan since the development master plan was conditioned on this. I'll tell you this is not a
good thing people. Okay? Not a good thing at all. And now we're going to hear, "Oh, we run the risk of legal exposure in the city because we turn around and deny a developer the right to bait and switch and pull this out from
under the citizens." I don't think so. I'm not voting that way. Anybody else have anything to say on this matter? Commissioner Langden. Yeah, thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um, a couple of things. One [Music]
is the issue in my mind is traffic impact. And I I would be open to an alternative way of handling the traffic impact. I know in previous meetings when we were
evaluating projects along Sumpter um the possibility of putting in a light somewhere um was sort of broached. So, I'll just reiterate my earlier statements, which is
um the developer needs to have communications with that community because not building the bridge and doing something different is um was not part of the original contract and
agreement with that community. I I also believe lot of time has gone by since we did that traffic study. A lot of development has occurred and is planned for Sumpter. Um that study needs to be
redone. Um and that would be the only way that I would consider not building the bridge. All I have to say, vice mayor. Yeah, I see Commissioner Petro wants to speak. I'm ready to make motion or
motions. I let Commissioner Pro speak then. That's just on a final note, um we've been fighting a lot to get connectivity streets and here we have a perfect opportunity to have one more. We
currently have, I believe, two in the process. and that's that's it. It's hard to get those things done for various reasons. Here we have a perfect opportunity to solve the traffic issue and I do not believe that the
traffic signal would solve anything besides waiting at the green for the green light to turn to make a left or on a sumpter. It's not going to alleviate the traffic issue or the traffic burden, but this
bridge will in many ways. So, uh, and the second point I want to make is from what I read in the agreement, um, and maybe I did not understand all of it since I'm not in a legal team or
analysis. I have not done a legal analysis but I do believe that the developer has to fulfill his obligation to build the bridge. Uh and as alternatives though those were presented
later uh as a backup documents we did not have uh any discussions. it was on the consent agenda which I I was also surprised to see that. Um but um I do not believe that the traffic light would solve the issue. Well, I don't know if
it would either. I think a robust traffic study would be wise if we would even be open considering an alternative. The Greenwood is not that long of a stretch. So, it's going to be backed up both ways and that's going to be a big
problem. Thank you. Um yeah and and um you know while while conceptually the idea of having you know robust discussions and interactions with the community and studies and this and that all well and
good while every day construction continues and more houses are built. If the developer ceases all construction immediately until all those meetings take place, you know, that might be something worth discussing, but
I hardly think that that would be, you know, something that would be agreeable to the developer here. So, you know, again, I'm I'm ready to vote on this, but Commissioner Duval. Yes. Thank you, Mayor. Um, when I mentioned all the businesses that could
be accessed by residents in that community and in that area, one thing I failed to mention was all of those businesses pay taxes in this city and they provide revenue to this city. And I know just
myself, if I've got to deal with a lot of traffic, I might sit home and say, "I'll eat leftovers." But if I have an easy way of getting somewhere, I might say, "Let's go eat
out." Thank you, city attorney. I see you wish to be heard. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. If the if the direction of the board is going to be to to terminate this agreement, I would ask for it to come back at another meeting so that we can prepare a proper termination document so it can be recorded and uh
handled that way. That's if we choose. chair attorney at this time. Greg, you bring it back another time so we can Thank you. I'm entertaining a motion. Uh, Mr. Mayor, Mr. Mayor, speaker cards um for Peter Van Busker, project engineer and Charlie Bailey, asking to
be heard on this item. Respectfully request that we be given an opportunity to discuss it with you as you requested. Absolutely. Thank you. I have just one question real quick u for the city attorney that just spoke. So, what you're saying is you do
not want us to make a decision tonight or we can make a decision if we if you decide to terminate the agreement to bring it back uh to to review an agreement for termination. Gotcha. Thank you. I just wanted clarification on that.
Okay. Ready for public comment, Mr. Mayor? Yes, sir. Okay. Okay. Uh, we do have one voicemail. My name is Tom Treat, 6034390141. I live at
3465 Lakewood Boulevard in Northport and I do believe that the bridge should be built by Central Park as they promised. Thank you. Okay, now we do have several e
comments. Uh Steven SCOD, the surrounding HOAs oppose the removal of these fees and the removal of the developers right to terminate the Tuscola Bridge. Speaking for the Sable Trace Alliance, we believe the bridge is necessary to the safety of the current Greenwood Avenue traffic plan.
Currently, the traffic on Greenwood has already increased and has become unsafe. The bridge will help eliminate congestion and unsafe speeds on Greenwood. Again, we would like to see the commissioners vote no to the request for the termination of the Tuscola Bridge impact fees and direct the
developer to fulfill his obligation to provide a bridge over the Cocoa Plum per the original agreement. Gene Mitchell, having lived the last 15 years off Northport Boulevard and knowing the background of former golf course development, I strongly oppose eliminating the developer responsibility of putting a
bridge across Koko Plum to Tuscola Boulevard. The future addition of 500 plus residences in Central Park will make Greenwood Boulevard a nightmare to travel on. The road is narrow with a lot of curves. There is no traffic signal on either end of Greenwood Boulevard. There is also a park on Greenwood where
increased traffic will be headed. The bridge was a necessary part of approval of the development and should stay. I'm a retired 35-year veteran law enforcement officer and know a little something about traffic flow. The developer is trying to line his pockets by avoiding the responsibility regarding the bridge.
Dale Thompson, I oppose terminating the bridge impact fee for Tuscola Avenue. This was part of the original agreement and the developer should be held accountable to do what was agreed to as part of the approval for the development. It is my opinion that with the increased traffic, the bridge will be necessary. Greenwood Avenue was not designed to handle the amount of traffic
that will result from this development. Linda Wells. With the number of multi-dwelling communities, including apartments, condos, and single family dwellings that probably number in the thousands, with the Central Park development that enter directly onto Greenwood Avenue, the bridge is a necessity and should be constructed as
planned. Sumpter and Northport Boulevard could not feasibly handle the additional traffic flow without widening roads and installing traffic lights. While numerous changes have been made to Central Park's master plan, this is not one that should be made. Keep the bridge.
Patrick Maltby Greenwood traffic would increase substantially and the Greenwood Sumpter interchange not the best will back up for those going northbound. It has tight curves going to Northport Road not really built for heavier traffic. The original agreement with the city included the bridge and developers should be held to this not allowed to
drop it because they are trying to save money. Pat Maldi David Green. The whole proposal with the bridge made this project acceptable to the community. There was a means to alleviate congestion with a huge construction project impacting a two-lane road. Lack of a bridge is also a deterrent to
business for access across the Cocoa Plum waterway. All their construction in the area bounded by Greenwood, Sumpter, Appamatics, and Northport Boulevard are 1 to twotory units. Anything higher is out of place. Please keep the bridge requirement in place for the sake of the
neighborhood. Debbie McDall. As stated in the backup materials today, estimated bridge costs have accelerated to $3 million. To be clear, per the bridge agreement, the city is not responsible to reimburse impact fees a penny more than $1,819,000 plus not to exceed 10%
towards the bridge cost $2,900 total. Now, they are requesting to terminate the agreement due to higher construction cost. The increased brid costs are not Northport's problem. developer could have built the bridge prior to the 250th certificate of occupancy issued or after the 251st CO knowing no other
certificate of occupancies would have been issued until the bridge was completed. This deadline was a vital component of the agreement. The deadline ensured the bridge was completed before any adverse impacts were felt on the existing roadway network. The proposed termination agreement has one vital piece missing, a deadline for the
developer to complete all the roadway improvements outlined in section five of the termination agreement. It is imperative to include a deadline for these roadway improvements to be completed. Otherwise, the city loses asurances to have the improvements completed in a timely manner. There is nothing requiring the commission to
approve this termination agreement. In other words, you can vote no. However, if you're going to approve the termination agreement, please consider adding a deadline to section 5 stating when the roadway improvements are to be completed. In my opinion, the deadline should be prior to the 100th CO and withhold the other CO until the roadway
improvements are completed. Yes. Amending the termination agreement is well within your authority. If the developer bulks at a deadline, then don't approve the termination agreement. Pure and simple. It's called leverage. They want something. The commission has no reason to give away the
farm. James Forest. Due to the volume of traffic increase from Central Park, a bridge is necessary for access to Route 41. Without the bridge and or no traffic lights, the increase in traffic will be immense. and a cough hammer. The Central Park
developers should be held to their original agreement to build a bridge connecting Greenwood Avenue to Tuscola Boulevard to alleviate traffic on Sumpter Boulevard. Tammy Trail is better able to handle the volume of traffic than Sumpter Boulevard. Is it extremely difficult to enter exit Greenwood
Avenue, McKibben Drive, Pocutella Avenue, Richmond, Terrence, Bachelor Avenue, and Sanuchi Avenue? With the current number of occupied homes as it is, the turn lanes that are proposed won't solve the issue and it may actually exacerbate it by increasing
road rage when people are waiting to exorbitant to turn. Furthermore, there aren't any deadlines proposed by Central Park as to exactly when these lanes would be built. Please vote no. William Coughmer, do not let the developers reneg on the building of the bridge.
Greenwood Avenue and Sumpter Boulevard can be a cluster mess at times. 250 more homes in Central Park will only make it worse. Okay. Now, on to in-person public comments. Peter van Buskerk. Yes. Yes, sir. Peter Van Buskerk as a
planner engineer with Kimling Horn Associates represents the other party of the great Sable Trace Development Partners and I along with Peter Charlie Bailey with the Williams Parker Law Firm are also on behalf of uh Sable Trace Development Partners. Is it possible? We were anticipating being able to make our
presentation together. Is that possible? Oh, you have three minutes, sir. It has begun for Peter. I'll I'll speak for Peter. So, I'm I'm here on behalf of Sable Trace Development Partners. Um want to kind of click reset, make sure that everybody
understands what's before you. In July of 2019, uh my client did action 18 acquired the golf course. and 19 uh obtained entitlements to develop the golf course in October. And to be perfectly clear, as set forth the agreement, the bridge that's before you
is not necessary to serve this project. It's not necessary to serve this project supported by the traffic impact analysis at the time. as reflective of my client's desire to partner with the um the city and seek to accommodate the neighbors to the greatest extent
possible. When we were requested or my client was requested as part of the it's processing the development approvals to whether it would consider constructing a bridge, my client said we would be willing to design, permit, and construct the bridge if the city fully funds the bridge all cost associated with it to be
reimbursed from impact fees collected by the city. We entered an agreement in October of 2019 because at the time the city commissioned its wisdom based on the information it had determined that the bridge would cost about 1.8 million slightly north of $1.8 million. And as it penciled out at the time, even though
it's not needed for capacity adding improvements, it's not needed for concurrency for this project. the city determined, okay, we'll construct it because if it's $ 1.9 million, uh we it'll pencil out and perhaps there'll be some leftover impact fees with which we can fund other capacity adding
improvements. Uh, of course, this is a brown field. We had had the property brownfield designated um and all that goes with that. We experienced the COVID shutdown and other costs that have caused some other things that have caused the the project to be delayed. Fast forward to 2025 and the um uh
updated engineer estimate of probable cost before you is now somewhat outdated. Um it's about uh it was done in 2024. The cost now is actually $3.8 million. And so while my client it's the decision before the city is not so much bridge or no bridge, it's so much if the
city does want to bridge, the city is fully obligated to completely fund the entire bridge to the tune of $3.8 million. And so we're here before you seeking to um uh to you know the the agreement does allow the bridge to be uh
for $1.8 million allow if there are unforeseen costs for the city manager to authorize those costs without amending the agreement. So that's it's not a hard fast $1.9 million. And so we're here uh before you seeking to um terminate uh
the bridge agreement. You know, this is reflecting a reflective of, you know, we've coordinated its infill development and we've worked very hard and I think with uh former commissioner um um Blucher and others to make sure the project was designed in a way. Thank you, sir. Sir, Mr. Mayor, if I could be
indulged just as No, sir. Actually, I'm sorry, but respectfully, you've had your three minutes. Other people have had their three minutes. So, okay. I would just make one request. I won't speak any further in support but we would ask that respectfully as we are the other part of the agreement please don't hold it
against us that you disagree with the manner in which this is being printed presented to the city commission it was you know we just simply made the request and it was came to you as a consent if the city commission feels that further discussion is warranted we are more than happy to engage in that discussion provide additional information but we'd
ask that you not make a decision without further input from us if you're you're inclined to deny it thank you thank you Charlie Bailey that was me Mr. Mayor would be able but Peter Van Busker I spoke for me to give my three
minutes to Mr. Really? They both filled out cards. Yes, sir. Absolutely, sir. You have three minutes. Thank you. And I think I would point out there's other So, sorry. Sorry. We don't assign three minutes to anybody who has to speak on his own. So, so what I'm I'm
sorry. So, who what are you authorizing us to do for Peter speak? Would like to speak. He may speak for three minutes. I think um Mr. Belly's made a lot of of good points. Um, one thing I I would like to read from the conclusion of the traffic report at time um and and we did
look at traffic with and without the bridge and basically the conclusion was that um based on the resulting analysis all study intersections are anticipated to operate at the 2020 AM and PM peak hour
uh traffic generation. The intersection of the North Pore Boulevard US 41 is expected to operate acceptably during the PM peak hour future total conditions with minor adjustments to signal timing. All roadway segments are anticipated to operate acceptably in future total
conditions. So the the difference between having a bridge and not was adding some turn lanes into the project which we're agreeing to do now because the bridge wouldn't be built. So in that way we are carrying out what the traffic impact
statement required to be done. Um in and yes initially the bridge was was agreed to be built upon if it was going to be reimbursed but in this case the bridge is it's you know the the price has gone up. I know you've dealt with this a
number of projects in the city. You understand escalation in pricing. Um, you know, the other issue that as we got into the design is that the Tuscola Boulevard segment south of the Cocoa Plum is not a city roadway. It is um a
private access easement for Lowe's and these adjacent development. So, in order to connect the city bridge to that, that rightway will have to be turned over to the city or replatted in some form or fashion to allow that traffic to come over the bridge. So, um, there's another
aspect to it that, you know, adds a little bit of complication that, you know, would had to been adjusted in order to be able to complete the bridge. So, just something else that I wanted to put out there so you would understand that. Thank you very much.
Uh, that is all, Mr. Mayor. Thank you. I'm entertaining. Um, city clerk, do you have a comment? No, sir. Uh, I'm entertaining motions. I'll give this a shot. I move to deny the termination of
the transportation impact fee reimbursement agreement regarding the Tuscola Boulevard bridge D A-24-113. I'll second it. Discussion anybody? Sorry, wrong button.
Mr. Amrich, you already spoke. You already spoke. Thank you. I just You were still up there, so um yeah, all all I would say is um parties entered into an agreement. They signed the contract. There was a
commitment to do it. It's specified that if the cost of this project exceeded what was anticipated that the city would be responsible to reimburse up to 10% of that excess in impact fees and the
balance obviously would rest with the developer and this DMP relied on this agreement. The community relied on this bridge being built and I absolutely absolutely would not support terminating
this agreement. Mr. Langden, um no, I hit the wrong button. So, with that, uh unless anyone else weighs in, we're ready for a vote. Uh, clerk, would you kindly read the
motion back so everybody hears it? Uh, a motion was made by Vice Mayor Emer, seconded by Mayor Stokes to deny the termination of the transportation impact fee reimbursement agreement regarding the Tuscola Boulevard bridge. Thank you, sir. With that,
there's nothing more to this item. Let's vote. That passes five to zero. All right. With that, I believe we are on to public hearings and we have ordinance
second reading. Uh a ordinance number 2025-11. Uh, city clerk, would you be kind enough to read by title only? An ordinance of the city of Northport, Florida, amending chapter 58 of city code creating the targeted industry incentive program and amending the
impact fee deferral program, providing for finding, providing for posting, providing for conflicts, providing for severability, and providing an effective date. All right. Thank you, sir. City manager, this is your item. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Uh, this ordinance number 25-11 was brought before you on first
reading on May 13th. Uh there were several questions that were issued and answered uh which were provided. I will turn it over to Mr. Bowling to have further conversation, but we did want to um allow us time to add in those answers to those questions to the respectful
information uh as well as some other questions at a third meeting if possible. But I will let Mr. Bowling speak further. Uh Randall Bowling uh planning and zoning division planner 2. Um, as city manager said, we are requesting to move to a third reading
for July 24th. This would allow staff to be able to research all the questions that have came to us and allow us to go to outside legal counsel for uh, additional direction. I'm opening this up to
commission wants away and please put your names up there. I apologize. It is June 24th at July. I was speak to this item. Why is it go? Okay. Vice Mayor, what new information did you plan on
bringing back? because I think we want to discuss up here about possible discussion about the percentage percentages, you know, um what we're doing currently compared to what you want to change going forward for these
incentives because right now, you know, if if we broaden it out, I believe it was seven years and currently we're on five to get the deferrals come in. I think that's just putting our money out there way too long. I think we need to collect it as as it should be. So, if
we're under a five-year agreement right now, why push it out? Um, another thing is too is, you know, for different targeted industries. I understand we're looking for commercial. I understand we're trying to target commercial, but we don't have to give the farm away to
get it. The numbers are starting to come in, the rooftops, all that stuff. People are starting to look regardless of what incentives we give them. So, if it's not broke, I don't I don't believe in fixing it. So, if we're doing
okay right now at like the 25%, I I wouldn't want to stretch it out any further than that. I mean, the city has to build its infrastructure on a lot of these impact people. So, to wait longer means the citizens wait longer, you know. So, I mean, I don't mind
discussing it again a month from now. That gives us all a lot of time to reach out, talk to people, get the information. So, I'm I'm 100% with you, but I I wouldn't have been for this going through tonight regardless. So, that's all I have. Uh, Commissioner
Langen, um, yeah, just a a comment. Um, philosophically, I'm okay with incentives, but here's my concern. Um we have a lot of finance financial
challenges facing us and um just so that people understand if we um dismiss an impact fee we have to cover that amount in our general fund. Correct. Correct. So we have
a repair and replace item coming before us. We have four essential projects that we need to figure out how to get money for. Um I'm just really beginning to feel that I I
really don't want to have this conversation until after our budget conversation. Um I'm just concerned burdening the general fund uh with something that isn't critical. we have
way more critical things that we need to figure out how to deal with um before we grapple this. And and again um philosophically I'm very supportive of incentives. Um I might want to dig into
it a little more given giving an incentive for 10 employees maybe not so much. But um anyway, that's sort of how I'm feeling with this topic. I'd love to talk about it but maybe after budget.
