All right, you guys ready? Yes. Rock and roll. Good evening. Welcome to a veto city council chambers. If you could all rise for the pledge of 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. Please join me in a moment of silence. I would like to call our meeting to order. It is May 19th at
approximately 6:30 p.m. and we have all members of council present. We will start off. We do not have any ceremonial items or presentations. So we are on to the approval of the minutes. What is the pleasure of council? I'll make a motion to approve the minutes for March 31st,
2025 work session. Second. We have a motion and second. Is there any discussion? Uh all those in favor, please signify by saying I. I. Any opposed? The motion carries. We'll move on to the public comment portion of our meeting. I do
have some written requests to speak. When I call your name, please come up to the dis and state your name and address for the record. Uh first up, I have Keegan Ford. [Music] Thank you very much. I actually have uh
Mr. Derek Caitlyn with me as well. Uh my name is Keegan Ford, 591 Piaza Point. Derek Catelyn, 561 Piaza Point. Good evening, mayor, deputy mayor, council members. Thank you for the opportunity to speak. I'm here on behalf of the residents of Ovito Park Terrace
and nearby communities to share a vision we believe align strongly with your collective goals. Transforming neighborhood ponds throughout Ovido into sustainable, pollinator friendly, water-wise landscapes. The primary challenge to realizing this vision is funding. While the model is efficient
and lowmaintenance once implemented, initial transformation requires resources. Meanwhile, across Ovito, we see a broader issue. High water, highmaintenance landscaping, and underutilized green spaces that could be working harder for residents and for the environment. Our neighborhood ponds
could be doing far more than catching runoff. They could be raising property values, supporting local wildlife, and even educating the public. We propose a simple but powerful model. Revitalizing neighborhood ponds with native plants and pollinator habitats, creating
vibrant green spaces that attract and support bees, butterflies, and birds. Improve water quality by filtering runoff. Reduce fertilizer, pesticide, and irrigation needs. Create inviting spaces that residents can take pride in and increase nearby property values.
This initiative would be implemented through a coalition of community focused organizations bringing together residents, volunteers, local businesses, and city staff. To fund this initiative, we encourage and and encourage water conservation. We propose the adoption of
the Ovito conservation grant program presented to council on April 21st paired with a tiered reclaimed water rate schedule for commercial use properties. The com this combination gives HOAs both a financial incentive and resources to make water-wise improvements. At Ovito
Park Terrace, our irrigation system was using on average 350,000 gallons of reclaimed water per month. The issue was the system was programmed by our landscaping company. Once the HOA took control, we identified the problem and
reduced monthly usage to just 50,000 gallons. We're likely not alone. Many HOAs in Ovito are in the same situation where third-party control and limited oversight lead to water waste, high bills, and missed opportunities. This benefits the whole community. Nearby
homes gain value. Visitors enjoy natural beauty. Local nurseries, beef farms, and landscape businesses grow, and city resources like the reclaimed water infrastructure face less strain. Deputy Mayor Tukurt, your platform emphasizes protecting natural resources
and preserving Ovito's unique charm. You identified the need for homeowner education during the recent conser conservation grant discussion. This project fulfills that need directly. Each pond becomes a living exhibit showing what a sustainable lowwater use landscape looks like. It's beautiful,
practical, and achievable. It's a chance for the city to lead by example and push to reduce water consumption. Importantly, this is also an opportunity to deliver the homeowner education that you stated was essential when the conservation grant was proposed. Council member
Britain, your experience in strategic planning shows your commitment to measured long-term decision-making. This initiative opens the door to meaningful water use monitoring. With tiered reclaim water rate structure on commercial use properties, HOAs would have a financial reason to conserve. Pairing that with educational
signage and transparent reporting makes real change possible. We've seen how firsthand how awareness leads to conservation. This project builds a structure for that across the city. Council member, your emphasis on responsible city spending and infrastructure aligns perfectly with
this project. These improvements are low cost. Oh, to be respectful, we have three minutes each. So, we'll move on. Six minutes total. If um it would be up to taking my time, we can't shift time. So, if you would like to speak, you can. Oh, no. And please state your name and address for the record.
Okay. So, um Derek Derek Catelyn, uh council member, and can you uh state your address for the record? Thank you. He he already did. Yes, ma'am. It's 561 Piaza Point, right down the street from us. Thank you. Okay. So, council member I your emphasis on responsible city
spending and infrastructure aligns perfectly with this project. These improvements are low cost, low maintenance, and eligible for support from the proposed conservation grant. This isn't a burden on city funds. It's an opportunity to support sustainable upgrades without draining general
revenue while also easing pressure on our reclaimed water infrastructure. Business part. Oh, sorry. Council member Bafford, your commitment to grow Bafford. Nice to meet you, sir. Your commitment to growing small businesses, investing in our local
economy is key here. This initiative boosts nurseries and growers like Gabriella Plants, Lucas Nursery, and Black Hammock Bee Farms. businesses that benefit from improved aesthetics like Memory Lane Cottage, Tutus, and Your Ovito Dentist, businesses up and down Ovito uh Boulevard. This work is
designed to be implemented through a coalition of community focused organizations, bringing together local businesses, neighborhood associations, and volunteers to deliver results the city can be proud of. There's also a chance to publicly recognize contributors through signs like a plaque
or city communications and build stronger business community partnerships in the process. neighborhood engagement and civic pride. Mayor Slick, um your focus on civic engagement, education, and shared community pride reflects deeply in your public service.