So I would say is to Commissioner Pro. Uh thank you mayor. Uh first I wanted to say that we as a commission board we did not come up with this proposal. Um there's some notion that we proposing to delay or reduce the impact fee
requirement on developers as a board. we are presented with a study or with a with a proposal and then we discuss and vote on it. We did not come up with this and I appreciate economic
development trying to incentivize and bring up more businesses to the city which is a good part on your work and I appreciate that. uh but um I do not believe this is appropriate time to do
that especially before the budget passes and uh before we balance the budget but I want to hit on few things um on affordable housing 75% exemption is far too high I do believe it that
it's too high and um for a couple reasons uh the developer who does or any developer for that matter who does affordable housing, they get a lot of grants or they they are tied up to the state and federal guidelines. Thus
therefore they get the grants. Um and um but in short the impact fee money will not be be available to be used for the infrastructure that we desperately need and as a city and somebody has to make up for
those impact fees and somebody is the taxpayer. Um so as a young city we we're growing and I do believe that the uh developers will come anyways and we can evaluate on a case by
case basis instead of making it as an ordinance that is actually the law for this topic. So, but once we get closer to the on the third reading, as we hear
that you are asking for the third reading, um we should be talking about more details. For example, should we tie the exemptions to any affordable housing developers or the ones that meeting lowincome housing tax credit? Questions
like these we have to evaluate more in depth and I do not think this is appropriate time to do it now. I I feel like personally I feel it's a rush. We've been rushed into it and uh and again I appreciate your work. Um but I'm
not prepared to vote on it anytime soon. Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner. Um I've given this one a really lot of thought and I really really have because I'm certainly an economic development guy. I certainly want to see the city
grow. um nonresidentially especially and yet to start with the the easy side first. Um when it comes to affordable housing and workforce housing projects, quite frankly, I'm okay with with
incentives perhaps less than than what's being proposed here. But am I correct with workforce housing? Is there also no obligation on the city's part to reimburse or to make up the difference? Does afford does does workforce housing
fit into that same definition? Does affordable housing we don't have to make up? Elena Ray, director of development services. Thank you for that question because that's one of the things that I was hoping to address. Affordable housing is statutoily exempt under the
Florida statutes. The city does not have to make that up. Workforce housing does not have that statutory exemption. So, the city would have to find alternative funding sources to make that up. Um, keeping in mind, too, as we talk
about all of this, when we first started talking about developing an ordinance for incentives, it was over two years ago. That's when the for our new commissioners and for anyone in the public, the commission did give staff direction to work on an ordinance and
bring it back, but it was over two years ago. and and this ordinance has been an outside legal council for well over a year because it got sidetracked due to many other heavy lifts that the city had. Um but we were in a different time when the city commission gave that
direction. We were still coming out of the um aftermath of the pandemic. We had dealt with the um hurricane Ian and the economic issues that that uh brought to us. So, it was a
different time in our city um and in our growth. And so, there are certainly things that are um indicative of today's situation that is different from when we first got this direction from the commission. But, um there are certainly
discussions that we would like to have related to um the workforce housing issue. Um that is something that we are concerned as well about where that funding would come from. Um and the um
long list of improvements uh and capacity improvements that the city has that need to be done. Um so I think there are some other questions that we have that we would like to get more information on. I think we would like to have more dialogue um with this
commission because this is a different commission than the commission that we received this direction on originally. So I think those discussions are definitely warranted and is one of the reasons we would like to delay this. I have a one more question uh and it was
funny because our last discussion our first reading I asked a question but the truth is I didn't ask the right question. I asked that every incentive project was required to come before
commission. However, question I didn't ask is if this ordinance is passed and an applicant for this incentive meets the criteria, do we have the legal right to say no? And the answer is we don't. Do we? No. On this you you can say no
because the city has to find funding. And if the city doesn't have funding or or chooses not to allocate that funding, then you absolutely have the right to say no. And that's why it comes before the commission. Except that the city can
always find money. It just reaches into someone else's pocket for it. Essentially, you can consider the criteria in the ordinance as a um a gatekeeper. In other words, if you don't meet this
criteria, you don't get to go through the gate to ask the commission for the ability to do this. And the commission would have the absolute authority for whatever reason they saw fit to deny because you didn't have breakfast that morning. Yes. Gotcha. All right. That's
good to know. The other thing is again in in thinking about this issue, there are a whole lot of businesses that took their chance on Northport, invested in Northport, pwnied up, paid their bills,
and they're here and and and a welcome part of our community. I'm good with the deferral programs that we have. You know, you want to help a business and and stretch out their impact fees some. I I sort of get all that, but to actually wave a percentage of them to to
literally say, "Sorry, you don't have to pay those." It took a long time to get our impact fee programs in place. Those revenues are so important to building back infrastructure. We hear all the time, "We need to fix our infrastructure. We need to improve it.
We need to keep up with growth." and here to incentivize a business to come to the second fastest growing city in America, the most livable city in the state of Florida, the place most people and businesses want to be now. We are all of a sudden in our infinite wisdom
going to say, "Well, guess what? We'll just sort of make it even that much easier for you and we'll you don't have to pay those impact fees up to 50% or whatever." Conceptually, this is just in my estimation a horrible idea. And for
those that we do have to reimburse, who's reimbursing them? We don't print money. So the taxpayers of city of Northport are going to subsidize businesses that want to come to the city. I mean, that sure doesn't make a
whole lot of sense to me at this point. Not when we are growing the way we are. I'm willing to take my chances that people are going to see Northport as a great place to come and businesses will want to be here because we've got the population growth and because we've got the consumer base that they can make
money on. So whether it's now later after discussions I've changed my opinion on this item. I'm certainly supportive of doing something in the way of affordable housing and workforce housing because I think those two areas are so important. And as a few people in
this room could attest to, if we did everything under the sun we could do to help those two categories, it would never be enough. So, anything we could do is better than nothing. So, I'm I'm open to further discussions on that. Um, Commissioner Duval.
Yes. Um, first of all, in the ordinance itself, uh, I did make an effort to read it all. Um, on and I just want to point out what I believe is what they call a scrivener's error. Uh, on line
475, it says, "The following procedures shall be used by those that calculate and access impact fees." I believe the word should be assess, but I could be wrong, but I it just stuck in my head.
So, I' I'd like you to look at that. Um, secondly, um, the vote to move this to the second reading was 4 to one. I was the one. Um, I was against it then, I'm against it now. that afford um when it comes to
commercial you know we need that 30% commercial here okay and I am for that because it brings in jobs so many people leave this city to
go to work when we get to affordable housing If a developer comes in with a project and they're offering it at 80% to 120% of AMI, a 25% reduction, I just can't see
that. Um, those numbers on affordable housing, I I just can't get by those. That's all I've got. Thanks. Thank you, sir. Uh, anything else from commission?
U any public comment on this item? Yes sir. We have some e comments. Uh all right. Robin Sanvic Vicente targeted industry incentive program. Absolutely not. All the citizenry hears about is economic development and how we can help
the developers and businesses. It's time the city puts the citizenry first and actually hears them. We understand the economic value of bringing in new businesses. However, it should not be on the backs of the citizenry. There is no need for this program. Thank you. William Coffhammer. I am opposed to
the city commissioners reducing the impact fees to 50%. We the taxpaying people of Northport will have to make up the difference with higher taxes. What has happened to all the impact fees collected so far? Anna Coffhammer. Vote no. Growth should pay for growth. Vote no.
Historically affordable housing projects are only required to be affordable for a decade. For example, Riley Chase was an affordable housing community is now lakes at Northport whose price is driven by the market. Vote no so that the next police station, fire station, city hall, etc. You want or need will have more
funds already in savings to build them. Over the past 20 plus years, various commissioners, mayors, and city managers have authorized and paid for consultants to advise the city on impact fees. Repeatedly, the money was wasted because the leaders did not follow the consultants advice. Our impact fees were either waved, greatly reduced or
deferred because the leaders wanted to encourage growth. Yet the point of impact fees is growth paying for growth. This has not happened and now you are crying broke and repeating the cycle. Your decisions are part of a long ongoing problem. You're simply repeating your predecessors. You have not you do
not have funds for the police station because the impact fees weren't charged at 100%. While impact fees might not have paid for completely, every little bit helps. Stop the nonsense. Your vote yourselves raises. You give the city manager and staff raises at the same time. You slowly tax and feed the debt
of the citizens. You remove services. You increase costs. Why? What is your logic? All of you live here yet you are blind to what you're doing. Press pause on growth. Take a breath and get the infrastructure in place. Vote no on reducing impact fee for anyone. That's it for e comment. And we do have some
in-person comments. Pat Neil. Welcome, sir. Thank you. Good evening, Mr. Mayor, members of council. Thanks for giving me three minutes to talk a little bit about workforce housing. We intended to experiment with
32 homes at Wellland Park in town community. Um, we have created a new affordable housing division in our company called Simply Dwell. Though I've been head of neo communities for 55 years, I'm talking tonight to you in my role as the head of our new affordable
housing division. Our objective was to build new homes, primarily town homes from a price range from the low 300,000s. To do so, we have to be very cost effective. That is, we have to manage the specifications, buy appropriately, build quickly, deliver the home when finished
in about 78 days. We can do this and we have done so successfully over the last 55 years. About 25,000 homes in Sarasota and Manatee counties. We build currently about 28 communities between Tampa and Naples. We hired Jag Ruparian, a
national reputed expert in affordable housing. We hired him for our nation's best public builder of value-based housing. But now we've run into an obstacle which we did not anticipate. In fact, it is the first time in 55 years and 20 jurisdictions in which
we've built that we have found a new uh obstacle unfortunately in the city of Northport. And that is that we've never sprinkled a town home. The cost including the fire sprinkling system, the signage, plumbing, electrical, fire blocking, insulation, cycle time,
architecture, design, construction variances, warranty reserves, closing costs, and commissions is about $14,760 uh for a home. About $97.20 per month. So, our biggest challenge is ensuring buyer eligibility.
An additional sum of $97 per month is a killer. These homes will be stretching even firsttime buyers because of our current 7% mortgage rates. Typically, Neil and Simply Dwell pay 25 to $35,000 to buy
down mortgages for those who buy our workflow for course or affordable homes. However, this customer sees no value in the sprinkling of their home. Initially, they get about a $7 per month benefit in their fire insurance. But the problem with sprinklers, of course, is they
degrade over time. And that $7 per month savings, according to our insurance agent, actually turns after the 10th year into an expense because of inadvertent water damage of an older sprinkler system. So we were surprised to find that the city of Northport had adopted a fire protection system for
town homes and we bought this 32 unit property before we had a full understanding. Of course, we have an an understanding with Whan Park, however, to build 400 additional homes of this type, but we ch will have to choose not to do so if we can't find a way to
reduce the cost of this housing. Thus, we are asking if you please for these and other town homes that we build that you adopt new language on page 24 so that we can furnish these homes to hometown heroes. That is public
employees who furnish services to people. Thank you. The rest will be explained by Christian Jennings who take off where I left off. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Christian Jennings. Thank you. So, my name is Christian Jennings. I'm the area sales manager for Simply Dwell Homes, and I wanted to tell
you a little bit about our mission for Simply Dwell. So, we want to provide attainable homes for the workforce um that is that is currently being being pushed out of many of our areas, especially here in Southwest Florida.
Since the opening of our first community, Broadleaf and Parish, we've actually moved in 72 new homeowners since May of 2024. Of those 72, 51 are true firsttime
home buyers. with a vast majority either living or previously renting near our community, most in fields such as health care, education, hospitality, as well as
first responders. We also have investor rules in order to make sure that our communities don't become oversaturated with investors. So, we've put in place and allow only a maximum of 20%
investors within our communities. And I can tell you that here in Broadleaf, we have less than 10% that have been sold to investors. And that goes back to our mission of providing that attainable home for the individuals that live here
in Southwest Florida. The impacts of raising costs or having costs incurred, similar to these sprinklers directly affects the enduser's pricing, which goes directly against our mission. When it comes to first-time home buyers, every penny
counts, and can make a difference between ownership, continuing to rent, or unfortunately having to move away from the area in search of that affordability. We are looking to do what we can to combat the affordability crisis and we
ask for your help in that mission with your consideration. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Alex Chandler. Good evening. My name is Alex Chandler. I'm the purchasing manager for Simply Dwell Homes. Um, as Christian mentioned, we're
a Neil Community's entrylevel brand aimed at providing a quality home at an attainable price um to the first-time home buyer. I'm here to discuss the city of Northport's fire sprinkler requirements and the effect it has on Simply Dwell's ability um to deliver
this vision as this is not a shared requirement in Manatee and Sarasota counties where we also build. This document um that you guys received outlines the estimated cost um impact based on a 13D wet fire sprinkler
system. Um as Pat mentioned, direct costs uh hover around $9,500 and an indirect cost impact or just over 5,000. Um meaning that this requirement adds almost $15,000 to our overall cost to build. One might ask,
why not just increase the sales price of the home? simple um because we want to provide the opportunity of home ownership uh to those who otherwise may not be able to afford it. Speaking from the perspective of a first-time home buyer has simply provided my family with
the opportunity to buy our first home, the home buying process is testing. The approval process is tight and finding cash for down payment and closing costs is a challenge. All of these items are impacted by the sales price of the home and a swing of a couple thousand dollars could mean the difference between
qualifying or not. In summary, the fire sprinkler requirements add a substantial amount of cost to build in the city of Northport, making it uniquely challenging to deliver the price point uh to deliver a price point attainable by the first-time home buyer. Thank you.
Thank you, sir. Jeffrey Moon. Good evening, Mr. Mayor. members of the commission. Uh for the record, Jeffrey Boon of the Boon Law Firm representing uh Mr. Neil uh in his proposal here. Um and obviously what we're talking about today, we would like the opportunity to work with staff so when this comes back,
then they'll maybe we can have something for you to to make a decision on. Um uh the prop we have some proposed language that we'll transmit to staff. Uh and the proposal would be impact fees for each residential unit purchased by a hometown
hero as defined in the regulations that you would be adopting would be eligible for a 75% reduction in impact fees which shall be reimbursed to the developer per the terms of a development agreement that you all would approve approved by the city commission. Um a hometown hero.
This is the key part here. So who's a hometown hero? I'm going to read from what we've proposed. The hometown hero shall be an individual who is employed by a federal, state, or local government, a public or private educational organization, a public or
private hospital or medical facility, or a nonprofit organization that serves the city. And again, this is where this is our starting point and we'll be happy to work with staff on that definition. If if you all at your discretion, it would need to be changed. But that's that's our our vision, Mr. Neil's vision at
this point. The intent of this ind impact fee reduction is to incentivize and ensure that adequate housing in the city can be available to and reasonably affordable for those individuals providing vital services supporting the community. Residential unit a a
residential unit constructed and sold to a hometown hero shall be considered an impact fee eligible system improvement uh per your ordinance. That's just sort of language at the end to tie it up. So, in a nutshell, um, uh, what what impresses me here, and as you all know,
I've I've I've been involved in a lot of stuff. So, what impresses me here is that Mr. Neil's not just talking about this. He's actually trying to do something about it. I'm going to say that again. We have a developer here, Mr. Neil, who isn't just talking about attainable housing or affordable
housing. He's proposing something to do about it. Um, and uh, I would like to think there's a lot of different ways that we can try and tackle the attainable housing issue. One one size doesn't fit all. And I really like this approach. He personally like this
approach that Mr. Neil has come up with. So, we would respectfully request that you all uh direct your staff to work with us on this uh proposal and then when you all have the have the ordinance come back to you for your third reading that we'd have some language that you
all could act could actually vote on and if you obviously if you have any questions at that time we'll be here to answer any questions you may have. So, thank you very much for listening to us and uh we're really optimistic we can make some make something actually positive happen. Thank you. Thank you, sir. John
Thaxton. Good evening, Mr. Mayor, members of the commission. For the record, my name is John Tax and I'm hearing appearing this evening on behalf of the Gulf Coast Community Foundation. Um, just by way of a little bit of background, I also serve as at least I
had served as chairman of the Sarasota County Affordable Housing Advisory Committee. Um, I was removed from that role at about 11:00 this morning. I'm still on the committee. I'm just no longer chairman. Drayton Saunders has taken over that responsibility. But
equally as important, in um 2005, I was the representative for the Florida League of City and the Florida Association of Counties on the State Legislaturator's impact fee review task force. We were charged with ensuring that impact fees are used effectively
and and efficiently to support the growth in Florida while also addressing the potential concerns about their impact on development and um and uh cost and affordability. So, basically, I was the defender of home rule for cities and
counties um in 2005. And I'm here tonight um as you exercise that home rule um to support those portions of of ordinance um number 202511 that deal specifically with
affordable housing under the 80% AMI threshold. I've not reviewed the economic development portions um of it, so I would not be speaking to that. I would say that I'm very sympathetic for your deliberation. I have had firsthand experience with the difficulties of balancing affordable housing and the
infrastructure needs of the community. But let me make a novel suggestion that affordable housing is an infrastructure need of the community. It is just as important as public safety, libraries, or utilities. And in reality, we need
more affordable housing. If you had established a level of service or affordable housing infrastructure in Sarasota County or Northport, you would note that you would have a deficiency. While you have many other funding sources for other
infrastructure needs, affordable housing relies predominantly on policy. And in this case, it is policy that promotes a developer's interest and ability to produce affordable housing. The dollar value gain by encouraging the private
sector to build affordable housing under the 80% AMI threshold far exceeds the loss of in of impact fee revenues. There is a lot of costs that this board has to deal with that are associated with a
lack of affordable housing under 80% AMI threshold which is your service workforce and those need to be considered when you look at a net result of your budget impacts of of this one. And I would suggest that this ordinance results in a net positive revenue for Northport's overall budget. And I too
would remain available to speak with staff um about possible changes that can be made to better um improve the the ordinance. I thank you for your time this evening. Thank you very much, sir. Damn toe [Music]
cars. Hi Pam Tokars. I find it ironic that all the developers and builders that have bought all market rate um development to Northport are now here asking you for lowincome housing and workforce housing which we do need
workforce housing immensely. My only comment is this is if the impact fees are going to be affected and the cost is now going to be put the burden on the taxpayers is Mr. Boom wants to help with the staff understand this is that you
give the citizens a chance to sit and also provide input when it comes to this uh item. Thank you. Thank you may that is all Mr. Mayor. All right. Um yes chief.
Good evening. Scott Titus on behalf of Fire Rescue District. Um I just wanted to clarify a few things. One, um we love and support the concept of doing something that helps our hometown heroes as as defined. Um what what we are not in favor of is reducing um life safety
abilities for our firefighters and for our community. And I wanted to make sure that we clarified. So State Fire Marshall adopts Florida Fire Prevention Code which incorporates by reference the National Fire Protection Association codes and standards. NFPA 101, which is
the life safety code, and NFPA1, which is the fire code. Those codes require sprinklers in those dwelling. Don't know how they're enforced in other places. I'm not sure how Mr. Neil does that. We've offered to several other developers here. They wanted to apply to the state fire marshall for a ruling. If
they thought that we were wrong, they could do that. The difficulty there is if that ruling goes against them, then they'll be told they have to do that everywhere else. So, um I'm very confident we're applying the code properly. Um, in these particular units, what happens oftentimes in a lot of places, uh, these types of structures,
they call them town home town homes, which is defined under the Florida building code. So, a lot of times it goes to the building official, the building official does not apply to the fire code. Three or more attached residential units and the fire code is apartments, town home with that same definition falls under apartment code,
which requires sprinklers under NFPA 1 and 101. So, I just want to make sure for the record that we that chief. Thank you. Thank you. Um, in in trying to decide how to
proceed, I guess I'm looking for some guidance here because there is two pieces to this ordinance. If we leave it intact and we send staff back for prepare for a third reading
um and it is inclusive of the economic development impact incent or the incentive program for that versus affordable housing and or workforce housing. I have some concerns about the ability of this ordinance to
get passed and I believe it's important that we address and have more dialogue on the issue of affordable housing, workforce housing. I think that has viability. I think that there's there's a path forward to help city in that
regard. I am concerned though about the will of the board with regard to targeted industry incentives and I'd hate to see everything fail because of that. So I'm wondering how the
best path forward is. um unless we want to discuss more if we can I don't even know about the incentive plan for you know for certain targeted industries because I'm I'm not sure there's much of
a support on the part of this board to offer those incentives since they have to be reimbursed by the taxpayer dollars and I don't want to see any incentives for affordable housing go down the tube because of it. So, I I'm really looking
for guidance here from somebody, whether it be the clerk, the attorney, city manager, as to how we do this because um you know, like I say, uh you know, when this comes back for a third round or if we vote on it right
here, I worry about, you know, killing this whole ordinance. We could always come back with another ordinance for affordable housing and workforce housing. I
mean, anybody have any thoughts on it? Thank you. Taper or I almost answered it. We could just vote on this as it is and then direct staff to bring back an ordinance with regard to workforce housing and affordable housing by itself. That would give us
So, Mr. Mayor, um, since this also is like the former item where a former commission has led us to this place and this is the time where you might need to sort of get together and speak publicly regarding the pros and cons of what is being asked of you. It may make sense to bring this back as a workshop topic so
that you can have those options and information prepared better for you and laid out for you both from the staff so you can understand the impacts of your decisions. And how do my fellow commissioners feel about that? Specifically to the issue of
targeted industry incentive program that any of you feel value in having that workshop on that aspect not affordable housing or workshop but simply on this incentive plan or you know have we heard enough about this issue because I wouldn't want to waste staff's time in
preparing for this if if we've you know if any of you have made up your mind let's hear from you. Do you do you want to simply defer this to a workshop to talk about it all again or or do you
have some focused opinions on the targeted incentive on the targeted industry incentive program excluding separate and apart from affordable housing and workforce housing? because we can always vote this ordinance down and then simply ask staff to bring back
an ordinance with regard to incentives for affordable housing and workforce housing. And that's a whole new discussion and we can vet it properly and we can have community input and we can figure out how we might pay for the
shortfall on workforce housing. But you know my real question is where do you all stand on targeted industry incentive program? I mean is there a need for more discussion on this or do we want to vote? I I really since my name is in the
queue. Um I think there's merit in a targeted industry incentive conversation. Do I think it's currently structured correctly? No. I think it needs more work and
to assume that there's no benefit to taxpayers in bringing companies here that bring a number of good paying jobs. I'm not at all certain that 10 jobs, you
know, rises to the the level that I would want to see. I think there's merit in that. Um, I also think we, this is a new commission and we need to have the opportunity to have these
conversations not just with each other but with the community. So, um, if I read Ms. Ray correctly, even she felt that staff would want to have an opportunity to review this, update it.