Revitalized ponds become spaces for volunteers, students, and residents to gather. Whether for planting days, educational walks, or simply enjoying nature. Myself, I'm walking by that pond every day, and it's so cool to see all the different water foul and the plants
and the and the birds that live there. Um, this is how we strengthen the bond between neighborhoods and the city by turning forgotten infrastructure into shared assets that residents help shape and protect. Um, so just to close, the the vision is scalable. It's already working and with the right tools, it's
fundable today. With a tiered reclaimed water rate structure and the Ovito conservation grant program, we can educate and empower our residents to save water, support small business, and build a more sustainable Ovido. Let's turn the ponds that dot our neighborhood into symbols of resilience, beauty, and
community. Thank you. Thank you, Bill. Uh, next up, I have Jenny Sumner. [Music] Thank you for the time, Jenny Sumner, 381 Evening Sky Drive. And I'm going to ask a rhetorical question because I
don't expect a response for sure, but I'm just wondering what the infrastructure and the plan is to improve the infrastructure particularly on Lockwood. So I drive home from Lockwood and I'm playing Frogger with all of the potholes and patches that are there. I'm also counting the dead oak trees that are there now. And then I hit
Mitchell Hammock, which is now a disastrous intersection. To think that a almost 45 degree dotted line is going to prevent a car from coming on top of you. It doesn't because one did the other day on top of me. And then you hit another monstrosity of an intersection of
Lockwood and 419, which here again is is a lack of engineering feet because cars do not obey the two right turn lanes and they come right on top of you. And then I'm pondering the decision that was made at the last council meeting to erect a five-story building when there's no
infrastructure around that area. All of that traffic is going to come on Lockwood and we are going to again four-lane Lockwood all the way through. That's not what we signed up for. The infrastructure is not there. The only person on this council that I was very impressed with last week was you, sir,
asking very thoughtful questions and listening to your constituents, which I did not feel happened last week. So again, I'm asking the question, and I know it's rhetorical at this point, but what is the plan to fix the infrastructure that is already here before we start building other buildings
on top of it that can't absorb the broken infrastructure? Thank you for the time. Thank you. I don't have any other written requests to speak. Is there anybody in the audience that would like to address council at this time? Hearing none, I will close public comment. And before we move on to the
consent agenda, um I did have a topic I wanted to bring up. So a few weeks ago, council received info from our attorneys that there were serious concerns in regards to sunshine law. And the attorney informed uh the involved parties to discontinue the meetings found to be in violation. I've recently
been informed these meetings have not been discontinued. Is my understanding that if we vote on issues that are in potential violation, it could make our votes um uh not count. So I'm asking the city attorney to clarify and correct my
understanding of this and if we are at risk of moving on after this. Yes, ma madam deputy mayor, the statutes or the the acting case law provides that in the event there's sunshine law violation that that affects
impacts or there were sunshine violation that caused a decision to be in not incorrect but on an accordance on an ordinance that that could be challenged could be a basis for challenge not automatically it could be challenged and the the way to address that issue
because it's already happened. Obviously, if if if it's happened, it's already happened. is to um when you when we get to that particular item is to um query of the the people involved in what
we perceived as a Sunshine Law violation to discuss with us or to let us know that that what was discussed on that particular issue and that uh those discussions and so forth um outside of the council thing does not will not
impact their decision- making. uh on tonight on an ordinance tonight i.e. We won't need affirmation from them that says our prior discussions. Uh we will make our decision based on the information discussion tonight. And it
has to be because this would be the the the hearing the public hearing we conduct we would conduct on this particular issue which would be the resolution and uh we just need confirmation that their prior discussions did not impact their I'm
done. Your public speaking is that Time's up. Time's up, Mr. But in other words, we need to confirm that all decisions made on on this particular issue on the are based on information discussion at this meeting and nothing
that was discussed outside this meeting. Now, when so I know I requested meeting minutes from these two instances and it's pretty much everything we ever vote on. So, in order to not put things at risk, so to say, if this is a potential
violation, do I need to ask at each individual subject for disclosure of what was said outside of this meeting or is this came up that is addressed tonight? Yeah, we should have the same disclosure that we generally talked
about this but uh my decision tonight will based on what's presented at this hearing and on the discussions and and on discussions and evidence not eved at this hearing. Okay. To add clarity to this though, uh I'll just share with
everyone in the audience the people who she is referring to is is the two of us. Uh under state law, there is a rule that you can meet with other council members and all council members were in fact invited to meet at various times that were publicly noticed properly by the
city clerk. Uh the public was invited. They were in places that were accessible for people who may be handicapped and uh minutes were taken. So they are in full compliance with Florida statutes. So there is no sunshine violation. I do not object to sharing any additional
information and reassuring everybody that even though we may have discussed, you know, kind of tangentially, usually we're kind of floating down crazy paths with talking with residents about things that they're concerned about. Um that yeah, we of course we base any kind of
quas quasi judicial decision on the evidence presented here. But when you're having theoretical discussions with residents, uh there's nothing improper about that under Florida law. And I would challenge, you know, I guess our new city attorney to um help clarify
that come June 1st. Mayor, we're not we're not we're not saying you did. We're just saying if if it's an accusation and it's unacceptable to be accused of violating Florida statutes in a Sunshine Live. I pride myself on transparency and on following the law. I'm a member of the Florida
Bar. It's unacceptable to be repeatedly accused of violating Florida law. Um, I am responding to an email I got from our city attorney who is our legal advice as a council. Not for much longer. Um, mayor, let me speak please.
That had advised that something that by the way that had advised that there was a potential violation. That is the information we have as a council and this is how do we operate with that? And I guess my my follow-up question is uh you know the
mayor does not think she broke Sunshine law. I am not an attorney. So I'm just following the advice we have here. So how do we go about finding if this is the right way to operate or not? We have two differing opinions. Uh mayor, you can you can direct me to contact the state's attorney's office and request
investigation. They've already issued an attorney general opinion that says this is I didn't say attorney general. I said state attorney. They investigate. They invest. Okay. So, so if this if that if the commission or the council would like me to contact the state
attorney's office, please let me know. Is that something we need to discuss right now or it's up to the council? Is there any input here? Does it have to be by the council or does it have could it be by just an individual? Well, it would be two individuals.
It could be by an individual, but it's better if it's a consensus of council or Oh, are you talking about asking about if clarification on the issue on whether or not it's a violation because you may be an attorney, but I'm not. So, our attorney is saying it potentially is
and let me say what I said in the email is is the concern is if there is a vi if it determines there's a violation of state law, then there are cases that say the ordinance is is void. It can be voided. That's that's why the issue is on the table.
I don't know that I quite caught that. No, the the issue is that there is case law that says if there's a violation of the sunshine law in the consideration of that ordinance and if it's later approved there was a violation, the ordinance can be can be challenged and
voided. So that's a penalty. I don't I don't want to say penalty, but that that could be the outcome. That's what there's there's several cases that have held that Supreme Court Florida Supreme Court cases. So that's why the sunshining law needs to be taken seriously because it could end up
challenge somebody challenging an ordinance. Sure. Go ahead. Uh Mr. Hall, what uh what in specific is it that you um believe about our meetings violated the sunshine law? What which which part in
particular? Because we've exchanged some email about this, right? And uh we have um I talk about my understanding of the three things that are required for a meeting of members of the the same board, right, to meet together. And I believe we've met all of those.