The direction came at a very different time. um we hadn't considered workforce housing. There's a lot of merit um in thinking about that. And again, I would say um it's absolutely correct that for
industry and for workforce housing, we would have to cover those impact fee um forgiveness through the general fund. But if we structure it right and if this program helps
attract housing for our workers and attract industry here that can substantially impact um the quality of life and the the level
to offer good paying jobs and career paths and benefits for the residents of this community. In my mind, there's a lot of value and benefit to that. So, I would and and I sort of have a motion if
if you'd like me to go with it. It's very broad and very general. Um, but I think it might help us all work on this uh in a way that really helps us move the needle from both a housing and a
jobs point of view. Your commissioner will hold that motion while two of us or three of us have additional comment. My comment would be a reiteration of what I said earlier on this subject. Um when it comes to
affordable housing and workforce housing, you know, I I see the need and affordable the city does not city taxpayers do not have to make up the difference on on workforce housing. That's not the case. And I think that there's a discussion to be had there and
and and an approach that could be hopefully developed that would make that make sense because we certainly need work for affordable workforce housing when it comes to targeted industry incentive programs. Um, there's just no way that I'm ever
going to support at this point. I am not going to support using taxpayer dollars to incentivize businesses to come here. Okay? When they're coming here because they see a viable opportunity to
capitalize on second fastest growing city in America, they will do well. Other businesses have already done well by coming here. We have a lot of companies that continue to come. I just feel this is just to ask the
citizens to subsidize this when the general feeling out there is hey let's slow things down just flies in the face of common sense. I mean I I
I just we good example the behavioral hospital that just opened I think if I remember the numbers right somewhere between 6 and $700,000 in impact fees if they were afforded a 50%. The city would have to come up with
$350 $400,000. Where is this money coming from? We don't have the money for our infrastructure. We don't have the money for a police headquarters or a solid waste transfer station or a wastewater treatment plant that the Department of Environmental Protection says we better
get fixed or we're going to find up to $1,000 a day. And we're sitting here talking about incentivizing, taking away money that could go to our infrastructure to subsidize incentives to businesses to come here and take
advantage of one, plenty of geography, plenty of land, plenty of workforce, and a growing community. I just I don't see it. So that's why I say you want to all have a discussion later on. Um I'll certainly, you know,
entertain whatever motion anybody wants, but it's not working for me. Mr. uh Commissioner Pro. Thank you, Mayor. I find it ironic that we've been talking about this as far as targeted industries. I understand we can put
aside the affordable housing and workforce aside, and I'm willing to have a workshop on those two. I'm not moving forward with the rest of it. Uh the impact fees definition al by itself.
It's, you know, it pays for the development. Um public safety is number one. That's through transportation. I mean, who who who's going to make up that difference? And I'm repeating the mayor's concerns, but I didn't know he
was going to say the same thing that I was going to say. But I want to vo I want to voice my concern because uh we've been crying for number of years that our infrastructure is aging uh lack of infrastructure and yet we talking
about subsidizing the and I'm not against development. It has to be balanced. Uh but I foresee that the quality of life will suffer if we do any incentives on the impact here. And I
therefore I'm not looking forward even to discuss it at the later time. I'm just my position is no at this time and will not change uh because the growth has to be paid by itself by growth.
So somehow make it more clear, but that's where I stand and I'm not open to entertain any notion uh motions besides affordable housing and workforce. Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner Vice Mayor.
Yeah, I'm I wouldn't be interested the first part taken care of, but the uh affordable housing is always good to talk about, discuss. Then again, earlier I stated if it's not broke, don't fix it. I just assume stay where
we're at, squash this, and move on. It's not take up any more staff time. Just done with it. My opinion, that's it. Mr. Lang. Yeah. Thank you, Mayor. I I just want to comment little reality testing here.
This city has been singularly unsuccessful in attracting the kind of businesses here that can really move the needle for the residents of this city in terms of job opportunities. Singularly
unsuccessful. 70 75% of the new businesses that we welcome here to the city every quarter are homebased businesses. We don't have existing buildings in
commercial areas that a a a business can come here and locate. So it requires building. We bemoan every single commission meeting that we have. The increase in construction fees and how
construction here in Southwest Florida is higher than just about anywhere else in this um United States. Now, do I think 10 employees in the way that incentive program is currently
structured is at the right level? Absolutely not. But we need to have some tools that bring the kinds of businesses here. We want high-tech. We want biotech. We want clean manufacturing
kinds of businesses. Name one business that we've been able to attract here of that caliber. Zero. Zero. So, we've got to take a look at it, folks. And we need to understand why
are those kinds of businesses not coming here. Yeah. Fastest growing. That's wonderful. But I don't see corporations, sizable corporations moving their corporate headquarters to
Northport. They go somewhere else. So, let's be honest with ourselves and and not get high on our own gas that we think we're like the gem of the United States. We have not been successful in
this area and we need it here for economic development. We need it here to give residents of this city an opportunity to upgrade their skills, to have career paths, have real jobs um
that pay well and have benefit packages, you know, let let's be honest with ourselves. And again, is it structured right? No. I I think it needs some work. Um, I'm encouraged that even if we have
an um an ordinance, the requests still come to us for review and approval or rejection. But come on, we need to get good companies here that really elevate
the the um the living standards here in the city. Affordable housing is important. I'm very supportive of incentives for both affordable and workforce also workforce
housing. But it is also our responsibility to help the residents of this city be able to afford the housing here. And we're not going to do that if we don't bring the
kinds of companies here that bring the kinds of jobs we want. So, I implore you to reconsider and to give staff an opportunity to review this proposal, to
give all of us an opportunity to have conversations with staff so that we all feel comfortable that we're doing the right thing and to also have those conversations with the residents of the city and and I totally
get it, you know, to to have to cover, you know, the cost of the the impact fee um forgiveness and having the the residents of the city
have to pay for that. A lot of people I talked to, if that money goes to bringing real opportunities to the residents of this city, they would be supportive of it.
Mr. Dval, at our last meeting when we discussed this, the vote to carry it forward was 4 to one. out tonight I'm hearing various numbers as to whether it
would be 4 to one or not. Uh, I have when it comes to affordable housing, workforce housing, I have to go back that development that's off of Price Echo
Park that we just agreed to 50 years of lowriced housing. housing for the residents there. That was a no-brainer. How
much did we give away and impact fees for that development? None. Commissioner Langden, you know, says we should be, you know, working on this and earlier she mentioned, you
know, maybe after our budget uh discussions at a different time. Uh I think there is some value to this program but I the way it is right now I
just cannot say yes to it right now to the way it's structured now. Now if you want to take it to a a third reading that's too short a time period. I believe Commissioner Langden
was correct in in giving staff time to rework on, you know, reook at some of these things or the uh opportunity for us to have workshops
maybe on this and discussions on this. Um, but as it is right now today, I still have to say no. Sir, Mr. Petro. Uh, thank you, Mayor.
Um, I just want to say a few things. I disagree with the Commissioner Langden. Um, we have a lot of jobs coming in and it's just a matter of time. Perfect example is Benderson Development. We tooured it together. Uh, a lot of buildings are being filled as
we speak. Um there's a growing um industrial side and our city. I don't want to be um I don't want to see our city to be completely industrial. More jobs. Uh sooner or
later those people who who are going to be burdened with the impact fees make up. They're going to have to get another job besides the job they have. But that's not the goal. And I don't want to be a part of the commission or and I can only speak on on
my own on for myself to attract businesses. They're going to come anyways. It's just a matter of time. The new ULC that was passed prior my election ensures that the more commercial land would be available for those businesses. They
will come. It's just a matter of time. But to let the impact fees slide to the taxpayers, those the very same taxpayers will have to get another job to make up for that impact fee shortfall that the
city is going to have. And again, I'm coming back to the infrastructure. We've been talking about uh talking a lot about the infrastructure that is lacking. Who's going to cover that? Who's going to do that? Who's who's going to pay for that? somebody has to
pay it if not developers and we're not asking extra that's and going speaking about impact fees years ago we were not collecting enough of those meaning the percentage was not collected and then
when we decided to make up the state law actually prevented us from collecting the full amount of those impact fees technically we are making a same the same mistake but in a different Um and uh I I'm echoing Commissioner
Dval. I'm not moving forward. I'm just I can't um for the sake of the development of our city um the respect of the taxpayers. I I just can't I don't see it feasible. We're just going to bear
ourselves more and more with the infrastructure needs that going to arise anyway and somebody is going to pay for them. So that's I'm just I would let it be as it is and not do anything with
this as of now. Thank you, Mr. Um and again I you know that's that's sort of how I feel. I I I I really take issue with Commissioner Langden's comments because um quite frankly I
could point to a whole lot of reasons why this city hasn't attracted the right types of businesses. First and foremost, no infrastructure. You don't have water and sewer. How in the world are you going to attract businesses? We have no shovel ready property anywhere. So, you know,
the reality is it is it if we give a tax incentive, we give a tax break to businesses that'll incentivize them to come. Well, gee whiz, we now have four hospitals planned, right? We have a behavioral hospitals open. We have SMH
Sumpter Hospital. We got a property sitting in Wellen Park that SMH owns that it's planning on building something on hopefully. We got HCA who built an emergency room uh and is anticipating building an office building next to it
and then hopefully a full service hospital. So with an incentive program, we can literally offer a tax discount to all those businesses that are already thinking about moving here and all the people who are going to
surround the SMH at Sumpter. All the development that's going to take place in the health care industry throughout this city, we can give them all discounts and the taxpayers can pay for that. What a great deal that is. They're going to come anyway. Okay. We worked
long and hard to revamp the uldc where population continues to grow on infinitum. I mean there is no denying it. We can't stop it. They keep coming. Businesses are attracted by numbers and
by money. And they see a population base. They see the densities that are necessary to make good wise decisions to come and invest in our city because the customer base is there. And with that business is going to come jobs sooner or
later to turn around and incentivize those businesses now at after all the efforts that have gone into getting this city through its growing pains to the point where we're breaking that 100,000 population level and to turn around and to offer a tax break. Hey, if we didn't
have to make up the difference, I'm all in. But if the taxpayers of this city have to subsidize this, there's no way on earth if we have 50 workshops that I will support this. So with that, I'm entertaining a
motion or you know, got it. Anybody? So, if we do nothing on that, what is the result of that? It just dies. Or do we need to vote it
down or vote it up? City attorney prefer a motion to vote it down if that's I'm sorry. Speak up. A motion to vote it down. Is it the will of the board? I'm sorry. Say that again. That is Will the board vote it down? Did that would
be That's right. Anybody make a motion? I move to uh I move to deny the adoption of ordinance number 2025-11. Do I have a second? I'll second. Got a motion by the vice mayor, seconded
by Commissioner Duval to deny the approval of the adoption, I'm sorry, of ordinance 2025-11. There's nothing else to that. Let us vote. That passes 4 to one. Commissioner
Langden, you wish to speak to this or stated. I would uh entertain a motion with regard, if anybody cares to make it, with regard to directing staff to bring back either well to either
schedule a workshop or perhaps that might be the appropriate approach on um uh affordable and work shop and workforce housing uh incentive programs. Anybody? Anybody wants to make that
motion? I'll make the motion. I'd like to make a motion to direct staff to schedule a workshop in the near reasonably near future to discuss uh affordable housing and workforce
housing incentive programs. Second. We have a motion on the floor. City clerk, can you read that back for the record, please? to direct the city manager to schedule workshop in the reasonably near future to discuss affordable housing and workforce housing
incentive programs. Okay. The motion was made by Mayor Stokes and seconded by Commissioner Langdon. Anybody got anything to add to this discussion? If not, let's vote. And that passes three to two with
Commissioner Pro and myself saying no. Anything to that, gentlemen? I have Yeah, I stated. No, I I just think it's too soon. I says we got time to look at it. I mean, we got budget coming up. We got everything. You said as soon as possible. I think we got time
as soon as possible. That's all good. That's the only reason I voted no. Got your uh Yeah, I think it's premature. Uh we've got to do the budget, balancing the budget first and other reasons that I can go on and
on. At this point, um my fellow commissioners concur, I say a 12m minute break. Okay, that'll bring us back at uh 8 what is it? 8:21 8:31
8:21 821 831. Talk about why it's important to have a go kit and what should go inside of it. It's important to have a go bag because if you wait last minute to pack, there are definitely going to be items that you are going to forget in the scramble
to get everything put together. So, it's important to have your documents such as IDs, insurance paperwork, titles for your home and your vehicles and your boats just so that if your home does flood or your roof blows up, all those
documents are with you and they're safe because you don't want to end up losing those and having to try to replace those later on. Also, in your go bag, you should think about what medications you might need to have ahead of time. If we're under a state of emergency, you are able to refill your prescriptions
ahead of time, even if they're not due yet. So, it's important to do that. Also, in your go bags, you should have non-p perishable food, flashlight, batteries, a radio that is battery powered and extra batteries. Should all power go out, we will be able to
broadcast on 97.5 FM anything uh any emergency information. So, be sure to have your battery powered radio ready and tuned in to 97.5. [Music] We believe that the natural resources department will be an integral part for
the city's growth as we want to achieve a more balanced approach of development. ment in the future. What we really want to do is see sensible development, sustainable development and development that is um in line with what we already
have here. So we want to preserve as much as we can of the uh natural resources. So there is still place for our natural species, our our migrating birds and all the other species that live um and survive in our habitat.
Natural systems are a big part of the ways ecosystems function. An important part for our community, our listed species. They stabilize the soil. They provide so many different benefits
including shade, limiting the heat island effect uh within our city, providing habitat, providing shelter for these species and just uh also for our aesthetic enjoyments. Well, as an
arborist, uh a lot of what I do is making sure that development conforms to the tree protection code. So, one thing we already have in place since April of 2022 is a tree protection code which is quite robust in the city of Northport
that was adopted by commission in the city through also a lot of community involvement. And so, we're very happy to have that tree protection code. So, what I a lot of what I do is making sure that development either residential or commercial conforms to that code. We are
such a passionate team. We come from varied backgrounds. Uh I think between us we have over a 100red years of experience and we are every day raring to go and you know we know our work is cut out here and we're happy to uh take the challenge through the division and
community involvement and leadership in the city. We really hope to make great strides in protecting what we have here and finding that balance with development and environmental stewardship. I am excited to be a part
of this team and I'm really seeking and looking forward to the opportunities for us to be able to make a [Music] difference. I started with Charlotte County Utilities as a meter reader in 2004. So that's kind of where I got my
foot in the door. And once I reached a point in my life where things were more stable, I decided to leave Charlotte County Utilities and I went and got my insurance license. It was very exciting doing that for a short period of time. But after a while, I started thinking about the utility. It was in my heart.
At this point, I had almost 12, just two months shy of 12 years in. And so I realized during that time, my heart was in utilities. And so I started looking around again. and I seen an opening here to be a CN D tech. So, I applied and I
got in. Typically, I get here at 7 in the morning. I get my list of, you know, if I can get to this, this is what I need to do. And I get in my truck. If if I need any supplies, parts, tools based off of the work I was given that morning, I'll pick that up here at our
shop. And then I head out and um my goal for the day is just to get as much work as that was assigned to me done as possible. And sometimes that happens. And other times there's a lot of first response calls that come in. My favorite part is the uniqueness. It's um not knowing what I'm going to be faced with
every day. It could be different. It's not mundane in any way. And it's exciting when you get a call and you're you're on your way and you don't know what it is. And you you have the experience and the knowhow and the backing to face whatever it's going to
be. So I feel very confident in facing these calls. And I think that's my favorite part. Hello, my name is Devon Pulis. I'm the aquatics facilities manager with the city of Northport. And today we're going to be talking with you guys about our free swim evaluation. It's important that we do these swim evaluations so as
uh kids are registering for swim programs, they get placed in the right class. What we're looking at when we're doing the swim evaluation is every swim level has what's called exit skill assessments. So, what we do is we have your child get in the water and we'll go through a series of different movements. Can you go under the water? Uh, can you
show us your front crawl? Can you show us back crawl? Can you show us elementary backstroke? Different strokes within there. And what we're doing is we're trying to see where your child tests to before it becomes a challenge for them at that point. Once we assess that, then we'll let you know and you can go ahead and sign your child up for
that appropriate level there. It's important that we have these so that way when we're teaching a level one, we don't have kids that should be potentially in a level two and a level one class because they're not learning the appropriate skills that they need at that point in time. Right now, uh when we're in full summer operations, uh we
ask that people come between 8 and 10 to do the swim evaluations just as you can hear the water splashing in the background, slides, and everything like that. But any day of the week, uh that we're open, you can come in at any point in time and ask for a swim evaluation. We always have a certified swim instructor on site that can uh have your
child take a swim [Music] assessment. Franklowway's manager. I am here today with Mario Vendetti. Mario, tell people here how long you've been doing this job. I've been here five years. Five years. Excellent. Excellent.
So, Mario, tell people what it entails, what you do. I'm a planner scheduler for Solid Waste of the City and um I go around and I I greet the new residents and I educate them on the recycle. Excellent. Sounds interesting. Very good. Yep. So, Mario, what do you find
inside the recycling bins that shouldn't be there? So, let's try to tell the people how to recycle, right? Well, the most common thing I find, Frank, is plastic bags. Okay. So, the plastic bags are not recyclable. I find them just tossed in the container or they bag the recycle with them. And they should This
is inside the blue container. That's right. Inside the blue lid containers. Correct. And they should be either taken back to the grocery store or tossed in the trash. Very good. Do you see a lot of recycling inside the containers? Uh I do. And I come across a lot of that. Okay. We don't want to do that. So,
okay. So, if you have any questions, you can always look at our website ww.northportf Florida.gov. [Music] GV/Solidwaste. Welcome to the brand new Northport Podcast Network. We're so excited to introduce you to our revamped
lineup of shows created to keep you connected, informed, and inspired about everything happening in our city. That's right. With three unique shows under one network, there's something for everyone. First up is Northport. Now Madison and I will rotate hosting this fast-paced
news-driven podcast to bring you the latest city updates, event previews, and important information all in one quick listen. Think of it as your weekly guide to staying in the know about what's happening in Northport. Next, we have Northport Stories. Laura and I will share heartfelt and inspiring
tales from around our community. Stories that showcase the people, places, and moments that make our city special. And don't worry, Voices of Northport isn't going anywhere. I'll continue bringing you even more personal stories and interviews with residents who shaped our city. And last but not least, Northport
Living. Cody and I will also rotate hosting this show, which is all about tips, events, and lifestyle ideas to help you make the most of life right here in Northport. Whether you're looking for family-friendly activities, ways to get involved, or helpful home and garden tips, Northport Living has
you covered. With breaking news, heartfelt stories, or practical tips, the Northport Podcast Network is your go-to source for all things Northport. Make sure to subscribe to the Northport Podcast Network wherever you listen and join us as we celebrate and connect with
our amazing community. Northport Now will be released bi-weekly. Northport Stories and Living will be monthly. A schedule will be available on social media and our [Music]
website. Hello everyone, Devon Pulis here, aquatics manager. Welcome to my [Music] crib. We have fun here at the crib. Programs included. Become a pass member. Play all year long. Hayer at the crib. We do have rules. We take all payments
here at the crib. Apple Pay, Mastercard, Visa, cash. You pay right here to enjoy the crib. So, enter through the gate. Childp proof, most adult proof. Shade. What's that? Our newly
installed sun shade available for rent all season long. Here at my crib, you don't have to worry about a place to find a seat. We've added more chairs than ever here at the crib. If you're coming to enjoy the cribs and you got little ones, we got the perfect area for them. Our Pelican
playground, newly painted, fresh floor, fresh palm tree. It's looking clean. Looking for a place to work your upper body? Take a shot at here at our Stingray shuffle. Looking to relax? I got you covered here with our lazy
river. Living more on the adventurous side. Check out the slides right behind me. Newly painted. All offer something individual and unique. Check it out. Check out the main pool. We got a long
night ahead of us. Next up, number 2025-12, excuse me. Ordinance 2025-12, [Music] an ordinance of the city of Northport, Florida, amending the non-district budget for fiscal year 2024 2025 for
opioid treatment and prevention items in the amount of $19,000, providing for fightings, providing for posting, providing for conflicts, providing for severability, and providing an effective date. Thank you, sir. City manager, your item. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. These opioid
sentiment funds may be spent on substance use u disorder treatment prevention and recovery as well as mental health treatment. This is the second reading and there were no changes from the first reading. We ask that you adopt ordinance number 2025-12. Thank you sir. Thank you sir.
Commissioners, anything to this item? Seeing none public comment? No sir. which case I will close this public hearing. Request a motion. Move to adopt ordinance number 2025-12 as presented.
A motion by the vice mayor, seconded by Commissioner Duval to adopt ordinance 2025-12 as presented. Let's vote, folks. And that passes 520. Moving on to resolutions. C. Resolution number
2025-R32. Uh, assistant city clerk. If you'd read by title only, please. A resolution of the city commission of the city of Northport, Florida, repealing and replacing resolution 2024R5, reallocating state funded grant funds from construction services to
construction, engineering, and inspection services, providing for the approval and execution of state funded grant agreements between the city of Northport and the state of Florida Department of Transportation regarding the reconstruction of drainage under Price Boulevard at the Blue Ridge Waterway, Mahay Waterway, Lagoon
Waterway, and Kraton Waterway providing for incorpor preparation of recital providing for conflicts providing for severability and providing an effective date. Thank you sir. City manager your item. Thank you Mr. Mayor. Uh this state funded grant agreement provided a million and a half dollars in funding
for construction services associated with the Price Boulevard waterway crossings at Blue Ridge Waterway, Macau waterway, Lagoon waterway, and Kraton waterway. During the procurement process for the Price Boulevard winding project, the city received a single bid that significantly exceeded the project's
estimated budget upon review with FDOT. The department wanted the project to be readvertised rather than negotiated directly with the sole bidder to avoid delays and preserve the awarded funding. FDOT recommended repurposing the earmarked funds to support construction,
engineering, and inspection services for the project. The total reimbursement amount remains unchanged. We ask that you approve resolution number 2025- R32 presented today. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Uh, commission questions, discussion, vice
mayor. Oh, no. That was clear for us. Seeing nothing to this item, any public comment? No, sir. And I'll close this hearing and request a motion. Make it move to adopt resolution number
2025-R32 as presented. Second. Got a motion by the vice mayor, seconded by Commissioner Langden to adopt resolution number 2025-R32 as presented. Let's vote, folks. And that passes five to zero. Moving on
to general business 6A 25-2195. Uh discussion and possible action regarding the proposed general terms and parcel map to facilitate development of conservation easement between the city of Northport and Big Waters Land Trust, Inc. for a portion of War Mineral Springs Park parcel. City
Manager, your item. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I will turn it over to our director of our park and recreation department, Miss Sandy Funhella, for conversation. Good evening. Sandy Funheller, parks and recreation director. In September of 2024, commission provided direction to
negotiate with the Conservation Foundation, now known as Big Waters Land Trust, and the Gulf Coast Community Foundation for a conservation easement on the 60 acres of land adjacent to War Mineral Springs Park. In addition, direction was provided to identify a
section of the property for development as an alternative holistic health center. City staff from Parks and Recreation and Development Services have worked with Christine Johnson and Brooke Langston of Big Waters Land Trust and John Thaxton with GF Coast Community
Foundation to draft general terms to support development of a conservation easement agreement. We've also identified a plan to subdivide the War Mineral Springs Park property to accommodate acreage for a conservation easement. The proposed parcel map included with
this agenda item shows the existing active park site and the spring, the proposed boundaries of a 52 acre conservation easement, and a 12 acre section that will contain the future Warl Springs Park connector trail head,
pedestrian bridge, and allow for a 10,000 square foot building site that could support a holistic health center or something similar. Pending commission approval of the conservation easement as deline delineated on the uh parcel map,
staff will pursue a lot survey as stated in the general terms document that is included. The conservation easement is designed to permanently protect and preserve the natural, recreational, and environmental integrity of the property. The agreement ensures that the land
remains available for public enjoyment while preventing non-recreational development. With commission agreement on the general terms, uh staff will incorporate that into a draft conservation easement agreement and submit for legal review.
Once complete, the agreement would be brought back to commission for review and approval. Miss Johnson, Miss Langston, and Mr. Thaxton, not sure. Um they're present tonight and are available to speak to this item along with staff. With that, happy to answer
questions. Thank you very much, commissioners. Vice Mayor, yeah, thank you, Sandy. I think you guys did a wonderful job here and getting all the parties involved. And I looked at the maps and everything and the only
thing that that I was concerned with and I have no issues with putting in the conservation easement. I'm just I don't want to shoot ourselves in the foot on just limiting ourselves to the 12 acres. So, I wanted to bring it up to the board
to possibly increase that to 20 acres total to where that square section could be carved out just, you know, a little bit more accessible to us for the future. Not saying anything's going to happen right now, but who knows, 10, 20
years down the line, we might want to be able to do something there. I would just like to keep that little extra acreage just in case and the rest can go into the east. That's quite a bit of land as well. So, um what you'll see on the map,
what staff did was really try not to disturb the existing wooded area um the natural area that is in the 60 acres. That's why you see that that parcel have that um odd shape there. Um I think what we presented responds to what the
community asked for. Um though it's a policy decision on what commission wants to do with carving out that um that space. um it would reduce the value um when we get to the transfer of development rights um on the
conservation easement thank you vice mayor commissioners anybody else duval yes um I did look at that map and uh you know we had a
discussion and that arch that's in front, not that wooded area. I like that area the way you have it set apart.
Um, I don't want to see anything extra digging into this. Okay. The public has been pretty affirmative in their idea of a conservation easement preserving this
land. And I don't want to see little pieces, little chunks of it taken away. Uh I think that map that you have that you guys came up with, I think it meets the bill. Thank you.
Uh, Commissioner Lang. Uh, thank you, Mayor. A couple of questions on permitted uses item 4 F. So, a permitted use is a public botanical garden
arburetum. Would that include potentially a botanical garden that charged for admission? What does public mean? It could um it's it's in there just now
this is not the conservation easement. This is just general terms. So how we hash that out um is still um in development once commission agrees to the general terms. What that arboritum might look like or botanical garden
that's really up for discussion. Um it could have an admission fee doesn't have an admission fee depends on what partner wants to come in on that. Is it something you want staff to try and develop or work with extension services or you know there's a there's a lot of options on on which way we could go with
that. Is there a friends group that maybe wants to um help with that? Um it's it's really in there because that was a discussion on the dis right about being able to do that. We wanted to have that in there so we do have the ability to do it if that opportunity presents
itself. Okay. Um, item H, routine and preventative maintenance. I'm confused between 4H and
5D. So, the grantee would be responsible for the removal of all invasive plants. Um, I have an undeveloped lot next to my house and it is
unbelievable the amount of effort we put into removing the kudzu vines that keep creeping onto my property. So, I have some appreciation for having to do that for 52 acres. So, I'm just trying to or
six whatever. Um I'm just trying to figure out what's the difference between routine and preventative maintenance which I would assume the city would be responsible. So H is referring to the city's be having access to do our routine maintenance. So
when the trail is developed and the uh the the trail head will not be in the conservation easement but a large portion of the trail itself will be going through the conservation easement. So that is allowing us to access that to provide the maintenance that we need to
do, right? Because it also says under H invasive plant removal and yet it's also under 5D. So I'm just a little confused. Um that would be referring to any of the area that is right off of the path. So I
believe it's like a three-foot buffer on each side of the path that the city would be responsible for. Okay. Do we have an any idea of the cost? So, so we we estimated with in rough shape. So, it has to be sort of
restored. So, I don't have a cost on that on on doing any grading or or getting it ready for public use. Um, as far as maintaining the trail, um, cleaning the restroom facility that's there, we're
estimating that's about $28,000 a year. I'm particularly concerned about the the easement area. I'm just really trying to understand the financial impact to the city. So, we would not be responsible for anything
except the maintenance of the trail and the the buffers on each side of it or any any recreational um amenities that we put into the conservation easement. the um foundation would be responsible for the invasive plant removal on the majority of that
property. Okay. So, if the city puts in any Oops. No, no, no, no. So, with a conservation easement, the holder of the conservation easement is basically holding the development rights.
the land owner is always responsible as they always are for maintenance of the land. So there isn't a cost for the conservation easement um that the city is paying for. The only cost to a
conservation easement is to enforce the conservation easement and that is being paid for by GF Coast Community Foundation. Could you repeat that please? So which part?
Um, I I I've sort of understood you to say it would be the city's responsibility to maintain the conserved area, but then I I thought you said that
the Gulf Coast Community Foundation would fund that. We they are funding the stewardship fee of the conservation easement. So we have because it's a per perpetual
conservation ement meaning forever um we have the obligation by law to ensure that the city does what they're not supposed to do and does what they're supposed to do and there's a cost to us for that not to you for us.
So, right. So, we have to come and monitor this conservation easement. And so, what whatever you guys would say the city needs to do or not do, the city would bear the cost of that,
right? So, you're the land owner, so you're going to take care of your land. Yes. Okay. Thank you. Oh, that's not that's not right. Yes. Is that it, Commissioner? Done. Yeah,
way to go. Sort of dropped that one in my lap. Um because when I had my one-on-one, it was my understanding from staff that the city would not be responsible for maintaining any of the conserved land that that would be and
belong to both coasts or or this entity that was being created. Um, so basically like whatever is done on this 60 acres is going to cost the taxpayers of the city of Northport to maintain except for
a carved out area where partners may come in. someone were to build a, you know, a gardens or a wellness center, you know, that purchase that that agreement between the parties could
spell out an area of maintenance and repairs and upkeep that that partner, that operator would have to do. But as far as all this acreage out there, like that would fall to the city depending on
what we did with it. And so, okay. Well, if we did nothing to it, I suppose we wouldn't have to keep much up and do anything much more than what we've been doing all along. So, we really haven't been doing anything all
along. Our intent is not to um open the entirety of the 60 acres to the public. it would be the trail, right, that is open to the public. Um, if we were going to look into um having all of that be accessed publicly, there's certainly a lot of
things that we would need to do to make that area safe for somebody to be walking through. That's not in our our intent. Our intent is that they are on the trail um and using any trail system that's in there. Uh the cost any of our cost on War Middle Springs Park property
would be within the War Middle Springs fund. Yeah, that makes sense. Um also, uh I concur with the vice mayor. I I would love to see more space. I I think if I remember our briefing on this,
there was about the provision for maybe 10,000 square feet um of of available. I mean, a building that could possibly be done there. That to me, that's not enough. I mean, if you look
at just what a 5,000 foot office is, it's nothing. I mean, you're talking about two entities, two 5,000 square ft spaces, it's just inadequate for what potential there might be. I mean, if if you just think of two or three or four
things you might want to do there that would generate some revenue and attraction, forget even about the revenue as much as help cover some of the costs and attract people. That's what I'm looking for because while I want to protect in my opinion, I want to
protect that 60 acres, I also want it to be a place that that more people than just use the springs want to come to. We know with the Legacy Trail Connection that's going to draw people there, but there still needs to be something whether it's food, whether it's a
wellness building, whether it's whatever. And 10,000 square feet doesn't cut it for me. 20,000 does. I think that that gives you a little more flexibility. And and the other thing hand inand with that is I would love at
some point before you all get too much further down the road is I'd love to get some more community input on ideas about what all they think. I mean, remember we had a huge group of people that said the
2019 plan would be a great plan and it references that in your in your documentation so far. But the reality is if we created that 2019 plan, the cost to the city could significantly I mean I'll pull a number. I mean we could be
talking a quarter million, a half million, threequarters of a million a year to actually maintain that 2019 plan. So I have some concerns about what all we think should go there because I think community has some ideas. I think
you all ought to hear them. We all ought to hear them again like what realistically could go there and then what's the costs of doing those things because otherwise we're going to put a cons if what we want to do is just put the conservation easement on carve out this this small parcel of land and then
do nothing with the rest of the acreage I guess that's okay too if that's the will of the board and that's certainly the will of of you know GF coast I mean they don't want anything to be built there if they had their brothers and and that seems seems to be the general consensus of of of the vocal voices on
this subject. But I just think like there ought to be like a another round of input here to make sure that all of a sudden it isn't okay we put this thing in place and then it's people go well I mean I don't understand. I thought we were going to do this and I
thought we're going to do that and we're really doing nothing. We're leaving just a whole bunch of woods. We're not really doing anything except a legacy trail connector and then maybe like I don't know what all you could have in that 10,000 square feet. So this this is not to
say here's what we're going here's the project plan for that that we're going to do on the 60 acres. It's to say we're putting a conservation easement and here's all the things that we could potentially do on the site including the things that were listed in the master
plan. But it's not obligating us, right, to do any of it. The only thing that we have moved forward with is the trail connection, um, the Warminal Springs Park connector trail. So, um I I don't know that we'd get a lot of different
information out of people given that we've taken the entire master plan, which we already had multiple public meetings, stakeholder groups um input on that um and are also opening it up to um
recreational opportunities. I mean, we can visit them down the road. You're you're absolutely right. The only thing I'd hang on to is I'd like to see as vice mayor would I'd like I'd like to see the additional acreage. We don't have to build on we don't have to tear all the trees down, but I'd like to have
that piece carved out. So would it be um would it be acceptable to work with Kimley Horn to say um commission is looking for a 20,000 square foot site potentially in the future and what acreage do we need to accommodate that
for me? All I got Commissioner Dval. Thank you, Mayor. The 60 acres. I want to understand this. It goes under the conservation
easement. The city's responsible for the maintenance. Now suppose the con you heard Commissioner Langden state how much time they have
spent cutting invasive weeds away from their property. Well, suppose the conservation easement decides that we should get rid of all the invasive weeds that are out in that 60
acres. Now, the city's responsible for doing that. Yep. That could be a an expensive process. So, let's get into the weeds, so to speak. The conservation easement
when it's when it is created, when it is put onto the deed, there is a baseline document and that baseline document says from this day forward, the property can't be degraded environmentally from this day forward.
So if when we do that baseline document when the conservation easement is placed on the on the on the deed if it has invasives already on it then you're not and you don't do anything with them and they don't get
farther into wherever they don't become you know you can't degrade it worse than it was when the conservation easement was put on it. That's basically what it means. That's what I'm trying to say. Does that make sense? So you don't have to, we do not have the right to tell you
as a land owner to make it better than it was when you put the conservation easement on it. We don't have that right. Thank you. Okay. All you got there, Commissioner Commissioner Langdom. Couple couple questions. I have a question for Mayor
in terms of community input. Are you looking for something additional to the survey we did? I'm good. I withdraw that request because that's something that can be handled down there. Sandy addressed that. We can handle it down the road. Okay, great. Now, I have a couple of questions based on um this
conversation. So, how do we assess the current level of invasives? I mean, is someone going to go through that property all 50 whatever acres? Yes. Well, here's the
trick with invasives. They're invasive because they spread. That's the whole thing. So, yes, we would be responsible. And so, are you only going to take half of the invasives
out so that they continue to spread or are you going to take all the invasives out so hopefully they don't spread or do you just trim the edge? Right. So we we would be responsible for maintaining on each side of the trail
for sure because we are opening a trail potentially to the public. So three feet on each side of that trail. Um if we want to go in and do um you know identify all the invasive plants that
are out there, we can do that. We've done some of that through volunteer work out at the environmental park. Um we've had um uh volunteer work days out there where they're helping us get rid of the invasive plants there. So there there are ways to do it. It takes a lot longer obviously when you're doing it with a
volunteer group. Um or we could hire someone to come in and document all of it and come up with a a management plan. But what I'm hearing is we could be required to do it under this agreement.
No, that is not correct. No. What I said again, yeah, what I said was whatever the state is of the property when the conservation easement is placed on it, it can stay that way. But I think we can assume the invasives
will spread and so when you you have to keep them to the point where they were when we conservation easement was acquired. Correct. So yeah, would be on the hook. You're not on the hook to remove them. No. No.
Keep them at bay. It's very hard to control them. Okay. Y sure. Pro. Sorry. Thank you, mayor. U lost. So I have a couple questions and a
couple points to make as I'm looking at this conservation easement general terms. Well, first I want to say uh the city is moving in in the right direction to have this to be granted into conservation easement.
Um this conservation eman general terms I'm looking at uh five um bullet point five number five and says rights and obligations of grantee uh grantee is the recipient of some something so it would be
conservation whatever the the nonforprofit organization correct we are the grantee so when I'm looking at the number It says the obligation to remove invasive exotic plants
is right an obligation of grantee that is recipient of something that is this area that we're talking about 52 acres correct and that was our little sidebar. We Big Waters Land
Trust does not agree with the word obligation and that would be something that we need to negotiate before we bring it back to you. Okay. So this document was given on on the on the premises of this document. I formulated my opinion and possible future I
apologize of my vote. Um so let's say for example we want to devel a development or as I'm looking at this permitted uses a passive low impact recreation for example uh walking trail
if we we anybody if wants to develop who can develop that who's going to make that walking trail is it going to be grantee or the city the city as the land owner you are Yeah,
because we can't improve your land. Okay. But I I was under the impression that once it granted into the easement con conservation, we have nothing to do with that. I mean, we can't
we're still going to be able to develop and develop what I mean to have walking trails. We will be able to do it. Yes. Yes. So, here's how conservation easement works. There is a bundle of rights. Picture that I have multiple pins in my hand. You as land
owner own all the rights when you own land in fe simple as the legal term is conservation easement. You sever some of those rights and put them into a conservation easement that's held by a third party big waters land
trust but you also retain rights in that conservation ement. And so as you as you see in here, you are retaining rights to improve the property both natural resources as well as what we call for
people resources, not just for nature resources. And so you're retaining some rights within that conservation. That help? Yes. Yes. In essence, I mean, we giving up uh a lot, but we still have to do a lot. Yes. Yes.
Yes. Yes. Okay. and forever forever right that's that's the big right big big item here um so how do we negotiate all those little things is it going to be a formal
process or yes I think you laid out that yes so um what we're looking for is general agreement to these terms this is not the conservation easement agreement correct um we would take these general terms um put put them into an agreement
format that we would then submit. Um uh we'd work back and forth um with the stakeholders and we'd submit it to our legal our city attorney for review. Um and eventually it would then come back to city commission for review and approval. Well, in the process of uh
designing the terms, do we have a say now? It's going to be whatever they decide the legal um team or you you present us back with the stuff. Do we have any say in advance? Yes. I I if there's something on the general terms
that as a a body of the commission you would like different amended um now is the time to let us know. May I May I add we do it this way to save you money. We do it this way so that we can say we
agree to these general terms and then your attorney, our attorney, your staff's time, our staff's time goes forth and does what you have agreed to preliminarily as the general terms. It's a way to save money and time. Not only do you have the time to you
have the right now to tell us what you do and don't like of these terms, but even when you get the legal document back, you get the ability to say, "I don't like this, I don't like that." It just is more efficient to hear it now instead of when we get the lawyers
involved. No offense. When you say right now, you mean literally right now or Yes, literally right now. Uh because we But it's not a It's not forever hold your peace. That's right. I So if you were going to make a motion to agree to
the general terms with an amendment or with a condition of um that's what we're looking for. And on the parcel map we're looking for do you agree to what we've laid out as the acreage to be withdrawn.
Do you want as um we mentioned u to say to accommodate a 20,000 square foot site? We're looking for that direction. so we can move forward and keep the process going. And I just want to make my suggestion public. I think if we do
develop and by developing I mean lightly permitted uses like a walkway or shaded area bench whatever that we do those things we maintain that structure
whatever is nature and that includes invasive stuff that's conservation easement let them maintain that stuff for example if we have a a walkway way built over a water or whatever or in the
woods and the invasive species are growing and overgrowing. That's not our job to maintain. We'll maintain the boardwalk or whatever the shaded area, the bench rotted. So, we will replace that. Let
the conservation easement nonforprofit organization maintain the nature is we giving the nature to them. Let them do it. But that's just mine. They're saying they won't do that. Well, they Well, I was just told that we can negotiate now, so
I'm just letting my voice heard. Um and um and the last thing I want to say that uh with the 52 acres that we have and 12 are excluded
from besides 52 acres I would like to see more of added to 12 acres maybe five seven acres for the future land development as a buffer between the 12 acres and the
conservation easement. Maybe in the future we'll have a pavilion open restaurant open where people can dine. I just feel that as a city giving this much land we want something to
preserve not for the big time development but for light development maybe a restaurant or a man whatever it is but I just feel that um it would be a beneficial for the whole area to be attractive
because let's face this this area is not attracted attractive as it is right now even if we develop those um or redesign those buildings repair I should say. So, um I'm
supporting vice mayor and the mayor's suggestion if we carve out maybe seven acres which would be not to benefit only for the city but for the entire area to be attract to be usable to be
familyfriendly. Uh we're not building a hotel there. uh nothing of that nature but something to be added back to TW um not back but to be added to 12 acres from 52 acres. So I
that would go along with Commissioner Emmer and what he suggested earlier. I think we're just looking for direction. Do you what is if you want different acreage let us know what that is. Do you want just us to accommodate a certain square footage of commercial? we can go
back and do that. Um we're really just looking for direction on how we can move forward. Well, they expressed their um suggestion and I in a way supported their suggestion so we can have more land as a city to be excluded from
conser uh ement conservation conservation ement. I'm sorry. Uh and that would be for the benefit of everybody to have that little transition from the the actual city- owned land and
between the conservation easement. I don't know if there would be a transition. We we would need to pull the whole No, no, I'm saying in the development later on in development, but the area is and we would encourage that the development is towards the front of
the property. That's correct. Yeah, that's and I did voice that when we met um with your team, the commission, vice mayor, city manager, I'm sorry. Oh, thank you,
Mr. Mayor. I'll let go first. You're too kind. Just this one. Yes, sir. Um, we just want to point out, I think Commissioner Petro touched on it a lot, but if you do want us to go back the evasive conversation and the maintenance of it, we do believe that it will be
significant. So, as it read, I'm sorry for as it reads, I'm sorry for the miscommunication that happened between us. But I just want to let you know as you direct this to go forward, that is something you want us to either have a conversation and hear no about it in the future or not. We do believe it's
significant. I don't want to minimize it. Um, just because we got it wrong as it reads on the document. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Yeah. uh since we're back to these invasives that Commissioner Language really loves and you know where where
we're at now in in the degradation of the property. Let's say the property's covered with 50% invasive comes down to year from now. Now we're at 100% and we got a watchdog saying you got to come in spend your
money and clean this up because it has to be back to 50%. It cannot go past that 50% on those invasive species. And we all know how fast they grow and how quick they grow. Now, what the city has is an outside entity agency telling us,
dictating us. We have to clean this up. We have to spend X and it has to be done with what time span would we have a year? Would we have six months? None of that is conduit to what staff would have to do out there for us the city
maintaining that area when we were all under the understanding if we gave it to the conservation ement they would maintain the natural areas because we were basically leaving them natural. But if we don't go forward with the
conservation easement, we're still the property owner and we don't have to worry about invasive species in the woods. You know, nobody's telling us what to do on that property. So, it's just something to think about. I've got no issues with going with a conservation
easement, but let's let's have all of our eyes dotted and our tees crossed to we know what both parties are involved in doing. And when we talked to, and I'll move on to another thing. When we talked about the adding of the property, I'm not looking to add an area to be
able to put in a 20,000 square foot building. Don't even know if we'd have one coming, but maybe to have an area for two 10,000 ft buildings. One now, one 10 years from now, whatever the case may be. That's what I'm looking at.