Um I don't have them right in front of me and kind of on the spot here, but can you can you tell me uh specifically what it is that you think that was not done that should have been done? In all cand cander, councilman, I'd rather discuss it outside of the meeting because this is the public record. Okay. I'm inclined
to sue you for slander continuing to say that we're violating sunshine law out loud at a public meeting. I I don't know what to do with you. And come June 1st, we don't have to do anything with you. All right. So, for now, we're going to table this, okay,
and discuss further. Um, I want to find a way to figure out what how we operate here going forward because again, I'm not an attorney, so I'm just presenting with the information I have. Um, but for this meeting, for the purposes tonight, if there were outside meetings held that
discuss the topics on hand, which there were, sunshine law violation or not, please disclose when those topics come up so we don't have any issues down the road. Is everybody good with that? That makes sense. Thank you. I don't have those minutes in front of me and I don't have email here and I did not know that
this was going to come up. So I can I can try to I can find it on my phone I think and try to review it. If you had them print it out that would help me to to comply. Um Mr. Col. Sorry. We can we could take a recess and we could print out the minutes for all the council members if you would like to do that. I
would like to do that. I do not want to have any issues here. So let's take a fiveminute recess please. Yep. We'll be back. Our printer might need another minute. Nope. Yeah. [Music]
What? No, I would not. Do we know what the news is here? Press. That was quick. Promise they did not call. Okay. All right. Too much maintenance. May
15, February 20th, February 26. [Music] These are such great minutes if you like. I base my minutes
on detail. I based my minutes style on I based my minutes style on the strategic planning session that was held last year. I went and looked at that because it was a meeting with council members and residents that discussed issues. I look at that and I use that as
my template. I All right, we will get started again. And before we go forward, um I did forget to mention this is an amended agenda. So, we did move what is now item number seven out of resolutions and into
public hearing just to make sure we cover protocol here. So, moving on. Uh Mr. Copper, are we still doing item number four on the consent agenda? Uh yes. Okay. So we are up to the consent agenda. Uh what is the pleasure of council? Make a motion to approve the
consent agenda. We have a motion. Do we have a second? I'll have a second. We have a motion in a second. Any discussion? No. I'm not sure we should do this. Um I I get that we can jump out of accepting
payment for taking over about six miles of state roads through our town at just about any time. It sounds like with 30 days notice, but that could harm our relationship with FDOT if we were to stay in it only
when we net more than we pay out and then we jump ship as soon as it starts to cost us something. So I I just looking at the numbers I I kind of want to let FDOT continue to maintain in every way that makes them and us happy
of all of the state roads going through our community. So Mayor, did you want Mr. Mr. Cop to give us an intro on this since we're going to do probably. So, just so everybody knows so so the audience knows what we're talking about. All right, Mr. Cobb. So, what happened to the motion? We got a motion to second. Now it's
discussion. Okay. So, now we can pop in there was a motion to approve and now we're having a discussion and part of the discussion can be an explanation of more details so the audience knows what we're discussing. I'm okay with it. Okay. All right. Uh, this is a request to
approve. It's a memorandum of agreement with Florida Department of Transportation. It's for rightway maintenance uh on our state roadways uh within the corporate limits of the city. And there was a uh actually and if you could just do the map that would probably be the best
thing for right now. Uh the if you can blow that up possibly that would be even better. Um it covers basically State Route 434, State Route 426, uh within the city. Uh those are that MP stands for mile post and so you can see
where it starts at 417 on 434, starts at 417, goes through town, crosses Mitchell Hammock, crosses uh down to Chapman Road, uh as well as State Route 426, which starts just south of uh the Home Depot, and then ends up at State Route
434. Uh the most recent memorandum of agreement, it expired in April. It is this uh memorandum of agreement is a three is for an initial three-year period and does allow for renewal up to a maximum of 3 years. Uh that is at the
discretion of the FDOT, but each renewal does require that both parties agree. The compensation for this, the city, the state will be paying re reimbursing the city uh for the services provided uh is $23,54125 paid quarterly which equates
to about $94,165 per year. Uh it does include mowing, tree trimming, storm water maintenance, fence repair. There are other items that are listed in the agreement as included. uh not necessarily what we do on a on a routine
basis, but uh most of the time it would be at the uh request of the FDOT and uh it's recommended that the council adopt resolution number 4596-25. Thank you, Mr. Cop. Mayor, if you'd like
to continue. Well, it's 20 12 lane miles of road. If you go look at all of the things that we're responsible for, it involves culverts, cleaning out uh cleaning out the culverts, repairing culverts, everything except for uh resurfacing and repaving uh is included,
including sidewalk repairs. And we, as we all know, sidewalk repairs are extremely expensive. So, we we would have only uh $7,600 per lane mile to to do all of the things that need to be done. And that
just you I had asked staff for additional data today. I I'm scrolling through my email to see if I got any any information about what is it has actually cost us to maintain the roads that we have been responsible for in the past. Uh you know what's what's the differential between what we are are
given from the state and what we actually spend like does it line up? how you I don't know enough to be enthused about moving forward with renewing that arrangement. Council member, yeah, I think that's the biggest question is what what does it
cost us because the state is giving us $94,000 uh per year to do this road maintenance and what is it costing us to do it? And uh because presumably this is stuff that they were going to do anyway. So if it
goes over, we're just shifting the risk of having to pay more from the state to us. And I'd rather not shift that burden. And maybe this was said and I I missed it, but what I mean this goes way back, right? So what what was the
impetus um for this? And if you said it already, I'm I'm sorry. I'm also trying to look at these minutes and make sure that I'm square on the request here. the FDOT enters into these agreements with uh with local governments because the local governments feel that they can maintain
the roadways at a higher level than what the state would do. And that that's really what it is is to to make sure that the state routes are on the same level of maintenance that the other city streets are in. So what would be some examples of um of that? I think some things in here were
uh places I've read this, but mowing more often. Yeah, frequency of mowing. probably the biggest one if I remember correctly during the uh growing cycle which I believe is March to October. Yeah, come on up Mr. Wyatt. Uh anyway,
there's a growing cycle. During the growing cycle, we're mowing twice a month. During the non-growing cycle, then it's like once a month and which DOT would be much less frequency. Mr. Wyatt, it basically what Mr. Cobb said it started I think it was 2007 is
when we first started it and it's council requested a higher level of maintenance on state roads and so here we are with this agreement and it's just continued this entire time and I believe the mowing cost is about $84,000 a year includes mowing and some aesthetics and the medians but we we hardly ever trim
trees we hardly ever do sidewalks um there was one other item oh fencing I think we replaced a fence uh gate a couple of times that got hit by a car so do you think the amount they're offering is sufficient it's been sufficient in in recent years. I don't know we've ever eclipsed the number.