That's why I went for like total acreage. If we're at 12, I'd like to be at 20 and then be done with it and then the rest goes into the easel. But we have to have those conversations on whose responsibilities are what before you know we're talking taxpayers money
too still with war mills. So just a discussion we got to have sometime. That's all I have. Thanks. And you know to that point you know Sandy made mention that Mineral Springs itself you know
generates funds and and obviously to the extent there there were available funds those dollars would theoretically go to help maintain. But I was also of the opinion that whatever acreage was put into
conservation and not developed left asis, that would not be the city's obligation to maintain. And you know if we got let's say a collaboration with Selby Gardens and they want to come and build a
gardens and take a chunk of that well our negotiation with them would involve them obviously not just building it but maintaining it taking care of the area in and around it whatever was involved so there would not be a burden on the city's taxpayers at all.
So, you know, I would say that um since things are negotiable that we make that a condition that um big water land trust pay to maintain any of the undeveloped
conservation land. If they don't want to do that, well, obviously they don't want to do it because it's a big number. Well, we don't want to do it because it's a big number to our taxpayers. So, you know, there we go. Um, I don't know how we resolve that, but I would certainly want that to be a condition.
I'm all for this easement, but I am not for putting a financial burden on the backs of the taxpayers of this city. I said it all night long. You're going to hear it from me all the way as long as I ever sit on this day. I am tired of tapping the taxpayers. It's time to stop
this. And you know, I appreciate all the value in this conservation easement. I am all for it. But if If this group, if Big Water wants to preserve this land, then it needs to step up and preserve it. We're giving it to them. Let them
take care of it as long as we don't develop on it. So, I I you know, Christine and I have have have talked here. Uh I think there is room for more negotiation. Um however, uh John Thaxton with GF Coast Community Foundation, who is um funding the conservation easement,
is not here. So I obviously don't want to speak for him if that's something that they were interested in funding moving forward. We need to have that discussion with him. Yeah. Exactly. And we're not proving anything or disapproving this. This was an update that we asked for so we could have this
these kinds of very discussions because we obviously have a commission that's concerned about this issue. Yes, ma'am. I just want to make it clear. The city of Northport would be granting rights to Big Waters Land Trust in a conservation
easement. The city of Northport is not gifting land to Big Waters Land Trust, right? It's giving you the rights and we're staying with the obligations. I get that. So that that's not entirely true either. I need to I'm sorry but I
have to correct this that with a conservation easement there is no conservation easement holder who is ever responsible for maintaining what they do not own. Okay? We as a conservation easement holder we do not own the land.
We do not get any revenue from that nor any of the proximate revenue from around it either. It actually is an onus on us forever. I guess that will be the reality of what this commission will have to decide about. If I if I may say, we have conservation easements on 150
acres of Robinson Preserve in Manatee County. We have a we have a conservation easement on Johnson Preserve in Man. We have a conservation easement on Bobby Jones golf course. We have a conservation easement down in Collier County on a 1500 acre Pepper Ranch owned by Collier County. We do not maintain
any of those. and and do we know it would be nice to know what it costs each one of them to maintain those conservation land and then we could see you know relative to the amount of acreage we have just so we could get a ballpark because like I say when push
comes to shove our ultimate responsibility here is to look out for our taxpayers dollars. Okay, I'll get on my soap box and say it and not everybody is going to come to this area. there's not going to be a whole lot there. They
ask taxpayers to have to fund the cost of maintaining this when right now we just let it be. It's as far as I'm concerned, it's conservation land. Nobody's doing anything with it. So I and I don't mean to be facitious or
snarly or whatever about it, but we have got to accept the realities of when we make decisions, it costs somebody money. And since we don't print it, who's it cost? our taxpayers over and over and over again. I don't know whether the taxpayers of this city are going to be
willing to fund the cost of maintaining this yet. I believe this is the right thing to do. I'll speak to that in my three minutes. There you go, ma'am. Thank you, Commissioner Petro. I think I can just add a little
bit to what the mayor said. Let the nature be the nature. Let it be as it is. But if we built any uh trails. I think there's a room for negotiation to to keep it clear from invasives. Um I don't know how much it's
going to be. The city manager said it's a substantial or can be substantial. Uh thus it's going to be a substantial financial cost or burden. Um but it all comes to the art of negotiation. I think we I
mean it doesn't mean that if you don't do on the other ones, maybe this one you will do it. I don't know. I'm just but uh I I guess it's it's it's logical to maintain whatever we put up
there any physical structure any any benches whatever we'll maintain those replace those but as far as we giving the rights to the n to the big water w water slant trust we giving up that right not to be
developed we giving that nature to to that organization. Do don't we we do give out that nature not to be developed. Thus we should not be maintaining fully or partially whatever whatever we come to the
terms why do we have to do it to the fullest extent I mean after all we don't have to maintain it anyways. I mean let it let the nature be the nature. But uh but when it comes to to
maintaining for the safety of the users of that land, maybe somebody has to step up and um I just feel a little bit cringed about that somebody's the taxpayer
again. So I I don't know the legalities of all this agreement. Maybe we should talking to the Maybe we should be talking to John, but he's not here today. Anything else to this commission?
Um, general direction public. Uh, yeah. Be uh yeah, I guess we have to do that before direction. Any public comment on the uh Yes, sir. Start with the e comments. Uh, Jasmine Bowman. Conserving all of the War Mineral Springs Park land is of
critical importance for the wildlife and people of Northport and for the well-being of the springs themselves. Dave Phillips. Dear commissioners, it is like a breath of fresh air to see the proposed conservation easement as opposed to the intensive development. 250 bed hotel,
350 homes, and lots of new parking and pvious services. As you know, the Springs is a fragile environment. This conservation plan will help to improve the sustainability of the springs. Several questions. One, what is planned for the south extension of San Jose Jose Avenue. The master plan appears to
indicate a path. The parcel map has the area highlighted, but is not clear what this highlight indicates. Two, the conservation easement refers to uses allowed and prohibited in improved areas. Could you please clarify what the improved areas are? Three,
could the potential nitrate issue be addressed through a lawn fertil fertilizer ban in the area and a cophammer? Yes, conserve the prop property. The citizens have asked for this repeatedly over the years. Please listen to us. We want green space. We want to live harmoniously with
wildlife. And now for in-person comments. Christine Johnson. So, good evening commissioners. Um, as you heard, I'm Christine Pervvis Johnson and I am the president of Big Waters Land Trust. We're thrilled to work with the city of Northport to conserve War Mineral Springs forever. Big Waters Land
Trust to save over 20,000 acres in our 21-year history. And we work in five coastal counties of Southwest Florida, Manatee, Sarasota, Charlotte, Lee, and Collier, as well as parts of Hillsboro, Hardy, Dodto, and Glades County. We're an accredited land trust, one of only
five in the state and the only accredited land trust working in this area. We approach land conservation collaboratively, working with land owners, NOS's, municipalities, Florida state, and federal government. We do this work because we envision a future
where the human and natural worlds flourish together. In the past few months, we've worked on the conservation easement terms with the city of Northport staff, and it's been a wonderful collaboration. The proposed terms would protect the site from future development and allow nature to thrive
while allowing the city to improve it for people's passive recreation. Furthermore, placing a conservation easement on the northern and eastern land surrounding the springs would protect the springs from future development storm water runoff. The proposed terms are in alignment with
what the vast majority of Northport citizens want. Using this property as a passive recreation park forever. For when we say conserve, we mean a place to place a conservation easement on the property to ensure that it never becomes developed and that its
natural areas are protected in perpetuity. The city would still own and maintain the property while the conservation easement would be owned by Big Waters Land Trust. Each conservation easement is unique because it is negotiated between the property owner
and the easement holder. Placing a conservation easement on War Mineral Springs would give citizens, developers, and donors the assurance that this property will forever be open green space. And that assurance gives philanthropists and government granting
organizations the confidence they need to donate to park improvements. We stand here today with our generous partner, GF Coast Community Foundation, who's willing to fund the cost of placing a conservation easement on the property as proof. That assurance also gives
developers market shity, a rare thing indeed. They would know that this property will forever be what it is today, public open space. People want to stay in hotels that are near parks. People want to buy and build homes in
walking distance of parks. This human desire to be near green space drives what realators call the proximate principle. The value of green space is reflected in the value of nearby properties. People are willing to pay more to stay and live near a park. The
most famous example is of course Central Park. Warm Mineral Springs could be Northport's Central Park. Placing a conservation easement on it assures that future and sorry and solidifies your legacy. I only have this much more to go. May I with your permission? Got to
cut you off. But thank you very much. Um John Thaxton, he had to go. He had to leave. Josh Smith. I just got back from a vacation in German. Oh, Josh Smith, uh, president of Northport. I just got back from a vacation in Germany where I was in a
city with 1.2 million people in it. It's called Cologne. The amount of green space they've found a way to preserve was utterly astonishing. And I was hoping to come up here and talk about that, but instead I stare at these five items that failed. And it's because of how tonedeaf you guys have been for what
the residents want. And you're immediately going on the attack to try to get more of the 20 acres back. What do we have to do? We ran against you. We voted no on everything. I mean, Lord
have mercy. Do we got to pick it in the streets? Please start listening to voters. They want this put in a conservation easement. You guys haven't touched that thing in years. Any invasive thing is already
invaded. You are willing to light $120 million on fire for a police station you've been told no on several times. And somehow we're worried about invasive plant specy cause. What do we have to do? That's
what I want an answer from you guys. What do the citizens have to do to get you to listen to us? I I don't know what it is. I mean, for the love of God, you are the most tonedeaf board of any city I've ever lived in. Thank God. I'm probably the young guy here, so I'm sure
someone's been in one worse. We are fighting you and fighting you and fighting you. Just we we're pretty much spiting ourselves to get you to listen to us. And your answer is, I still want a place to fire up the
bulldozers. You have more land than what? We're the third largest city. So 90% of cities in Florida, we're larger than. And you guys are so greedy in your inability to listen to the taxpayers. You You just got to grab five more
acres. When my kids and grandkids are here, thank God they decide that this place is still amazing. I don't want to hear from them that they don't have any place to go out and be in a green area. You have all the economic area in the
world to develop. You've reszoned a major portion of this city, which I love because they're still building houses on price. So, obviously, what you did isn't working. Please listen to us for the love of God. I want to stop coming here.
I want you to do what we ask you to do and I want to be at work right now. But instead, I had to scramble down here because I knew this was how this meeting was going to go. Please stop. I I don't know how else to put it. Thank you.
That is all, Mr. Mayor. Thank you. All right. Um, we want to give a bit of direction here. any consensus or a motion. I got a question for uh Sandy. In in the motion, I you pretty much
heard what we've had to say up here about the negotiation part of maintenance and stuff like that. Would that be something that would be just automatically to go back into discussions prior to coming to us as part of the negotiation? Yes. Okay.
Because I'm trying to figure out how to form this motion without having to include that. So, all right. I'll make a motion. I move to approve the proposed general terms and parcel map to facilitate development of a conservation easement
between the city of Northport and Bigwater Land Trust Incorporated for a portion of the Warm Mill Springs parcel, changing the carveout of 12 acres to become 20 acres going
forward. I have a second. A second. Okay. Discussion on this before we vote. The one thing I'll say is if we do allocate the other 20, it's not to be said that it has to be developed
necessarily. just carved out and gives us that much more flexibility as a city. If there were some amenity related development that we might want to do in that space, if we don't add that additional bit of
acreage, I mean 10 acres is is is significantly limiting if there becomes a very low impact amenity related opportunity that our citizens would like to enjoy and now we can't do. So I I
don't have a big problem with this notion. I I think it makes sense and you know I think it it still gives us time to think about the cost of maintaining and how we wrap our heads around that as a separate item. But I don't think this
com, you know, I would like to think this commission is not secondguing the need to conserve this property. This is it has been a long time coming to get to this point. We really do need to do it. It's the right thing to do here. We just have to figure out the way to get it
done that makes the most sense and and and wrap our heads around what what the costs are going to be to this city, you know, and how we can mitigate them because there is going to be a cost. We need to understand that before we ink this deal. That's all. That's so we can make an intelligent decision as to how
we move forward or you know. So, u with that Commissioner Duval. Yes. Thank you, Mayor. Um, 12 acres is 546,720 square feet.
How many inches is that, please, sir? [Laughter] Sorry. I have to agree with our public speaker. I sat where he sat and consistently the board would say like,
"Well, yeah, we want to, you know, in case we want to be able to, you know, maybe have a, you know, a hotel restaurant or, you know, do this, do that." And the people were saying, "No, we want it left natural." And there's a carveout in front. It's 12
acres. I just can't go along with that making it 20 acres. Um, and I do want to see some kind of negotiation on that that we're responsible. Somebody's going to decide that, you know, we got to cut
those weeds. I've walked that 60 acres in my dreams and there's a lot of weeds out there. Uh, it's I that that part bothers me. As the
mayor said, you know, it's the taxpayers are going to have to pay that money if somebody says, "Hey, you got to get you got to cut those weeds out. I want it to be the way it is." And taxpayers don't have to pay anything for
the way it is. And I don't agree with going from 12 to 20 acres as a carve out. Thank you, Commissioner Mr. Petra. Uh yes, I want to explain
my logic and uh first I'm in full support of a conservation easement. However, if we look at this map and can we put that map on the screen, so I assumed or I know that
lower left corner is the 12 acres. Correct? The the area outlined in yellow. Yes. So the parking lot we see on the left hand side, how much we have to increase the
parking lot? Yes. As part of the um project for the building renovations and how much more it's going to be increased by as a as opposed to the current one. Um it's it's not
necessarily increasing that much. Um it's where so the area that you see there um on the bottom left um that's already paved. It's improving that area. Um there'll be um some additional parking um towards
Triumpho. And then there will also be parking required um for the trail head that's put in place and possibly future buildings that are built up if if there is a um for example if we did a 10,000 foot building which was proposed there
would need to be parking for that building. So let's say they will be built because that's that's that's what I was presented with. So there will be two buildings. So most of these 12 acres going to be
uh occupied by the parking or whatever the structures are going to be there. To me I am a family man. I have three kids. One special needs one is on the way. We have four kids. Let's face it this thing is not attractive. Uh my
my logic is to make it attractive. I'm not asking for I'm not greedy. My logic is simple. Let's make it attractive. I'm sure the city or whatever the other city they don't have any conservation as a public speaker uh
pointed out in Germany. I'm sure to some extent it's developed so people can enjoy it. I'm a balanced man. The balance is the key to life as my mentor used to say to me all always balance is the key to life. I want to balance
nature with the use of that nature. So asking for five more acres to be 18 or whatever 20 for the benefit of the city for the benefit of the entire park to be more attractive to be more usable. Right now as I sit here my wife is afraid to
drive on Ortiz let alone go inside of you know that wooded area. We all know what's what's happening there now. there are homelessness or people trash it, people dump trash there. If we carve out a
little bit of that area, not for the city use, but for the benefit of the city citizens, I don't see why it's not logical. I see it total logic. Um, I was not part of the earlier plans for the
full development, so I cannot say anything of that nature. But as of right now, as a part of the board member, I advocate for that more land just to you to be used for the future use of the
taxpayers. So if we carve out the right upper corner and make it more geometrically square, not entirely because there's a water way of going. Um, right. We're talking about 5
acres for the benefit of the taxpayers that can use that land relaxing, eating out. Nobody approached me and say do this and so we can have a developer there. I'm speaking as a family man to
be to enjoy this facility. We need more land. Practically speaking, we need more land. The parking alone will be tripled in size. Two buildings are going to be there. Um head trail is going to be there. The
parking for the head trail for trail head, I'm sorry. There's not much left to make it more attractive. I know the nature is nature and we have to leave it. But if we don't use that nature to our advantage, it's just useless. Uh, as of
right now, I'm like I said, I'm afraid to go even on the trails that are there because I know who lives there. Uh as far as the maintaining invasives, I say let's have it more
discussion with John because like I said, I was I was presented differently um with this sheet that it says the obligation to remove invasive species, exotic plants and wildlife is a obligation of a grantee and a grantee is
the recipient of something. That that was our understanding. Yeah. Mhm. Uh so that's maybe we can have that discussion later on but five acres I don't think it's too much to ask I think it's for the benefit of everybody
the very users of that park understand my my question is what is it when you say for the use of the public it sounds like you're saying for the recreational use not for a commercial use for the public to have access. Um,
if if you're looking for a recreational use on it, that would fall within the conservation easement. If you're looking for more land to be developed, then that would be really separate from that recreational use. Carve out for the future use, not
developed right now. Because if we build a parking lot, we're going to triple the parking lot at least triple in size. it would be it would not be uh consistent with the nature surrounding it. It's going to be paved buildings.
That's it. We need a little bit more of land to make it more attractive, to make it more appealing. And when I say commercially developed, I'm not saying a hotel. I'm not saying u a strip mall. Maybe a pavilion of open
restaurant when I can come with my kids and dine. and after that enjoy the walk trail. So that's where I stand and uh I think I made myself abundantly clear. Um not influenced by any developer or anybody. Nobody approached me. Nobody
asked me. It's just coincidentally three of us want more land for future use. But uh uh it is what it is. I just voiced my opinion.
But I'm very attentive to the to the citizens. Um and and I would just add that there I mean there's you you've got you know day spa kind of amenities. You you've got
holistic medicine. You've got a whole bunch of very low impact, but in keeping with the whole concept of of the Springs area and and it's hard not to agree with
Commissioner Petro that when you put in, you know, the parking areas that are required there, there's not a whole lot of land left there. The city could well decide not to do anything with it and leave those trees and not mess with any
of it, but at least it's carved out. Once it is, if it's not separated, will it'll never we'll never have the opportunity to do it. And as he said, we're we're talking about for
amenities that are for the benefit of people to to attract them to the area. That's otherwise why wouldn't we just find a way to just leave this entire property and pass whatever ordinance and rules and qualifications make it it
takes a a a supermajority or or a unanimous decision to ever do anything on this. We could find ways to like not touch this land, but that isn't the best use. The best it is a good idea to make this a conservation, you know, easement.
It it that's the right thing to do. we've gotten to this point, but to have that little bit of extra flexibility because we do need to draw people to it. I mean, I mean, that's the whole idea here. Otherwise, you know, I mean, not to trash it, not to overdevelop it, but
simply to add to to, you know, to that feel of mineral springs and and that holistic and medicinal and wellness feel. And I don't I don't think 10 acres is enough. That's that's why I support the money. But there's the motion. It's
been seconded. It's been discussed. Um, we ready to vote or is anybody else got another two or three cents to throw in? If not, let us vote, folks. Probably a good idea.
to approve the proposed general terms and parcel map to facilitate development of a conservation easement between the city of Northport and Big Water Land Trust Incorporated for a portion of Warm Mineral Springs Park parcel changing the carve out of 12 acres to become 20 acres.
And that passes 4 to one with Commissioner Duval abstaining. Reason stated or want to Yeah. Yes. Reason stated uh I don't want to see any more acreage cut out. Thank you,
Commissioner. All right. Um moving on. Oh, 9:30. Everybody good? Yep. Yeah. Why don't we push push forward a little bit if if you guys are good? I'm good. Good with that. Got a bunch to go.