Okay. Thank you. Any further questions? So, there is a there is a a paper trail on what we're actually paying for on those. Yes, sir. Actually, within the ultimate image, uh within their contract, there are line items specific to the DOT rights of way. Does it include culverts, cleaning culverts? Uh
not for ultimate image. We have to do that separately with one of our uh other kind of contractors. Okay. So, it's mostly aesthetics. Yes, sir. Okay. Yep. And it's mainly it's mainly what Mr. Cobb said it's it's frequency of mowing and it's it's twice a month in the heavy growing season, once a month in the light growing
season. Okay. So if I if I can sorry go ahead. Yeah. Uh so piecing together what you said, it sounded like what you're saying is that we can do it more efficiently than the state can. That's the premise. I mean it's been so long since they've done it. I don't know what
their current what it would what it would look like if we went back to them. I mean, if we did go back to them, it would take a while for them to get up get up and running. I don't I don't doubt. I don't know what their current contracts are on the side for their own mowing. I don't think they do it in house. You I don't believe they do it in
house. I believe they have contractors just like we do that do perform mowing for them. Okay. It's just one of those things we've done so often for so long. So, we have a contract for this and we could look at that contract and find out how much it cost. Yes, sir. It can be. We can go in and find it. It just would take a while
to find it. Okay. I just don't have the number prepared this evening. But you think it's 84,000? We believe it's 84,000. Yes, ma'am. In that neighborhood for the six for the six lane miles and the medians. I mean, we used to have less median, right? Well, you have to you have to understand some of those
areas, some of the rights away have no grass to cut. It's all sidewalk or minimal grass. I mean, some of the rides away are very narrow, but there are some medium strips, especially on out here on 434 that have to be maintained. And I know that there down by Chapman Road, I believe there are some plantings in one
median closer to Chapman that have to be maintained, low-level shrubbery and stuff like that. And this doesn't include 419, right? That's No, sir. That's county. Okay. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Riyot. I will ask the clerk to call a role at this
point. Council member Bterford I. Council member Britain I. Mayor Slick I. Deputy Mayor Tukurt. I. Council member Aught. I. The motion carries. Moving on. We're up to the public
hearing portion of our agenda. Item number five, ordinance number 1757. Amendments to the code of ordinances. Low here. Second. Uh, Mr. Hall, can you read the ordinance
by title only? Absolutely. Depend up here. Ordinance number 1757, an ordinance of the city of Ovidito, Florida, amending the code of ordinances of the city of Ovido, specifically section 30-3 political campaign signs,
advertisements prohibited on city-owned property, implementing administrative actions, providing for savings, providing for conflicts, severability, codification, as well as the correction of scrier's errors, and an effective date. Thank you, Mr. Hall. Mr. Cob, would you please provide a brief
introduction? Sure. Annie, if you could just pull up the the proposed changes, not the not the uh the not not not the graphics, but the other one. Sorry. Thank you. That's the state statute. I need the other file.
Here we go. Perfect. uh council, what I'm going what I thought I would do is that most you've already seen a lot of the uh a lot of the changes. So, I thought I'd just try to focus on the changes that we uh we have done since the May 5th first reading. I did uh none of the changes
that we have recommended uh since May 5th are considered to be substantial so that you can conduct your public hearing tonight and and move forward if you so desire. Uh Annie, if you could scroll down to uh number four. Uh one of the suggestions made at uh at the May 5th
was to uh change the word or to the word and which we were fine with and so we went ahead and made that made that change. Uh Annie, if you could move down right there, please. Uh one of the one of the uh input from the May 5th was that um uh the supervisor of elections
uh per statute is limited on their ability to cause for the removal of signs. And so uh it was recommended that we we agreed that uh we should based on our review of the statute that we should remove the references to the seminal county supervisor election. So, we've
removed all the references uh to the supervisor and and if we can move down a little bit more. This is the section that deals with signs in the ride ofway. And if you remember back to your discussion on May 5th, council, we we the original ordinance had uh that we
were going to allow signs in the rideway adjacent to the polling place on the same side of the street as the polling place. And uh what you directed us to do was to allow that the signs will be placed in the right of way as long as that is adjacent to the polling place.
And so what we've done is you can see we struck out as far as the same side. We uh so that the signs of 6 ft or less can be placed in the public right of way adjac directly adjacent to property serving as a polling place. And what we
added in was between the side property lines. And so that establishes the limit uh that you would take the side property lines go go across the ride of way and that it could be uh help that the signs could be placed in the in the uh in the right of way. Uh we also but we did add
one thing in that we do not recommend allowing signage to be placed in the median in the middle that uh in our in our opinion that becomes more of a traffic hazard than on the side. And so we would recommend that we not we not allow signs to be placed in the median.