Maybe we're looking at B25-2304. Uh discussion and possible direction regarding funding options to respond to declared emergencies disasters. City manager, your item. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um this is the uh first item of discussion tonight regarding one of the agenda items that
failed in the special election. Staff is seeking direction if you would like us to explore any other available financial options uh for disaster recovery or if you would like this item may be placed on a future general election agenda uh going forward. Thank you, sir. Thank
you. All right, commissioners, put your names up there. There's a lot of area to cover. Commissioner Langden, you're up first. Um, thank you, Mayor. My recommendation would be that we put this item on every
um referendum in the regular election cycle until it passes. I think it's just a matter of time before it passes. That it. That's it. Oh, man. Vice Mayor. Yeah, thank you, Mayor.
Um, this is this is a tough one because um if we were to deplete our funding during an emergency and we have no backup to go through. I mean, there there's problems right now with uh FEMA not responded to, you know, tragic sites
with the tornadoes and this that the other out there and they're just they got to suffer through it. So, I agree with Commissioner Langden that maybe we need to revisit this in a uh another referendum election, but let's also do a little bit better and
put a cap on it of let's say 15 million or whatever the number could be or whatever, you know, we discussed between now and then. But we have to have this tool in our toolbox just in case. And I know there's a lot of grumbling out there saying, "Well, we
can we can make a state of emergency anytime. We can do this. We can do that. We're in our 133rd week from Ian or whatever the case may be. But this is basically for cleanup and getting the roads back together again and and
allowing people to get back to their lives. And if we don't have that, then we're just going to have stockpiles of, hey, look at all those trees laying over there. It's it's not very welcoming, especially if you've just gone through a hurricane. You want to see it get
cleaned up. You want to see it go forward. Um, so yeah, I' I'd agree with Commissioner Langden on doing this. And, you know, got to do what we got to do. If not, we're going to be stuck holding the bag. And hopefully the citizens out there will understand, hey, they
couldn't borrow money and this is the best we could do because we're out of money now. So, it is what it is. That's it. You um well um I'm definitely not in favor of going back out to referendum on this. In November, we asked the citizens
for broad borrowing authority for emergencies, uh eminent infrastructure failure and health and safety related. And we heard loud and clear if we only asked for emergency borrowing in the event of natural disasters, this wouldn't have
had a problem. Everybody would approve this. So that's exactly what we did. And as well as the projects that people asked for um you know bring us back individual projects of infrastructure and and we would support that. But really in my opinion the referendums
didn't get turned down because any of these were bad ideas. That's just because the citizens don't trust us, don't like us, don't believe in us. And so this was a protest vote. And you know what? We should hear that. So with that in mind, I'm not an advocate of coming
back at all at all on any of them. But but what I am in favor of and I think it it it's it's it's a worthy pursuit. Um were we to establish a a the certificates of
participation entity which basically creates an entity that gives us the ability to borrow or whatever but just creates that entity and gets it prepared. So, in the event in the event
we have a natural disaster, we have the ability to validate whatever project we might be wanting to fund and be able to utilize this tool. It's the same tool that hospital boards, airport authorities, the county uses. I mean,
COPS is something that is used universally all over the place. to have that established for us and and have it as a as as a as a ready tool I think has some value and and despite some
conversation to the contrary that entity can serve as an umbrella entity for multiple multiple transactions. So were it to be decided that the opportunity was there to do certain infrastructure
projects, they would have to be brought through the proper process, they would have to be validated, they would have to dot their eyes and cross their tees. It would give us a mechanism to do this the same way every other municipality and county has the ability to do it. And I
think there's some value in in exploring that. and and you know in that vein um you know we we have subject matter experts and and our our legislative people who can assist us in that process. So you know I'll be making a
motion down the road for that. But I think that we have to have some tool, some structured tool to be able to try to expedite the response in a natural disaster because otherwise we are left purely to the
devices of of what reserves we have. Now that was another alternative here. We could increase our reserves, our our uh you know our fund balance reserves. I I mean, but you know, to do that, we need
to accumulate the money. And where does that come from? Once again, our citizens. I'm not a big advocate of that. I'd rather have a structure set up so if, god forbid, we lost a water plant and couldn't provide drinking water, I would hardly think anybody in this city
would be against us utilizing a cop's mechanism to be able to go to court, validated, and get out there and fix the problem or a bridge that went out. I mean, there it's a clear emergency need, but the facility would be ready to go.
The entity would be ready. It would be set up. It would be structured. It would be in existence. It requires legislation on a local level and and I think that's worth pursuing and and I I would like to think that, you know, staff can can take a look at this and
and explore that alternative because other than that, I I don't really see any other funding options. I mean, we got that memorandum with the laundry list of five or six different options, but for emergency disasters, what else is there? I mean, everything else
requires referendum. Okay, after a natural emergency, how the heck are we going to do a referendum? So, you know, you know, I I I I think our hands are tied unless we want to take the position of let's just roll the dice and and we could do that. I mean, other
municipalities do it. You don't have the money, you can't clean up. You know, infrastructure gets ruined, you have to suffer. You you just can't do it. I mean, that is a it's an option. It's not an option that I support, but certainly an option that we ought to think about
and talk about because, you know, just saying, well, we're going to talk about this down the road. This is another kick the can issue. Okay, we can't the citizens are not going to approve emergency borrowing. That much is clear. So at least if there's a structured
entity ready to do kind of borrowing necessary once an emergency occurs, that might be a lot easier to facilitate and get accomplished. And I wouldn't want to have to spend a half a year setting that all up down the road after a natural
disaster. So Commissioner Dval, thank you, Mayor. Um, I too think that that the comps is a possible funding
mechanism. Um, and I hope that we're looking at it for each of these individual. I wouldn't want to see one cop set up that will cover everything.
uh because then I'm afraid that it might run away with us. But for the emergency borrowing, number one, uh citizens are angry, upset, untrusting, whatever. But in this case,
for emergency borrowing, sometimes biting your nose off to spite your face isn't such a good choice. Uh I personally believe that it was the wrong
choice not to pass this, but we gave the citizens their option and that's what they said. Uh along with this, I do believe that more or less we have to try to figure out a way to increase those
reserves because if we do get that major hurricane, if we do get those multiple hurricanes, those costs are going to be there. They have to be paid for somehow. We can't borrow the money. We can't
borrow any money from FEMA that might be forgiven and that's a shame. So if we can somehow do a a combination for this item of the
cops and try to increase our reserves if we can. Uh, that's the best I can think of we could do. Thanks, Commissioner. Uh, Commissioner Lang, just a couple of quick ones. Um,
in terms of emergency borrowing, I I think we saw an emotional decision on the part of our community. I think at some point in the future cooler heads will prevail and they'll see the wisdom
of granting the city the authority to borrow in cases of natural declared natural disasters. Um I wouldn't put a limit on it. I mean after Ian I mean it was 50 million just to clear debris. So
I if we put a a limit on it, it would really negate the value of it. Um so I I wouldn't do that. I agree with cops. Um I think we really need to put that kind of process in place, but rather doing it
in the absence of a real project. I think one of um these projects lends itself in my mind to a cops. So, I'd rather develop that process and work it through with an actual project in mind
because we would accomplish um the mayor's uh desire to have that all worked out just in case. Um and and so I'm very supportive of that, but we should have a particular in mind. The attorney
Thank you, Mr. Mayor. to clarify something. Um, a certificate of of participation is good for that debt being validated. So, it's for a single project. You could not have an over continuing cops for any project. It
would be specifically for a project. That's that's what how is it then that the county uses the same entity for multiple transactions? Each one is a separate transaction. Make no mistake, there are separate transactions. To Commissioner Dval's point, okay? You
know, each one is separate. Once cops are set up, it doesn't mean you could just like automatically start doing deals. Each one has to be validated. Each one has to stand on its own, but it falls in under the umbrella of a entity that I mean, if you go look at the
county like and school, I mean, that's how they do it. They don't have like 20 different non like corporations set up. They don't do that. I mean I'm saying each each project itself would have to be validated. Absolutely. That's what
I'm saying. But but the creation of that corporation, that entity, with its board, with its executive director, with its outside bond council, with its financial uh partners out there in the community, establishing that network so
that if you had a natural disaster or you had a project that lent itself, you could come back and do the legal process and vet it and get it approved and validate it with the courts and go through the process. But if you don't have that entity set up, then you're
starting from scratch. And that can take three to six months or more time after a natural disaster, that would be a serious world of hurt for a lot of people if there was some serious infrastructure that was affected. That's all I'm saying. That's why I say, you know, I'm going to make a
motion if no one else does at the end of this once everybody speaks to, you know, to move these two ideas along because Commissioner Duval made a good point. We do need to take a hard look at increasing reserves. We just have to understand what that means and in terms of money and how we do it and all that
stuff. Anyway, uh I'll defer now, Commissioner Pedro. Yes. Thank you, Mayor. I would like to suggest and maybe explore what CUPs are. U I'm sure
some people don't even understand the uh the acronym, let alone how it operates. And um if I may, I can suggest um to call uh Todd Miles who's our legislative
analysist, but uh he worked uh his professional life as a bond council for many years to many jurisdiction in a different state. He has vast majority of uh experience and I'm not looking for legal advice, but clarification what cops are, what it is. I mean, what is
it? Uh, some people don't even understand. I I I did not understand before. Can we have Todd Miles come up and maybe give us the description of what it is and maybe educate us and the public and how it works? I don't know.
Maybe it's worth uh worth the time. That within my authority, Mr. miles. Look forward to hearing from you. Good evening, Todd Miles, your legislative
analyst. How can I be helpful? Maybe define what is uh what is cops is or are. Okay. Um and how it works in real Okay, real
um this acronym POPS stands for the phrase certificates of participation and it is a way of structuring a borrowing transaction in order to accomplish the
same purpose as issuing debt, the issuance of bonds, such as the city did for the price widening project. However, it's a way of doing it without issuing debt. And the way that's accomplished is
the repayment obligation of the borrower is subject to appropriation. So in this case, if it was the city that was going to finance a project, its repayment obligation would
not be the pledge of the city's faith and credit, which is an unconditional promise to pay, but it would be a contract to agree to appropriate money. The commission would have to appropriate the money in the budget every year in
order to make the payments that are owed to the investors that bought these certificates. In order to accomplish setting the city up in that manner, a separate corporation would be created
such as the county school board uses as the mayor referenced for the financing of school facilities throughout the county. It's a not for profofit. It would be created under state law. The typically the city commission
would be the board of directors. They'd be wearing a separate hat of a separate entity just like the county school board members are the directors of the corporation that was created to finance school facilities in the county.
And that corporation would undertake the financing of the project. It would go out and procure its own attorneys, its own financial advisor, its own investment bankers or underwriters to find
investors. And it would enter into agreements with the city to finance the project on behalf of the city to get possession of the site of the project. The city own the site. City would have to lease it to the
corporation. So the corporation has control of the site. Corporation would build whatever the project is. Or if it's an existing facility, say a water treatment plant or something like that, the city would have to lease it to the corporation and lease it, the
corporation would lease it back. So the city now has to make payments under this lease. And those payments, as I said, because they're subject to appropriation by the city commission every year, are not considered to be a debt. because if
the city commission should decide in any given year not to appropriate the money, it would not be obligated to pay it. However, like any landlord um tenant situation where you don't pay
your rent, you run the risk of the remedy of the landlord kicking you out of the facility. So at least under the documents in that arrangement, if this corporation were to finance a facility
for the city and the city were not to make its scheduled payments, the corporation could cause the city to lose the right to possess that facility or use that facility. In reality, because this is a widely used
financing mechanism throughout the country in many, many jurisdictions, including Florida, it's used for essential facilities. It's used to to finance city halls. It's used to finance police facilities, water treatment plants.
It's recognized that because those facilities are essential, it's highly unlikely that the city would not appropriate the money to make the payments. It's not going to want to lose the right to use those essential facilities. And because these
there have been so many of these transactions, the investment community that lends money to local governments and school boards through this mechanism recognizes that the risk of not getting paid is
infantessimal. They know it's not a debt. They know they didn't get the pledge faith and credit by the borrower. They know that has to be appropriated in the budget every year. However, they also know because it's an essential facility, the legislative body, in this
case, if it was the city, the commission is going to make those appropriations every year. Um, it's true that because that type of financing mechanism is not a debt. It's not a pledge of the city's faith and
credit is more expensive in terms of interest rate to finance projects in that manner. However, and I'm speaking now just from my experience and having seen many of these
transactions, typically the rating agencies who, as you know, have assigned a rating to the city on its bonds of double A2, I believe it is Moody's rating, they rate a cop's financing by the same entity, in this case, if it
were the city, one notch below the city's bond rating. So in this case, if this is the city of Northport doing such a financing with a double A2 bond rating, it would get a double A3 bond rating from the rating agencies, one
notch below. And again, and this is common information that's available, the difference in the interest rate when you move down one notch is typically between
1 and 210 of a percent of interest. So you can do the math depending on how much you borrow in the transaction to figure out what one or two ten of a percent difference is each year, but that's that's the degree of additional expense that's associated with borrowing
that in that manner. Does that give you kind of a general general idea of how to set this up? Appreciate it. Okay. What else, folks? Anything else on
this one? Do um you got general comments, public comment? Yes, sir. Uh Josh Smith. Mayor Stokes, I truly appreciate you explaining how in your head this all went along because I'm realizing now
that when you guys take your notes, you use commas instead of periods. We said only ask us for the right to borrow. Stop. I begged you not to throw the baby out with the bath water. And I begged you. You need to ask for this thing. Get
it passed. Prove to the citizens that you can be trusted with debt. and then ask for the other stuff. Donald Trump just got reelected. That's the world we're in. Everybody's excited about this Doge thing. Everybody's running wild with keeping
government spending under control. And you guys went, "Nah, that's that world. This isn't our world." The cooler heads will prevail comment. You're correct. Eventually, if you continue to only ask for that, the
citizens are going to go, "Finally, you're listening and you'll eventually get it." But I want to get back to how we got here. I was a big supporter of the emergency
funding when you guys raced to stick a police station on there and when you raced to stick a bunch of items on there before the CIP project list came out that you promised us we'd get first. You threw the baby out with the bathwater. You lost me. I don't know if you guys only spend
time with people around here. I don't know what I have to do to get you out talking to the other citizens because everybody I spoke to said I'm for emergency borrowing if that's what they asked for. The Argus Foundation, I hope I get
the name right. They support cities and borrowing and even they went, "Hey man, you promised us a CIP list. I I I just get back to what do we have to do? This
this citizens be damned mantra we've been running for a while is getting old. The answer is if you have to set up a cops to do things, that's what you have to do. But the real answer is let's stop running wild. Let's get some citizens
act behind us. Let's see if maybe we can get emergency borrowing to pass on a normal election cycle. And that's it. That's all you asked for. And then in another 2 to four years, you've proved to us your stop running wild. And then you're right, Barbara. Cooler heads will
prevail. But unfortunately, you didn't do the cooler heads will prevail. You did the citizens be damned faster and harder method. Please stop doing it. I'm begging you. Thank you. Ham to
cars. I I like to wing all this stuff. The five referendum questions. I get why you had to do the emergency borrowing in May because we had to get it all done before hurricane season. However, the majority of the people thought that, hey, we already voted no in this in
November. So, we're voting no again. That was the herd mentality. And then, unfortunately, all the other four referendum questions suffered because of that one. And if you look at the election results that Matthew read, the majority of all five questions, there
were 11,000 whatever votes. What meant everyone that went into that voter box voted on all five questions. They didn't just go in and vote on one question and leave. They voted on five. So the majority of the citizens, they all said no. So now here we are with the
emergency borrowing. And then the mo m Yeah. Most of the people I spoke to, no one knew we were having a special election. So it was all basically trying to educate people that I spoke to that, hey, we have an election. I send out emails to my no reszone group, my Toledo
320 group with information directly right to some of these meetings, whatever. The link went right to the um the city's website. Robin and I put together a little flyer with the five referendum questions because everyone was getting confused and it was just basically here's the question, where's
the money coming from and will it raise my taxes? All that information came directly from the city website. The only one we had a problem with was this emergency borrowing. Where's the funding coming from? Will it come from FEMA and then Robin was like, well, whatever
doesn't come from FEMA, we're going to have to follow the debt policy because there was no real clear information on how we were going to pay this emergency borrowing back if it didn't come from FEMA. So now, if you look at that debt policy, you had to follow it. So now,
let's just say we have the police station that passed. We got that big bond out. You've got the waste transfer station bond and now you got the water bond. If all three of those passed and we have the Price Boulevard, what were we going to be able to do to finance this emergency borrowing? How much money
were we going to be able to borrow? That was never really defined except for just follow the debt policy. So based on all that, everyone, yeah, it was a protest vote. They all said we voted no in November. So they all voted no again in
May. So to bring this back, that's why I said I think you have to do, you know, get the public trust again and show them that, hey, this is what we're going to do. And I don't, that's the only thing that I can basically babble on about. All right. Thank you. Thank you, Susan
Balmer. Hi, I'm Susan Balmer. I would just like to speak I think for most of the people we didn't vote this down. The city caused it to be voted down. We told
you what was important to us. This is important to us. Being able to have money to do what we needed to do in case of emergencies, that's important to us. But it all comes down to the fact
that we don't trust we don't trust you with making that decision right now. The idea of just keep putting it on until they vote
for it. That I I really resent that. I resent comments like, "Well, we're going to get it done anyway, so it doesn't matter what you think." Do you really think that you are gaining our trust with that kind of
repertoire? Is that really representative of the city that we want to live in? You're okay with talking all the time about spending
our tax dollars? Well, we are trying to tell you how we want our tax dollars spent, but I don't really think that you're listening all the time. Not when we tell you and then you turn right around and spend two hours changing. You
know what? We have spent such a long time working so hard at trying to get your attention for how we want our city to be. We love it here. We live here,
but until we you have our trust, you're going to have a hard time. You know, before we said, we want you to be transparent. Tell us what's going on. Tell the people who live around Price Boulevard what's going to happen. Tell
us about the the reszoning. Tell those people who are not going to be able to build their house with it. You tried, but a scripted meeting trying to convince us is not being
transparent. So maybe you need to go back and rethink how you feel that you are representing
us. You know, I just I just I just get tired of it. My head hurts just thinking about how do I get the message to you? You know, it's it's you represent the citizens. You're okay. You know, just
keep that in mind. Thank you, ma'am. That is all, Mr. Mayor. Um, we have any motions to make here, Mayor. like to make a motion to direct staff to explore
the cops uh facilitating a cops uh entity uh inclusive of a uh the amendment that's been submitted to the attorneys for uh the amendment to Greenberg Trout's
agreement with the city to allow them to assist in uh legislation required to establish cops. Um I believe that amendment's already in the hands of city attorney. Uh and additionally to
investigate the possibility of increasing our reserves and what all that might look like a motion. We have a motion on the floor. Um city clerk, will you repeat that for
the record? Uh I will try my best. Thank you. to direct the city manager to explore the certificates of participation, aka cops, inclusive of the amendment that's been submitted to the attorney, the Greenberg Trouse, to
allow them to assist in legislation to the cops and additionally to investigate the possibility of increasing our reserves and what that might look like. Hold on. Hold on one second. City attorney, go ahead. I'm not I'm not familiar with with what you're referring to as something that's been submitted to
our office for review. I'm not I'm not sure what that is. I believe city manager forwarded a modification of the uh Greenberg Trout uh consulting agreement or for lobbying to include uh public finance assistance and the
facilitate, you know, which would give them the ability to help facilitate the establishment of this. I mean, my understanding was city manager, you said you forwarded that on the city attorney's office. No, sir. I think I said we have discussed it being needed to be amended in order to accomplish
what we're trying to do. I don't think I've seen an amendment. I didn't create an amendment. All right, then just to, you know, but the motion still stands as is. We'll just see to it that amendment is drafted. Okay, we have a motion on the floor. Do we have a second? Yes.
Okay. And the motion has been seconded by Commissioner Deval. Anything to this commissioners. Please vote. And that passes 4 to one with Commissioner Langden descent.
Commissioner Langden. Uh, yes, I I do support exploring cops as a funding option, but I'd rather see it in line with a specific project. Um, and I think one of the later projects lends itself
really well um to a cops. So, um I I wouldn't see trying to generically set that up to support emergency makes sense at this point. Um
and then the other piece of it which is um taking a look at is the other piece of that taking a look at increasing the reserve. That would be a tax increase, right? So it would have to be I don't know
where it would come from. So So um the floor because she's respond votes taken place. She's she may finish speaking. Yeah. I'm just speaking to why I said no. Um and uh I I I would rather
proceed with this item in a way that does not impact um taxes. We have plenty of other situations in which we have no choice but to have the solution impact taxes.
So, I'm just much more supportive of in the next election cycle, including this question again for um resident approval. You wish to make a motion. Make a motion on this item.