Uh we did but we do also still allow that signs people can carry signs. We don't allow we're recommending that we not allow signs on the sidewalk but we do allow we do recommend allowing people to carry signs on the sidewalk. And uh that once again if we
scroll down just a little bit further Annie we have in there that signs uh can be removed if in from the rideway if they are in violation of this ordinance. Uh if you can move down a little bit further. Uh this here the maximum square footage of a campaign sign is 6 square ft. You can see there that the city
reserves the right to designate an area as an offlimits. Uh this was one of the things pointed out in state statute uh on a polling place uh that there is a 150 ft exclusionary zone and that outside of that 150 ft exclusionary zone pretty much signage can be placed on the
property. And so we uh we took that we were recommending that we delete that. Of course the next one is just uh just a renumbering of of uh paragraph F. Um, and council, I do have the graphics that we provided to you uh in your in your packet. If you would like me to pull
them up, I can. But uh that is our presentation. It's recommended that you conduct a public hearing and adopt ordinance number 1757. Thank you, Mr. Cob. This is a public hearing. It I do not have any written requests to speak. Is there anybody in the audience wishing
to address council at this time? Hearing none, I will close public comment and I will ask what is the pleasure of councel? I move we adopt ordinance 1757 but delete the last sentence of subsection C which reads at no time are
political campaign signs allowed to be placed on any public sidewalk and that is a repetition of something written up higher in that statute or in that section that would be 3C correct yes 3C. What page was that? It's the right right
here. The second page of actually Annie, if you could come come on down a little bit further and come down a little further. It duplicates. Yeah. Get something set up higher. And I think it adds confusion. It duplicates the last line
on H1, right? Yeah. Uh, but that looks formatted differently than what I have. Come come down. Come down. There. There it is. Right there. That the la last sentence there says at no time, which is above D. That's and it
already says it further up. And I think this adds confusion because we we're talking about you are allowed to carry the sign wherever you want to. First amendment and all. And then it says, but you can't place them there, but you can if it hasn't on a stick and you're standing there, you can. So, I just don't want anybody to be confused or think that we're going to Okay, we have
a motion. Do we have a second? I I will second that. I I'd like to add one more thing if you're willing. Yeah. Um, so and Mr. Cob and I I talked about this. The intent was that the rightway on the opposite side of the street would still
be allowed. Um, and he and I had a conversation about whether that is implied by the word uh directly adjacent. So, in section uh in that same paragraph there, paragraph C. Um it says
the public right of way directly adjacent right right before we scratched on the same side. Um I I'd like to have language there that just made it abundantly clear that we're talking about this side and that side because otherwise I'd believe it's open to interpretation. So what if we add in
parenthesis including the opposite side of the street within the same ride ofway? Yes, something like that. I was I was going to recommend say including both sides, but that's fine. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. Uh, mayor, any discussion?
We we finally got here. It's been a been a journey. Council member, anything else? Uh, nothing. Council member Written, I'm good. Council member Bford, I'm good. I will ask the clerk to call a role. I'm sorry. Can you make it clear that the motion is with the add with both?
The motion is to both delete the last sentence of C, subsection C, and to add in where is that located? Uh, in in the middle of section C. Sorry, I lost your same same paragraph. Yeah, same paragraph. In the second paragraph of
section C, add parentheses saying including the other side of the road. So it includes both amendments. Can we say other side of right of way? Oh yeah, both. Yes, both sides of the
right of way. That is more legally accurate. And that parenthesis is being added right after right of way directly adjacent. I don't know if that was [Music]
Did you say that part? Sorry. I think so. All right. Mayor Slick, I. Council member Aut I. Deputy Mayor Tukurt. I. Council member Bterford. I. Council member Britain. I. Motion carries. Moving on to item number six, ordinance number 1758, revision of
the city code of ordinances, section 38-99. Uh, Mr. Hall, can you read this ordinance by title only? Absolutely. Ordinance number 1758, an ordinance of the city of Oido, Florida, amending certain provisions of chapter 38, private waste collectors, section
38.99-9 rates subject to review, providing for implemented administrative actions, providing for savings provision, providing for conflicts, providing for severability, providing for codification and scriveners errors, and providing for an effective date. Thank you, Mr. Hall. Mr. Cop, can you
please provide a background? Uh, yes. Thank you, Deputy May. And if you can pull that Thank you. Perfect. Uh what this ordinance does, it deletes section 38.99 from the code of ordinances and that it will not that section required private waste collectors to provide
their rate sheets and be approved by council. And so this will take that requirement away from here. And so it's recommended you conduct a public hearing and adopt ordinance number 1758. Thank you. Uh this is a public hearing. I do not have any written requests. Is there anybody in the audience that would
like to address counsel at this time? Hearing none, I will close public comment. What is the pleasure of council? I move we adopt ordinance number 1758. Have a motion. Is there a second? Second. Is there any discussion? Mayor Slick. Council member Bford. Council
member Britain. I'll ask the clerk to call a roll call vote. Mayor Slick. I. Council member Bford. I. Deputy Mayor Tukurt. I. Council member Britain. I, Council Member I, I, the motion carries. Moving on to item number seven,
resolution number 4603-25, storm water utility revenue note series 2025. Uh, Mr. Hall, can you read this by title only? [Music] Resolution number 4603-25.
The resolution amending and supplementing resolution number 545-95 as previously amended of the city of Obito, Florida authorizing issuance of not to exceed $9.5 million city of Obito, Florida utility revenue note
series 2025 to provide funds for the purpose of financing a portion of the acquisition costs associated with certain capital improvements to the city's storm water utility system and paying the cost of issuance related thereto pledging a parody lean on the
net revenues of the utility system of the issuer and certain other legally available funds of the issuer for the payment of such utility revenue note providing for the rights of the holder of such note authorizing the private negotiated sale of such note to TD public finance LLC pursuant to the terms
and conditions described herein providing for the amendment of the definition of bond service requirements approving an amendment to the city's budget ratifying and confirming all of the terms, provision, and covenants of resolution number 545-95 of the issuer as previously
amended, providing certain other matters in connection therewith and providing for an effective date. Thank you, Mr. Hall. Mr. Cobb. Uh, thank you, Deputy Mayor. This is a request for city council to award request for bank loan of proposals number 25-32 for a taxexempt non-bankqualified
utility system revenue note series 2025 to TD public finance LLC to authorize the issuance of utility revenue utility system revenue note series 22205 in the amount not to exceed $9.5 million and to approve a budget
amendment. Uh Mr. Mr. uh B is going to give the staff presentation. Uh after he gives this presentation, it's recommended that the city council conduct a public hearing and adopt resolution number 4603-25. Thank you, Mr. Cob. Thank you, Annie. Um
thank you, honorable mayor, deputy mayor, council members. Go to the next page, please, Annie. Excuse me. So, we issued the RFP request for for uh response for bank proposals and we also