We have to vote, right? We would have Well, no. We have this motion that was just passed, but if you wish to make Yeah, we didn't vote. 401. That's why you're Oh, I'm sorry. We
already voted. Getting late. But if you wish to make a motion, you know, regarding referendum, by all means, I'll make a motion to include [Music] um going back out to the community in
the next election cycle. Um requesting their approval of our ability to borrow uh in response to declared emergencies or disasters. I have a second.
I'll second it for discussion. Anybody want to discuss it? City manager, I'm sorry, you were up there. It's okay, Mr. Mayor. Mine was just for clarity. So, on May 19th, I did respond back to Mr. Miles and I put I
added Michael Golden. I did not include him on the email that he needed to look at the amendment before it went to Hayden. So it didn't it didn't go out of our organization, but it was also for cops and P3 related the capital project, not disaster.
Thank you, sir. Vice Mayor. Yeah. Um it's it's just kind of hard for me to support that at this time. Right now, we're looking at a year and a half away. We have a lot of stuff coming forward. I just don't want to jump on the bandwagon just because it got voted down before
and it's just like, all right, we're just going to put it right back on the ballot again. Let's give it some time, some thought. Let's get some information coming back from the discussion that we just approved to see what angles we want to go to before we make that decision. We got plenty of time before we just
say, "Yep, we're putting it on the referendum until you say yes." So, I I just wasn't in favor of that. So that's that's my two, Mr. Petro. Yes. I also Thank you, mayor. I also do not approve to to have
even discussion and it's too far away. Um I don't think there's any any value to it that motion to be even considered. However, I want to say that the need doesn't go away.
Um, however, we have to I respect the voters and the way they voted. However, it does not minimize or eliminates the need. If we have two hurricanes back to
back, we we not going to be able to sustain ourselves. So, that's just that is what it is. And I know some people voted just to vote no, just to vote no. So, however we have to earn the trust,
I'm willing and open to do it. Thank you, Commissioner. Mr. Dval, uh I just want to say I I agree with uh the vice mayor. You know, just got turned down for the second time in six months. Uh we've got time before that
general election in 2026. Uh let's do what we can do now and eventually hopefully people are going to realize
that we are the only city in the state that cannot borrow without a referendum. And that need for emergencies is there. Uh but I say give it time. Wait
till the 20 26 elections. Anything else to this? Any uh already done public comments? Let's vote. And that gets defeated 4 to one. Any other motions to be made on
this item or can we belong? Good. Do we want to It's 10:18. Uh, anybody need a health break here? An unhealth break?
Get at it. Yeah. Let's take a quick 10 up them quick. Kept at a wonderful 84 degrees all year long. I just want you to have a good time. We
have safety covered. Lifeguards here staffed all day, every day when we're open for you to enjoy. Concession is open. Pizza, pretzels, nachos, ice cream. We got it
all. My crib is your crib. Looking forward to seeing you here. Duty calls. I'm Stacy Losio. I am the emergency management coordinator for the city of Northport and I'm going to be talking about having an evacuation plan. It's
important to have an evacuation plan ahead of time. And it's very important to write it down because that way you can have it somewhere present where everybody in your family can see it and keep it fresh in their minds. And you want to also share it with people in your family or your neighbors so that
they know what your plans are ahead of time and how to get a hold of you or where to look for you after a disaster. for your evacuation plans. Uh you should have multiple routes to get to the location you're planning to go to just because traffic-wise traffic on 75 might
be gridlocked. There could be some very good back roads to get to where you're going uh that could get you there more quickly without being stuck in traffic. When you're making an evacuation plan, we usually tell you four different things. You should stay home if you are not in a zone that's being evacuated and
if your home is built to withstand the forecasted storm. If you can't stay home uh and you evacuate, your next option should be to go to a friend or family's home that is outside of the evacuation area and is structurally sound to withstand the storm. Third option would
be go to a hotel. They're much more comfortable than our evacuation centers. Fourth option would be to go to one of our evacuation centers. Sarasota County has 12 evacuation centers. Those can be found on their [Music]
website. I'm Stacy Loio. I'm the emergency manager for the city of Northport and I'm going to discuss first responders after the storm. So, it may take a while for first responders to get to after the storm and that's due to a variety of reasons. One being we pull first responders off the roads when
tropical storm force winds are sustained for their safety. That is a standard usually across the state and other states that have hurricanes as well. So, we will have a backlog of calls that have come in during the storm that we will prioritize based on urgency and they'll be responding to those as well
as the calls that are currently coming in if they're urgent as well. Also, the roads might be flooded. There might be debris in the roads. Our tactical first in teams will be going out right away to clear the roads of any hazards so that our vehicles can get through and respond
as quickly as possible. Just keep that in mind when you call after a disaster for assistance. We are coming You are very important to us. We care about our residents and their safety, but it may just take a while for us to get to you depending on the conditions of the [Music]
roads. Hello everyone, my name is Mario Van Diddi. I am the planner scheduler for the city of Northport solid waste. I got into this position um first I was a recycle driver for 5 years for the city of Northport and then I became the
planner scheduler after taking an interest in educating the residents on how to recycle properly. In my position, my day-to-day, usually I start out by visiting the new residents that schedule garbage and recycle containers to be delivered and I will go see them and
educate them on our solid waste guidelines. More or less, I'm more focused on the recycle part of it. After that, I will drive around the city and I actually inspect recycle containers manually for contamination. And then I will take
calls from drivers if there's any issues with uh repeat garbage in the recycle and I will go educate those people as well. What I love most about the city of Northport is their residents are from all over the world and I get to learn about the solid waste guidelines where
they come from as well as educate them on the city of Northport's solid waste guidelines and how to recycle properly. [Music] [Music] [Music]
[Music] [Music] I decided to become a firefighter. I used to work in uh hospitality and group sales and I had always had friends that were firefighters and I decided one day that I wanted to change my job and serve
people. So I went ahead and went through EMT and paramedic program. Went to Fire Academy and then I saw Northport were hiring and I really liked what they had on their between their ISO rating and
their beliefs and values and everything. So, I applied. They gave me an opportunity. Every day is different, but for the most part, we start off the same. We'll uh get our gear onto the apparatus and um make sure everything's
operational like our air pack. Then we also check the inventory. Uh make sure we have all our medical equipment. Um everything's operational. Um that way we could respond to any emergency so we're always stocked and ready to go. I think the best part is that everyone's
passionate about their job. So they come to work and they're ready to train and uh take care of each other and and teach each other. So everyone's sharp and on their aame. So it makes the job fun and I just look forward to coming to work.
[Music] Yeah. I'm Stacy Losio. I'm the emergency management coordinator for the city of Northport. And I'm going to tell you the difference between flood zones and evacuation zones or in Sarasota County we call them evacuation levels. So flood
zones were generated by FEMA and they're used to determine the likelihood that you will flood and they're used to determine if you need flood insurance if you have a mortgage on your home. Now, the evacuation zones are based on storm surge data that comes from the National
Hurricane Center and they use topography as well as hurricane vulnerability for storm surge for the area and we use those to determine who needs to evacuate during a storm. So, it's important to understand that there is a difference. If you're interested in finding out what evacuation zone you are in, which we
highly recommend you do, uh you can use your search engine of choice and type in Sarasota County know your level and that'll take you to the Sarasota County government website. [Music] [Music] Frank Lamos always waste manager city of
Northport. Uh here today with Mario Vindetti, planner schedule for the city of Northport solid waste division. We're going to talk about bulk pickups today. uh how to schedule bulk pickups, what should go out and what should not go out to the curb, where to place the items, and then what happens if you have more
than what's allotted for you for the year for a bulk pickup. So, Mario, I know we call 941-24850, talk to our customer service reps. That's correct. About how to schedule a bulk pickup. How else can we do that? Can also go on our website, northportfl.gov, click on solid waste,
and fill out a bulk request form. Excellent. Excellent. So Mario, what about uh if a person wants to place it out, what should they place out? What's the right thing? What's the wrong thing? Basically, Frank, anything that doesn't fit in the container that's
All right, moving on to uh hang on a minute. Where am I? 25-2305 discussion and possible direction following the May 13th, 2025 special election results regarding
referendum questions seeking to change residency requirements for the city attorney and city clerk and to move forward with the recruitment and final posting for the city attorney, city manager. Your item. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Uh this item is asking for direction regarding the elections results that um said that the
city attorney and city manager needed excuse me city attorney and city clerk uh needed to reside uh within the city limits and that would put our deputy director of our city attorney out of this conversation. So I did reach out to
Doug Thomas, our SG and our recruiting um official. He did pass along the revised version of the form which he said you all your input was included. The only two changes he had to make was the removal of the residency um conversation that was to happen with the
public as well as ensuring the price range of 190,000 to 220,000 was included in the brochure which it is. So with the blessing of the commission, we will move forward with the advertisement and recruitment if you so wish or you can
also allow Mr. Goolan to continue in the interim capacity for as long as you choose and he is willing to do it. Thank you sir. Um commissioners, anybody weighing in on this? Mr. Langen, I'm ready to make a
motion when you are. Okay. Um, well, I would say anybody else want to say anything on this. All right, go ahead. Make your motion there. Uh, we do have public comment. I'm sorry. Excuse me. Okay. Uh, Josh Smith,
I hear the huffing. It's okay. I'll be quick. Um, I'm going to put use my hundreds of hours of corporate forced HR training to help you here. When you ask to remove a leader of the city from being forced to live within that city
and he makes at least double what the average person makes. It comes off as it doesn't sound right. We're back to that it doesn't sound right thing. He makes more than enough money to move here. I'm sure it's family. I'm sure there's a reason. The reason I'm coming
up here to speak tonight is I've heard rumors that we're just going to leave him as an interim. I'm back to the listen to the voters thing. You get what I'm saying here? Please use a Q-tip, start listening. Please do not just leave him as an interim. He seems like a great guy. He's probably amazing at the job, but let's
let's start doing that thing that we need to do. Thank you. That is all, Mr. Mayor. Appreciate it. Uh, entertain a motion. Okay, I'll roll with it. I move to direct the city manager to proceed with the recruitment
process. finalized the job posting for the city attorney position to include confirming the job description, salary range, and desired qualifications. Identify appropriate channels for advertising the position
and a proposed timeline and process for candidate review, interviews, and final selection. Second. Anything to that, commissioners? If there's nothing to it, let us vote. And that passes
520. There we go. Moving on. D 25-2306. discussion and possible direction regarding funding options for the police headquarters police department headquarters project. City manager, your item. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Uh, this
item is the next item on the agenda that failed in the public election on May 13th for the police headquarters. We are seeking direction if the commission would like us to explore alternative financing options uh to include cops and
uh P3 public private partnerships especially including also state revolving fund um and different items that may be available. The city did receive on Friday a public private partnership proposal and if you remember
through the process at War Middle Springs that we did uh a year or so ago the proposal has been submitted. The next step is for u me to analyze the city's interest and I know we are interested based on the item that we're talking to talking about. Then the
commission would did review the item. I would place the item on an agenda meeting for your determination whether to accept or reject the proposal for a substantive review. Uh and then once you decide that we will go from there and follow the C3 process if you so decide
uh where it would then be qualified as a qualifying project etc etc. Um we seek your direction. Thank you Mr. Mayor. Thank you sir. Um, commissioners speak now or forever. Thanks, Mayor. You're up.
Yeah. Um, on this solicitation that came in, have numbers been put on that solicitation? Are they looking at the current numbers that we were looking at going forward or do we not know that
information? Uh, on my review of it, I did not see a number that was on it. Uh, I could be mistaken, but we just got it on Friday afternoon. So, um I will make sure that the information that we need for you to be um ready to make a
decision once it is brought to you is available or able to be spoken to at that time. It is Tuesday, sir. Monday was the holiday. I was with you half of the day. I'm just the the re the reason I asked though, sir, is once we get into
these conversations, you know, we were looking at the $115 million price tag. Um a lot of conjecture has gone into that discussion especially from the public this that and the other but we had already vetted this decision moving
forward like last year and and what we wanted to do. So I just wanted to ask because we do have that solicitation was it amiable to what we're going and what we're looking at now but I guess we'll get that information in the future.
therefore really wouldn't want to change any direction that we have going forward at this. I I think you as a board would have a direct impact on the number and amount that you are willing to negotiate to build up to whether uh the 115 which
is what we had on the ballot or whether it was 100 million because that's a number that you now feel more comfortable to or a number lower than that. I mean, I think you would have that sort of flexibility to direct what size, type, design that you have and and that's what I'm getting at. I would like
to have these discussions with the P3 participants and that not commit to something now because we don't know what their response is going to be, either higher, lower, or whatever the case may be. I would just I look forward to having those conversations and like you
said we can deviate from plan A and go to plan B at that time today you would only be deciding to move forward with that as a process uh potentially a process of multiple processes that you're looking to use. I would recommend that you explore the P3 and the COB
process simultaneously. No, absolutely. As you explore both of them, you will get down the road where you will decide at some point based on their different process cycles. You know what? This is the one that looks more like what we want to deal with in order to build it. Whether it's cost, time, who builds it,
who runs it, lease payback, they're both two different structures that both could sort of u as um Mr. Miles came and outlined the COP process that as you get into it, you'll learn more about it. Whether it's through our PFM financial advisors, whether it's our bond council,
they'll be able to get you going to where you want to be. Right. And I know that you and I discussed in the one-on- ones about a uh timeline. Yes. And and talking about, you know, getting some of this information back to us, not as
quickly as possible, but I mean, maybe after we come back from our recess or our hiatus in August and and go to get into the fall months that maybe we can get some of this information coming back, maybe a 90day window or something like that. I I think as you make the
decision and you say, you know, let's do the P3, it involves you in that process. If you remember, there was a qualifying project and we came back, there was like four or five questions that had to be satisfied. It will continue to run down the runway. The the cop process there,
the people that we're talking to, whether it's PFM or our bond council, they have the blueprint of how to get those done. we will just need to bring them in and speak in front of you to outline what they see as their process will and timeline as well. But I I just
wanted to put this out here as information so the public knows that, you know, hey, we've got avenues that we must research and that's exactly what we're going to do is research those avenues and see where we can get to. Yes, sir. That's all I had, Mayor.
Anyone else? No one else. No. Once, twice, three times. Any public comments? Yes, sir. Um, am to cars? Hello. Again, of all the uh referendum questions, this was the one that had the
highest percentage of no votes. And I believe the reason why was the dollar amount. There was a lot of citizens that could not get behind the $122 million that we were going to spend for this. I believe if it was a little lower, they would. The citizens do support the
police. Some of them do believe, you know, that we do need a bigger station for them because of what happened over the uh original one now. But, you know, they also came up with other ideas. They were mostly um why can't we have substations? And I know that was addressed that it wasn't feasible.
However, if you're looking at New York City, Chicago, any of those bigger cities, they all have police precincts and they pretty much work. So, I don't know why that wouldn't be able to work for us here as a way to save money. And then again, like I had suggested before,
if you're this, you build it out two floors, reinforce it so that it'll support a third floor. We don't need the shell space right now. So that when ready for the shell space, add it on at a later date. So that was it. And I know there's some items in there that might
be able to be uh eliminated. I know the covered parking had a reason for it, but maybe that could be scaled down. uh a place for the canines and I've heard that they need it so that if someone goes away, we have a trainer for the canines and he would be the most appropriate person to house these
canines at when their um handlers are on vacation and uh they they already know. So this way if you have that that canines on um site, then you're going to pay for someone to take care of them out, bring them out and whatnot. So that's another added expense as well. So that's my two cents.
Thank you, Josh Smith. Um, this one was the main reason that you got a no vote from me on all five. City manager, when you said to me, "I don't care how you're going to vote.
I'm building it anyways." Every person I know changed their mind on this. Everybody. I I don't know a ton of people, but I know enough that out of 11,000, you lost a big chunk. Deputy chief and I spoke one night after a
meeting and I said, "You got to get him to stop saying that." And then somebody decided to put back the blue signs up around the city and you scanned the little QR code and pretty much if you didn't vote for this, you didn't back the blue. That upset another group of
people. We we have got to find a way to stop shooting ourselves in the foot when it comes to getting citizens on our side. I've joked around we need to put the city seal and change it to the curt before the
horse. We have got to start communicating with citizens in a way that is not you be damned because that's how it sounds to us. That's why I keep saying listen to how it sounds. I want you guys when you get here at 7 a.m. I
know you don't, but whatever. Sit at home, drink your coffee, listen to the meeting the night before and put on your I'm the citizen hat, you can hear how you sound. The mayor at one time said, "As long as I'm on this board, this project will never cost more than this dollar
amount." And the reply I got from a group of friends was, "God has spoken." Huh? That's how you guys sound to us. So, please start listening to how you
sound. The 122 million was an insane number from the start. The citizens told you that's an insane number. You guys got through your election cycle. You knew you had the votes you needed. You did
it. Please, please, please take these opportunities. lower the price of this thing enough to where the cops get what they need, but we're not talking about shell space for 35 years from now. We're praying that we get enough commercial to
pay for this thing. We're praying it continues to build up. It will eventually. We'll get there. I keep hearing, let's get some citizens in the future to pay for it. Unfortunately, I'm the one paying for it until more citizens move in.
that that's how these things sound to people. So, just please work on the rhetoric. I I I keep hammering you on this because I would love to hear you guys speak and me go. Thank you.
Jerry Niccastro. Good evening everybody. Thank you for all for being here. Um, police station is valid. It's needed. Now, people are complaining about how much it costs, but yet the taxpayers didn't complain too much when
we spent over $200 million in Wellland Park for a new school and what is the value of a life or public safety. And then the other thing that I noticed here too is part of this is about this building and part of this is about who aggravated who and who
gets their 15 minutes of fame or shame. We had people out at the polls this past election that weren't even from Northport sitting there telling Northport residents, "Vote no." And they were from Venice. I know cuz I worked those
polls. Now, I don't say too much, but this is a disgrace. People need to grow up and put your community first, not your 15 minutes. Men's men's and women's safety and lives are on the line here. And people are talking about a dollar
amount. But we've had in the past couple of weeks, we've had shootings from people outside of our community, but yet these brave men and women in blue responded, did their job. But yet, we're going to say to them, "Hey, it's too much. So, you know what? Let's get you
half of a police car and you can respond that way because you don't need the other half because it's going to cost too much. Or you know what? We'll give you the gun, but forget the bullets. This is ludicrous. Thank you. Public safety comes first. We need the building. It's
time people grow up. Thank you, Mike Morales. I know it's getting late, so I'll try to be brief. Um, obviously I'm in full support of building the space station, no matter, you know, the cost to me is
insignificant and the amount that we're talking about and differences whether it could be cut down or brought up overall is insufficient over time and how it's spread out in the actual cost difference. So, this is kind of a mute point in my opinion. If anything showed
in the past is that what you've built here, previous commissions in this chamber and the city hall and building department, planning and zoning as well as the current police department was underdone. So now we're looking at, okay, we're going to do this again now.
Are we going to project it out for the right amount that's needed also for what we can't foresee? and city manager um as far as speaking out at um what was mentioned earlier, there were studies done by different
people that have nothing to do with this commission that said this is what this city needs. They don't know how we're operating what we have been operating with for the last six, seven, eight years. So if they're saying this is what we need and we don't do it or we short it and you don't build it to the full
potential of what it's need and what they're saying it needs to be done, it could be liability issues because they told you what you needed to do and if you don't do it that becomes a liability if something really bad goes down in the city and things can't be
staffed right or done correctly. So, I encourage you to do what you need to do. Spend the money. Do it right. Don't look back and say, "We wish we could have like we did in these two buildings." Thank you. Thank you. That is all, Mr.
Mayor. All right. Um, so looking at any motions here? I'll make it. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I move to direct the city manager to explore certificates of participation, cops, public private partnerships, P3,
state revolving fund, SRF loans, bank loans and lines of credit, increasing fund balance reserves, and pay as you go, financing for the new police department headquarters project, and to bring back the findings and recommendations for further discussion
and possible action at a future meeting. I have a second. I'll second it. Discussion discussion. Ready to vote? Let's vote,
folks. That passes 520. Moving on. E 25-2307. Discussion and possible direction regarding funding options for the solid waste transfer station. City
manager, your item. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This item is another item that failed on the special election on May 13th. Um, it is an item that we have expressed the need for and outlined it. We ask for your direction on how to move forward. The P3 proposal
that we received on Friday afternoon includes this item as well. So it may you may want to consider that as a possible pathway as we explore the alternative fin alternative financing option for this project going forward. Thank you. Thank you,
Vice Mayor. Yeah, a question for the city manager. Um, I know that we're looking at all sorts of alternate uh funding options for this, but D3 is actually looking at this as well. But, um, did we ever take into consideration
and look into if a rate increase was needed in solid waste, what that number would look like and uh, you know, how it will work out in the future years to be able to finance this. Yes, sir. Mr. Vice Mayor,
that was explored during this exercise. Um, Mr. Speaker's coming down. I'm not sure if we know the exact amount or time frame. Um, but I know that that information will be coming back to you as one of the options going forward. Um, it was always not considered a tax to
get this particular um facility constructed, but a rate assessment was in the conversation of how to get it funded. The reason I ask that is because it is a possible venue to go ahead and get this done if anything else did not
happen. Correct. Should have left when you had a chance, Chuck. Not um No, I just wanted to make sure that that's out there for the public, too. If any of these others fail, that could be our last line of defense on getting this done is a rate increase in the solid waste budget. Do
we know exactly how much or how and how long, Chuck? Chuck speak, public works director. So, we're looking at a 10% increase this current year and then a methodology starting very shortly to figure out what that would look like in the upcoming
years to meet that goal with transportation funds. No, go ahead, Commissioner Dval. Yes, Mr. speak that 10% uh what would that come out to per year per customer?