um did it uh for um we did it for a u a credit um a line of credit. We did it for a bank facility as well. So, when we issued the the uh RFP, we requested uh information on both. So, these are the folks that responded to both um both of
the requests. Bank of America regions uh capital TD public finance truest and Webster Bank. So the credit facilities again like I said just said we requested two different types of credit facilities a bank loan line of credit uh not to
exceed 9.5 million and a not to exceed 9.5 million tax exempt fixed rate senior lean with a final maturity of on October 1st 2040. Next slide. So we looked at these things very very carefully. You know
when we got the re the u responses back in from the various different vendors we engaged um Mr. George Smith bond council who is here tonight as well as Mr. Joel Tindle who is with Hilltop Securities who is our financial adviser and we had
significant discussion on the advantages and the disadvantages of both offerings. Okay. We tried to find the advantages to the line of credit and we just couldn't find any. Um the issues that we ran into uh based upon the time constraints that we had was that the borrowing would be
at a variable rate. Um and at a variable rate it would be subject to interest rate fluctuations. And one of the next bullets I felt very uncomfortable with is that the borrowing would require that we pay a fee on unused amounts that we did not draw down. Okay? So, they're
getting their interest whether we draw it down or not in some way, shape, or form. But in addition to that, the borrowing would have to be fin refinanced at or prior to the end of the 3-year period. And you know, when you're forced into a refinancing at a particular point in time, you really
can't time the entry into the market perfectly. So, one of the things that we always try to do is time our entry into the market at the most appropriate time so we that we can create the most interest rate savings that we possibly can. And it was felt that this line of
credit would paint us into a corner. We would be forced to make a decision and it would not be advantageous for us. And then the last bullet, which to me is the clencher, is that the line of credit would require the payoff of the
lowinterest SRF loans. And so one of the loans is about 3%, another one is less than that is two 2%. And that would require that we take $1.8 million roughly out of the utility cash and pay off those notes. Going to the next
slide. The advantage to the fixed rate note is that we would lock in an interest rate for approx approximately 15 years and eliminate refinancing risk and the and and we would know what the interest rate is. Okay, we wouldn't be subject to market volatility. Um the note would lock in
certainty in regard to the repayment schedule. So we could easily budget for it year-over-year. We would know what those numbers are. The note uh does not require the payoff of the SRF notes which is loans which is a big bonus for us. We retain that cash in the water and
sewer utility. And the most adv advantageous component of the fixed rate note is that there's no prepayment penalty as a result of paying it off early which gives us the options with the help of bond counsel and the help of our financial advisor to if it's
advantageous for us to do that do so is to pay it off or to refinance it at the most at the best time for us uh for the market. Uh next slide. Uh so the stormwater note basically we selected option B with TD
Bank. It was determined to be the most advantageous after significant discussion. It was it took a couple days for us to fair it through it all. Um and the note would be secured by Alena and the pledge on the net revenues of the combined utility which is storm water
sewer uh revenues and in addition to that storm uh sewer system and water system development charges which are impact fees. Next slide. So the approval process, what it requires by our city charter is that it
requires a vote of at least four members of the city council to approve. So in order for this to move forward tonight, we would need an affirmative vote from four of the council members. Next slide. So resolution 4603-25 accomplishes the following. It
fulfills the fiscal requirements of the rate study provided in attachment 4. It authorizes the issuance of the utility revenue note series 2025 for the amount not to exceed 9.5 million. Also authorizes a budget adjustment as
provided in exhibit D. Next slide. It it also authorizes different things for the mayor, the clerk, deputy clerk, city manager and such other officers like myself to execute the necessary documents to facilitate the
financing. It provides for other certain matters. Staff recommends approval of resolution 4603-25. And with that, I will ask any questions, answer any questions. Anybody have any questions up here?
Thank you, Mr. R. Mr. Cob. Was that it for presentation? That's all I need. Okay. Uh, this is a public hearing, so I will ask if anybody would like to address council at this time. Hearing none, I will close public comment. What is the pleasure of
councel? Make a motion to approve resolution number 4603-25. Do we have a second? I'll second. Okay, we have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Council Butterford? No, I'm good. Council member,
um I just uh and I spoke to uh Mr. poop earlier and uh there were in the attachments here there's there's a lot of different things and uh I I just wanted to make sure that the record um showed in the minutes that um we're
choosing TD option uh B and that's at 4% for $9.5 million and that is a little bit different than what's in the summary of bank proposals. It shows a a different rate than that but Mr. poop uh told me
that we were able to negotiate them down um from the from the original bid. So those are the numbers as I understand them unless uh somebody wants to correct me. Sounds like that's right. That's it. Okay, Mayor Slater. [Music]
So I kind of went back and forth on this one a little bit. I think you guys know from the previous discussions that my preference as a general rule is to not borrow money. Um but in looking at the annual rate of construction inflation
and just the general uh you know the CPI the regular normal inflation rate for just general household goods. I think the rate we got probably leaves us in a stronger position if we borrow versus don't borrow. So, I think
I think we have crushed the threshold for me being comfortable with this u at the 4% rate. So, I'm I'm glad that we were able to to lock that in at a lower rate and be able to address all of the issues all at once. Uh we we have a lot of deferred maintenance out there and I
am hopeful that we will be able to quickly tell people that, you know, there's there's no backlog and we have a timeline. We will have a timeline once this is approved. And I did forget to mention this is one of the topics that was brought up in the separate meeting. So if you guys have
anything to disclose at this time, yes, please do so. So we didn't talk about these bonds. We just talked about how a bond is like a mortgage because a lot of people don't understand what a bond like you're talking about a bond. You're like what does that mean? Like James bond. Uh so yeah, it was just you know highle
explanation. Is that how you recall it? Yeah, I concur. We we didn't talk about the specific bond in general. Um and this particular meeting was with residents and and a lot of it was um you know answering questions that residents brought up about things and yeah so now now everybody knows that a bond is a
bond is borrowing money. It's what's it's what cities call a mortgage on a utility or a capital project. Okay. Uh council member Brderford or I already asked you. Uh yeah, you already asked me. Council member Britain. I'm good. Thank you. All right. And I'm good as well too. So with that,
I will ask the cler to call a roll call vote. Council member Bodford I. Council member Aut I. Mayor Slick I. Deputy Mayor Tukurt I. Council member Britain I. Motion carries. We do not have any first reading of ordinances. So we'll move on
to resolutions. Item number nine which is resolution number 4599-25 seminal county city of ovito mobility fee interlocal agreement. Mr. Cobb would you please provide a brief uh yes thank you de this is a request for the council to approve a
interlocal agreement with seminal county for mobility fees. Uh it establishes the procedures in which the city and the county will work together uh regarding uh the dispersement of mobility fees and also regarding uh funding of projects uh
within the city's uh mobility fee benefit district. Uh this this agreement uh it is a requirement of state statute. Uh when we adopted our uh mobility fee, we opted out of the county system. And so what it meant was that there are when
developers come to the city of Obito, they will pay one mobility fee. Uh the city will receive 75% of that revenue. The county will receive 25% of that revenue. Uh that was the first big thing that first big hurdle that we were able to uh overcome. Uh we will the county
will receive their dispersements on a quarterly on a quarterly basis. Uh, also it requires the county to spend the funds in the benefit district. And if you recall, Annie, if you could pull the push push the map up there, if you recall from when we adopted our study,
our benefit district covers the city limits plus the area around us uh in unincorporated seminal county. If you uh those of you who are on council about four years ago would probably remember that the county wanted to spend the money anywhere in the county, no matter where they collected it. And so that was
a huge issue with us and we said no you need to be spending the money here uh that would so that it meets the dual rational nexus that the impact the money is spent on projects that are associated with the impacts. Uh the it uh
that it also requires that the county will provide us uh with a summary of mobility fees sent um how the funds are being spent. Uh the term of the project of the agreement is five years uh or until the next uh mobility fee report
mobility plan which you will recall from our ordinances that we will do the updates every 5 years. And so I it's recommended that you adopt resolution number 4599-25. Thank you. Mr. what is the pleasure of council? I move we continue resolution
4599-25 to July 21st, 2025 so we can make sure that it complies with um all the state [Music] statutes because I don't think it does right now. I'll second for discussion. Right. Mayor Slated discussion. Well, on
July 19th, 2021, we cancelled the interlocal agreement that uh obligated us to give any um get to remit any sort of payments to the county. So, I I guess I have a lot of questions and there's a
lot of uncertainty to me on on what we have been doing from July 19th, 2021 till now. Uh when a developer showed up on July 20th, 2021, who got what payments? because at that time uh I believe the county had adopted its
mobility fee or if not there was a road fee and we had a multimodal fee. So what we should have been doing from that date onward is putting everything into escrow so that we could then apply our mobility plan that we have since adopted and this 25% number could be remitted to the
county under our state compliant plan. So if in the meantime we have had people if we have had any money collected by OVTO and then given to the county there is no interlocal agreement
to do that. Okay. So what please please share where's the money? Who's got the money and what have we done with it and how much has been collected in the last four years that's in escrow. Good evening um mayor um deputy mayor council members. So I don't know I don't know
how much money. What I know is that since we um terminated the agreement and before we would collect the money for the county and then we would um send the money to the county. Uh from that point on since they adopted the mobility fee
and then interlocal was just for transportation road impact fees we stopped collecting the money for them. So we would send developers to pay um the county um uh mobility fees at the county. We would not collect them here.
Okay. So, we need to get a list of all of the fees that were paid for this the last well since July 19th, 2021 and find out what percentage of that accomplishes the plan that we
ultimately adopted because that's what the state statute requires of us. So, that that number, we don't have that number tonight. So we should not approve the interlocal agreement until we have the math figured out because and I and I don't know mayor if that is so that was
not our understanding because at that point we did not have a mobility plan. So when you and me and a our tra and our mobility consultant were on the phone on speakerphone upstairs at city hall and we talked about how this was drawing a line in the sand and that all of the
money should then be escrowed and our ultimate mobility plan. those numbers would apply to the escro funds. Like the three of us were there and I and you guys have no recollection of this book
over and over and over again and every time I'm blown off and told, "Oh, we we're just No, we remember I remember that discussion, that phone call. Jonathan Paul was part of the negotiations with the county. This was never been brought
up. It should have been brought up. So, we need to bring it up now and we we can just bring this all back up July 21st. I think that should give us enough time to do the math, find out how many millions were given to the county, look at our plan and say, which of these projects
did you spend this money on? And either they spend it on projects that are in our benefits area because we have a mobility area. It's a a defi a very well- definfined mathematical kind of a plan. And they spend it there or they didn't. If they didn't spend it there,
then we essentially have allowed them to pre-collect money from our developers that the developer got no benefit from. So they they could spend it wherever they want, but that money doesn't get paid to them. Again, it would be
prepayment for things that do actually fit into our mobility plan. And I don't know that I'm explaining this especially clearly. Um, so I need to like get a copy of our mobility plan out and and and say, you know, here's a here's a a road that got
done like, you know, 426 that was never we didn't use mobility fees to expand 419, for example, uh the portion that is county road versus state road. So that was done with the 1centent sales tax, not with mobility fees. So the
capacity that we extracted this impact fee for was not added in a place that benefits the business that paid the fee. So that's that's what I'm concerned about here is
that we are not requiring the impact fees to add capacity for the people who pay the fees and and this nexus. Yeah. The interconnectedness of getting a benefit for paying an impact fee is required under state law. So, we do need to address that in interlocal
agreement so the county's not caught off guard later down the road if we say, "Well, hey, you know, we we allowed everybody to pay this directly to you and you should have put it at escrow and should we have had this discussion way earlier?" Well, absolutely. I I tried to
get the discussion to happen many times way earlier and uh we haven't had many chances at a public meeting to have this discussion. So, yeah, I I wish we could have done it behind the scenes, but here we are. at the public meeting hopefully going to sort this out. Okay. Any other
question for me? Council member, you question. Um could we add this to the work session in a week? Is that okay? I think that makes sense. So yeah, if we So you seconded the continuence and then we get it on a work
session agenda really fast. Sorry, it's a matter of making a public records and find out public records request at the county and say how many impact fees were paid in these categories for projects located in Ovito city limits. Then we take that list, we compare it to what
our mobility plan says. We apply the 25% rule and like the these are known quantities all of them. Well, um perhaps maybe the June work session because you I I would not think that we would be able to do that in a week because I think we have to first understand where
you know the legal aspect of the statutes cuz how can we we need to wait till June 1st so our new legal council can get up to speed on all of this and sense so I mean do we have a one scheduled at the end of June? I'm not aware. Okay.
Well, right now we're in discussion. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Um, so I might as well go through my my whole little list of of things. Uh, so I guess the questions we need to ask the county is did did they escrow the money given to them if they
So we know that we did not escrow it to in the future give to the county. So maybe they escrow the money so we could do this calculation later. So maybe there's not really an issue. Then we need to ask uh, you know, what what did they do with the money specifically?