It's about $32. Okay. All right. Thank you. Um residential customer. How many customers do we currently have? Somewhere around 40,000. About 40,000. Okay. Thank you. Um I kind of came up with, you
know, something like that. Uh, I thought $25 a year per 40,000 customers. I came up with that number. You know that my head, you know, that's a million dollars. That could be one
of the ways we could fund this. Another way, I know a lot of people aren't going to like that I'm saying this, but um we are considering
a registration fee for empty lots. Okay? And that fee is going to cover uh taking care of the dead trees that are a danger, but it's also going to give some revenue to the city. If you
go to those 40,000 empty lots at a $100, okay, that's about $4 million right there. Maybe we could take a million or two million a year out of that and dedicate it to the transfer station because this transfer station is
important. It's going to save money in the long run and whatever way we can do to get it done is just going to be to the benefit of the city. So those are my ideas. Thank you, sir. Commissioner
Langden. Uh thank you, Mr. Mayor. This particular project in my mind lends itself the best to a cops approach. Um, short of bonds, cops is the least expensive
way of financing a project. This particular project of all of them came very very close to passing and it wouldn't impact millage rates. So for all of those reasons,
um I would suggest that we explore cops and I guess public private partnerships which we assume are going to be more expensive, but that we take a look at the impact of both approaches for this
particular project. And then to the mayor's point of wanting to develop that cop's methodology and sort of having gone through it and having a structure in place, this is the project that I
would recommend we use as that test case. And then if if sometime in the future we do um access cops in an emergency, we sort of have that process all worked out and it would be a shorter
time to market. Yeah. Um I I agree with Commissioner Langden. This to me this is the perfect project for cops. It a big reason is the ROI makes so much
sense. If you delay this for every year, you're talking 8 to 10%. So if our rough number was 14 million, we had a not to exceed number in the referendum for that and and we could have build it for that if we could move on, but we can't. So
every year you wait, you're tacking on. If you're, you know, looking at a couple years, you know, you're looking at 17 million. Three years, four years, you're looking at 20 million. So timeliness is important. Accumulating a few million here, a few million there
does doesn't work for this. This project makes so much sense. The ROI on this is less than 10 years. By the time if we were to use cops for for say even something like the police headquarters or another bigger project
in utilities or whatever, if we saw the fit, by the time we got to that, we would probably have this paid off. That's how positive a project this is. The opportunity to save what was it? $13
million over five years. And that's not even accounting for how much outside business once we're up and running we could get because it would be I mean the premier solid waste management system in Southwest Florida. I mean there this is
just such an incredibly good project. What a shame it didn't pass. But yeah, I I concur with Commissioner Lang. I think we need to go down both paths. Look at comps and look at the P3 options there. You know, I just hate to turn over too much of a of of the money on this
project to a third party. That's why I'm a little reticent. But again, you don't know till you look at the deal. So, I say we pursue both avenues and move it along. Mr. Dval. Yes. Uh I I agree. You know, some com
combination of of the cops along with maybe a rate increase, you know, to help. We have to appropriate the money every year to pay off that cops. Okay? Make it from that fee increase. The one thing I forgot to mention
was for these referendums, both for this issue and the one that we're going to discuss next, one of the big complaints was that we did not have the final estimates of what it was actually going to cost. It was $14 million, but nobody,
you know, the final design wasn't done. We didn't know if it was really going to cost 20 million. I would like to see as soon as possible get those final numbers in so that we know what we're talking
about. That's all if I if I could speak to that. Uh the process we're using is a Seymar process was the intent for for the transfer station. So we build to that cost. So as we design, we design to that 14 million or the 10 million or the
15, whatever that number is is where we design to. So we're we're not worried about overrunning that number because that's the number we've already had our consultants tell us this is, you know, we told them what we're looking for. They said they're typically it's going to be this much. We're going to design to that much. We're not going to run
over. So those those costs are control and that's the that's the benefit of that process. It's a not to exceed. It's basically a not to exceed. we put in the referendum not to exceed 14 million. The same thing with 17 on the waist. Correct. And we'll work with our consultant as far as the methodology
that we work on uh to bring back other options for for for assessment and funding uh that we'll bring back to the board when that's complete. Thank you, Director Matri. I mean, Commissioner Petro.
Thank you, Mayor. Uh quick question about 10%. Was that 10% as a result of the refer referendum result or the hike the increase? So that that 10% is now that we the referendum
has failed I have to I have to account for starting to save money to build a transfer station. If we're going to be a pay as we go these other if these other options don't work out for us we still have to operate as a business. It's also to start funding more trucks and more
people because as we said the whole time we're growing transfer station was to keep our trucks and people in town so we wouldn't have to expand our fleet and our staff. That didn't happen. So now we're looking to expand fleet and staff to keep up the growth of the city. We
foresee uh lowering the 10% once we achieve that number of dollars that we needed to build or it's it's going to stay there. So once the transfer station is built, we'll we'll recognize those efficiencies
uh and we'll be able to see if we can scale back at that point. It's going to really depend on the growth of the city. Uh but that would be the time that we could look at our efficiencies as far as reducing the amount of trucks and and staff. It's unfortunate that this item
failed. This is one of the items I was hoping to be passed because this project is not a pay as you go project because we're losing money. We saving the money but we're losing more money by delaying the project.
Yes sir. Construction cost is going up every year. So if other options are chosen or other option would be provided will that 10% stay or it's going to be will that 10%
fall away or we would we would work that back through our methodology. So the methodology is going to be based for us to get to the to the point of of a transfer station being built whether we have to stack that money over the next several years or if we're using that money as a payment. So that 10% uh as as
the commissioner mentioned would if we if we were to borrow the money through some other source that 10% could be used for that payment that you're going to have to pay. Right. So the 10% is built in already. This is the project I want to
uh public know that this is one of the ways the city can make money if off of this transfer station. And uh this this design this project has been in design and in talks since 2014. I think it was a little longer than
that. But it's it has been around for quite some time. Yes. And the main complaint was that the design is not ready but it's as I understand it's over 80% complete. It's almost upon the completion of the design. Is that correct? Well, we're still working
through design but again we're designing to a number. So, so we're not concerned with overrunning costs on this design. Yes. You know, we're designing for function, not not, you know, we need the transfer station. We know what we need
to to operate now. Uh any expansion to that station would happen in the future, but we're designing to a number that's going to sustain our population as it is and it's growing. And I just want to state it publicly that this project and public works actually can make money off
of this project. And uh this is a perfect candidate. This project is a perfect candidate for consideration of cops. Um I just I don't want to wait two
years to put it on the ballot. I mean, I said this was so close to be passed that I'm very disappointed. It's a fiscal responsibility. I cannot go any any other way but to vote yes on this. So,
it's just as logical as it can be. I mean, this is no-brainer. And we as a city, we making money off of a recycling system thanks to Frank Lama. Yes, sir. But we got to recognize the people who
did contribute and as if I'm not mistaken, it's $50 per ton we say be saving. Uh actually a little more than that. We've we've had some good returns the last couple of months where the recycling companies actually had to cut us a check. So we're making money and we
correct uh this is a prime example that I cannot go but vote for this and I encourage the commission to look into the least the least
uh costly I mean this is from what we've heard from Todd Miles it's just going to be a little bit more than regular public bonds. it's just going to be a tenth of a percent.
So, I think we should consider that as a first project or one of the first ones. That's all for me. Thank you. Yes, sir. Thank you. Anything else to this item? Public comment.
Josh Smith. I know it's getting late, but I got to talk on this one because this one hurt me in my soul. I begged you not to screw this one up, man. God, does this one hurt. This is as near and dear to me as you can get. This is how I make my money is keeping these trucks on the road. And
we just Oh, you guys kill me sometimes, man. This one hurt. Um, I agree with you guys. It needs to be cops. It needs to be whatever it needs to be. This thing is the greatest thing you can do for this city in terms of getting some money back in. um that that it really needed
to pass and I hate that you guys dropped the ball on this one. Um so please find a way to get it funded and uh let's get this thing rolling. Thank you. That is all. All righty then. Apparently the mayor
disappeared. Uh yeah. Do we have anything else out there to hand you the Yeah. Any other thing from the commissioners? I'll be looking. Can I venture a motion? Yeah, I'll be looking for a motion.
I move to direct the city manager to explore the certificates of participation and a possible solid waste fee increase pay for that tops
agreement and to bring it back to us for future discussion at a future meeting. A second for discussion. Hey, we have a motion on the floor. City clerk, that's to direct city manager to explore
certificate of participation cops and a possible solid waste fee increase to pay for that cops agreement and to bring it back to commission for future discussion at a future meeting. That motion was made by Commissioner Dval, seconded by Commissioner Lagnet
for discussion, but city manager is in the queue. I'm going to put the city manager on notice and then pass it back to the mayor. Phil, uh just to be clear, the rate assessment option will be a budget option. So, you'll be able to see that one, but I encourage you to put a P3 option in that motion as well because
it is included in the one we received on last Friday. Thank you. That's why I seconded discussion. Um if if the motion maker would be open to an amendment, I'd like to amend the motion
and add the evaluation of a public private partnership as part of that um evaluation. I'll go along with that for for discussion. I am not in favor of a P3 for this. I don't want to give up
any of our our revenue to somebody else. But it would it would be helpful to see for comparison's sake though so we can see the benefit. I will agree to her amendment. Right. So we should vote on the amendment. Vote
on the amendment first. And that passes five to zero. Now we're voting on the main motion as amended. As amended. And that passes
520. All right. Moving on to F 25-2308. discussion of possible direction regarding funding options for the affluent pumping station and pipeline project. City manager, your
item. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um staff is seeking direction of uh possible exploring possible funding alternatives for this particular project project of the pumping station. Um a few things about it. One, it was also included in the P3 proposal that we've received on
last Friday. Uh, also whatever method that we choose, if we decide to explore it, this item would need to be first in line due to the consent order that we received from the Department of Environmental Protection, we would make sure that this project gets done so we don't incure any other fines or costs
associated with us not being in compliance with the D. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you, sir. I jumped on this one first because there was one thing I noticed in the proposed motion that wasn't included as an option. Um, and I'd like to at least learn more about it. Um, the,
uh, uh, West Villages Improvement District has significantly excess capacity in their deep, uh, in their deep injection wells up in Wellen Park. And um I know our previous uh utilities
director had discussions with uh chairman uh Lzinski regarding the technical aspects of that possibility like you know basically egghehead to egghhead engineer to
engineer and it is a doable project so I have been told but um I'd be real interested to know what if any convers conversations have taken place with the city and obviously what the interests West Villages improvement district would have in exploring this. I understand for
a number somewhere in the $67 million range the infrastructure could be could be created to allow that water that excess water in the wet season at Pan-American to be pumped up to well and
park. Now, I don't know all the details or any of the details, but I'd love to know if that's even a viable option, and I don't know that there's been any discussion. So, I'd love to see staff address that in some way, shape, or form. Good evening, Trisha was our interim
utilities director. We do have a meeting to begin discussions with West Villages, not this week, but next week. Um, we're also looking for consideration for state revolving funds loans. Those would be highly weighted for us um based upon the
consent order. The P3 would be a great opportunity and so would cops for this. Rich, the revolving loan uh possibilities for funding though require a referendum. Am I I mean it's a charter issue. There has been some consideration
for that because this would be similar to an agreement between two governmental entities. So we're still evaluating the referendum need. Okay. So it may be something a little unique. So Jason Yarro, deputy city manager, if
I remember right, underneath a previous uh underneath John Lewis, uh the city went out went through a bond validation process for the issuance of what is it? SBIA loans at 0% interest
for the for the expansion of Sumpter Boulevard. So, the city has already kind of had uh and didn't go out to the voters for a broke a vote. So, a precedent has kind of been set in one way about going after um you know, you
can make an argument that while they're called SRFs, they're really contract between the city and the state of Florida. So uh whereas the SBIAS I think are federal um loans at 0% interest but so it's something to explore. Uh
obviously you know it's going to require legalize and and if you if you were to go that route I would definitely recommend a validation process through the court system uh for SRFS. But um we had conversations with um our our bond
council about they said well it's not a no but you know it it is gray and it was something that needed to be cleared up through a a validation process. And uh it's the good news though, not
good news, the the taking lemons and making lemonade is that by being on the consent having consent, it allows you to kind of skip uh to the head of the line for for that for that fun. Well, it's given heavy consideration and and with
regard to I would just say with regard to any exploration you might have with WVID, I mean, I'd really want to understand what is it they're exactly looking for. Nobody does anything for free. So it makes me wonder. I mean, you know, I see all the good that they have
done up in Wellland Park, but nobody does anything for nothing. What do they want? And what kind of control are we talking about? Well, I think we're all in the same boat. We all want to know what they want, right? We're not there yet. We're gonna find out, man. We're go find out. We're still
um yeah, P3 is certainly one of the options and and I would include maybe technically it's not a P3, the West Villages option, but I kind of group it there. Um so I think for this project it's potentially a P3. I'm not
quite sure about that loan thing. That sounds terrific, but I'd also like to see as part of the evaluation of this, we've got to find the money now. So, it's robbing Peter to
pay Paul, which is how we've rolled historically. I'd like to understand what the impact would be. What other projects would we have to shove in order to pay for this? because this needs to happen and it needs to happen sooner
rather than later. We have already robbed Peter and to try to pay Paul. Um there are a list of some projects that are in there but really improvements to the plants that are needed. So we've had to push them off a few years so that we can recoup some revenues. The cost for
price was higher than expected. The cost for the utilities admin building was higher than expected. that has really depleted all of the funds that had been built up over the years. So, those projects had to be pushed out so that we could move any remaining funds to meet
the obligations of this consent order. Mr. Dval, yes. Um, I just wanted to expound upon the idea that this has got to be done first. I mean, I really want that
transfer station that transfer station to, you know, but you know, the bigger government above us has already looked at us and said, "Hey, you guys did a bad thing and we're going to start giving
them money possibly and getting nothing for it." So, this does have to be at the top of the list. Commissioner Petro. Thank you, Mayor. Uh, Deputy City Manager, when you said 0% interest, you caught my
attention. How do we proceed that? And how do we do that? And how do we expedite and what do we have to do as a commission? My apologies, Commissioner. I didn't mean to get your hopes up. Uh, that was for that was for Sumpter. Uh that was
the widening of Sumpter. That was a different program than the the state revolving loan fund administered by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. Um but I have seen interest rates from 2 to 3%. I haven't really seen a a loan given out by SRF higher
than 3 and a half%. Uh they intentionally keep them low. Uh it would it wouldn't be 0%. I was using that as an example where we've did something kind of similar without u by going through the court system for validation
of that of that loan. Sure. Sure. And but it wouldn't be I doubt it would be 0% although although they have a they they have a little they don't do grant but what they do do sometimes is principal forgiveness of of the loan
which in in essence is a grant. Attractive. Yeah. that that can happen and we'll ask for it. You know, we'll you know, maybe because this was failed item as well, that's a blessing in disguise. We might get better rates. Yeah, absolutely. Absolutely. And we're
going to we're going to ask for the sun, the moon, and the stars if we're given direction to pursue that. I just don't want to pay any fines to the EPA. Typically, they start off nice. They'll find you. They'll let you use the fine towards solving the problem. But when
you start missing your delivery deadlines, then the fines get more aggressive and more mean and higher and um then then uh bad things happen to you when you start missing the timeline because there they they kind of make you
go pick your own switch for for beating you by telling you, well, you tell us what the timeline is. Okay, now it's written in stone. And now if you miss the timeline that you developed and told them you were going to execute on that's when bad things start happening. So as a
commission board do we have to do anything or you can proceed on your own? Uh we need direction about of the list of things that you want us to pursue like the the state revolving loan fund, cops, P3s, WVID, you know, I would
recommend you allow us to pursue all four of them just to see what shakes out because you know that's what I would recommend and SRF would be included in that list as what that's what I'm asking. That's what I I would recommend. Do we specifically spec specify that in
I don't you've been y'all been pretty specific. So far, I would I wouldn't stop now. Yeah. Yeah, I see it. It's Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Yes, sir. Thank you, sir. All right. Uh
public comment. Josh Smith. You guys ain't seen me in a while. This is the one project that needed to wait for a CIP list to come out. We're back to that shooting ourselves in the foot thing. I know you're getting
tired of hearing it, but I don't think you quite heard it enough. This was one of those things that if a CIP project list pointed it out, it wouldn't have been on the tax thing to look at. This would have breezed on through. This is the one that you guys
need to tomorrow look at and go, we missed because we got too greedy. Please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please. I'm begging you from the depths of my soul, start looking at things from a how
do we make sure that one of our friends can't hurt us here. I mean, when that Tax Watch thing came out, it it literally said, "You should have waited for a CIP." That that's how it read out. You guys got to start when you say,
"We're not going to do anything until we want this. we are not going to do anything until we get the CIP lesson. And then you go, we really didn't mean what we said. You lose everybody that the bus has left the station. You guys are standing in the rain. So, I'm going
to keep hammering you on this. Please start doing what you say. I It breaks my heart that you guys lost as many people as you did when you didn't wait for that CIP list to come out. I know you had one referendum. I
know it costs money. I know all of that. I see him smile. I'm going to keep hammering on it, man. It breaks my heart. So, please, please start doing things in the right order when you speak. Thank you. That is all, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor,
entertain them. Oh, city manager. Uh, I think the citizen may have been in Germany when we had the meeting, but we did have the meeting. We had the CIP list about a month ago. It was $2.1 billion dollars for the next 15 years.
So, we did have that. We can give it to you. We can show you the minutes where we had it online. We had it. You didn't have it with enough time. Let's move on. That's it. Move on. I'm entertaining motions. I'll I'll give it
a shot. I move to direct city manager to explore certificates of participation, public private partnerships, and that would include the West Villages option, state revolving fund
loans and increasing fund balance reserves um for this particular project. Got a second. We got a motion by Mr.
Langon, seconded by the vice mayor. There's nothing else to it. Let us vote. Five. Nothing. This passes. Move on to general public comment. There is none. Hallelujah. With that, move on to
commissioner communications. Uh, Commissioner Duval, you're up first, sir. I attended the city memorial day observance yesterday. Uh, last week I attended the first quarter service awards ceremony here and I also attended our career connect job fair at Mullen
Center and I was amazed at the number of people that are looking for employees. I think that's a good sign. That's it for me. And uh Commissioner Langen, um I will be submitting my May activity list to city
clerk next week. Vice Mayor, nothing for you, Commissioner Pro? Nothing for me. All right. And for me, the first quarter service awards
presentation. Uh went to the economic development uh career connect job fair. It was well attended. That was really excellent. Um I think somewhere along here I also went up to the uh county BBC
um uh economic forecast annual meeting and uh found that very interesting telling tale was we can look forward to uncertainty. works for me. Anyway, other
than that, that's all I've got. Um, oh, yeah, actually, I do have one other thing. Um, one second. Bear with me. Get Well, it'll be up there anyway. uh
time extension. Yeah, I I do. I'm trying to find a date. Um I booked a date in uh June. I'll have to it'll be posted. It'll be all over social media um to continue town halls, which I said I would do after the referendums. And um
you know, the first one to be a Chan Stal. It's like 6:00 to 7:30 at night. I just can't pull up the exact date. Sometime in June, but I'll get it posted. And uh probably a good topic to begin on will be like trust. So we can
talk about why all our citizens say they supported all these particular projects and emergency borrowing, but they said no because they don't trust us. They don't trust city staff. They don't trust the city. So, I would say that probably that's not a bad place to start having
some conversation to see if we can't find a way to start communicating because without that communication, um, there isn't an end in sight for this continued dysfunctionality that's going on between the city residents and city
commission. Uh, other than that, moving on to administrative and legal. Uh, anything out of city attorney, city manager? Nothing, Mr. Mayor. Clerk. No, sir. Well, then it is
my pleasure at 11:25 to adjourn this shooting.