what did they do inside OTO city limits or in our benefits area that does extend some of our roads uh some of what we will be using our mobility fees for extend beyond our border so they can do things that are outside our border so we need to know what specifically they did
with that um and then in the ILA ultimately you know after we answer some of these basic questions uh we need to make sure that we address a timeline and how we're going handle future payments. So once we collect the impact fees from developers in the future rather than
just us turning around we give 25% to the county for them to do whatever they like uh we should have an arrangement in advance that we will hold it in escrow and when they begin to construct the thing that they have promised to do. then we have the money waiting for them and then we give it over to the county
to do the joint project as agreed upon you know in our and hopefully in our soon to be adopted slightly amended from what it is now interlocal agreement. Um so I guess we've addressed and and I'm glad that that the city has not been making payments to the county
because there is no interlocal agreement to authorize them to do so uh to authorize you know us to move this money. Um, so I get, you know, that gets back to the escrow account and, um, yeah, we just, we just need some documentation on what the county has
spent the unknown amount of money doing to benefit Ovito. Councilman Britain. Um, Mr. Cobb, is there an escro account mechanism to uh do what the mayor's asking? Oh, we don't
have one right now. No. Okay. West Palm has such a thing. Several cities have such a thing. Can I continue? Yes. Okay. Thanks. Um, how do we track that stuff? Does the county give us a report? Uh,
under the under the current currently, uh, no. Under the interlocal agreement, then yes, we would be receiving a report. Okay. So, you think the information is available that they they have that much fidelity in their system to tell us exactly how much was spent on every block of every brick of uh they've
laid and every covert they've put in. I think that we can I think we can ask uh one we can ask what projects from Oto have paid the county fee since I guess July 19th of 2021.
And then um to we can ask to see where the funds were spent. Okay. Can you do that? We can ask those questions. Yes. All right. Council member Bodford. Oh, good. So, I guess it's up to me. So, I guess my question here would be, is there any issue with
delaying this at this point, Mr. Cobb, or when do we have until we need to adopt this? We must adopt before October 1st. Okay. So, we do have some time to continue this. And if we did go that route, uh, when would you propose we come back to it if we do that
information? I I think we can do the June we could do the June uh work session if you want. Uh, and we can, as the mayor said, July 21st. Okay. And that's enough time to get back to this. Yes. Okay. Uh, is there any further
questions? Uh, no, you asked it. Okay. So, right now the motion is to continue this. Um, I will ask the clerk to call a roll call. Mayor Slick, I. Council member Bterford, I. Deputy Mayor Tukurt, I.
Council member Aut I. Council member Britain, I. Motion carries. Moving on to item number 10, resolution number 4600-25, preliminary subdivision plan and site development order, final engineering for Magnolia Town Homes. Uh,
Mr. Cobb. Uh, thank you, Deputy Mayor. Uh, Mr. Harris Burns Kel, our development re review manager, will be making the presentation. Uh, once he's done, it's recommended that city council adopt resolution number for 4600-25. Thank you, Mr. Cobb, mayor, deputy
mayor, council members. Um here to present Magnolia Town Homes preliminary subdivision plan and site development order final engineering. Uh obviously preliminary subdivision plans come before this uh council for approval. Uh the site development order
final engineering has deviations that are above 20% and therefore it's before city council as well. They decided to do this as one application have a preliminary subdivision plan and final engineering. Um so some quick facts about the project. Uh it's a future lane
use designation on downtown transition zoning of Central Avenue. Uh it's a little less than an acre in size. Uh the proposals for seven town homes, also known as single family attached. Uh the future lane use provides for 12 dwelling
units per acre, but with the acreage of the site, the maximum density will be nine units per acre and obviously the seven are below that threshold. Uh it's seven town homes along with shared infrastructure and the utilities provided portable water connection and
uh it's a septic system that's going to be on the site. The nearest sewer available is over on division street which is quite a ways from the property. So on the preliminary subdivision plan obviously you could see the seven lots and then you have the
associated tracks. Track A being the parking and alleyway, track B being the storm water facility, and then track C and D being the sewer utility easements. So there are two deviations
we I referred to at the beginning of the uh presentation. The first being street trees along Central Avenue. And the issue over here is that there's not enough space to be able to fit them over in the rightway. So between the edge of
pavement of the roadway and the sidewalk, there's about 3 ft in space. Little little difference between where you are on the site. And then at the back of the sidewalk to the property line, there's about 3 ft in space. And it's just not enough space to be able to
have a tree uh and what we call utility tree conflict. And so at any rate, that was the purpose of the deviation there. And the mitigation that they provided was to upsize these trees. The trees were located in the area that really kind of it serves as a street tree. They
also have some replacement trees that they provided to the north of there that they upsize and they serve as a street tree providing that canopy that promotes walkability of the pedestrian facility that's provided on site. The other deviation that we have
is uh our requirement is that you have to have terminal landscape islands for parking facilities. is there's two parking spaces there and they're required to have two terminal islands which is a little excessive but on top of that then being able to provide the landscape island uh is prohib uh
inhibited by the fact that the septic system is over there and so again we have a utility tree conflict and what they did was provide a upsized landscape tree into landscape island that they have here these are the deviations written out again the street tree deviation was
100%. They did not provide any of the street trees. Instead, they provided the upsized lot trees that were in the location where a street street tree typically would be and then um uh 50% deviation for the landscape
island conditions of approval and mobility strategy. the mobility strategy they provide or the developer provided uh public benches along or at the corner of Central Avenue and Magnolia Street. And so you could see this depiction and
we'll kind of blow it up a little bit. The benes are kind of offset from the corner there. So you have the uh edge laser beam. I I am
I I don't have It's not working. The very top one. The very top one. Am I not doing it right? Okay. I'm seeing. Okay. So, like Yeah. And so the edge of the bench for both of them from the back
of the curb. So you you have backb I think it might just make it like bigger. So, inside that red box, for everybody who's sitting out there for trying to figure out where these benches are, it's those little black rectangles inside the
reddish box almost right smack dab of the middle of the screen, the bottom left corner almost. Mhm. And the second part, the this the developer entered into a vesting agreement with the city of March 4th,
which uh vest them for transportation impact fees. As long as they uh obtain uh building permit issuance prior to September 4th of 2026, if they do not and they provide building permit issuance after that, then they will be responsible for mobility fees.
Oh, one other key note. This site plan was reviewed under the 2006 code, not the 2024 code based off the application timing. Okay, so we have the current application before you, a preliminary subdivision plan, uh site development or final engineering, and then future
applications being the final plat architectural design order and development permits such as site permits and building permits. Uh staff recommends approval of resolution 4625 for Magnolia Town Homes preliminary subdivision plan and site development order final engineering. This concludes staff's presentation and
we're here for any questions you may have. Thank you. Does anybody have any question why he's up here? Yeah, I do. You talked about that island up there and you said something about an island on each side. Uh, I I had been looking at that island thinking that it seemed
completely useless and provided an impediment to the fire truck turning around in the firetruck document. I was curious about what So, not the red one, the one to the left of that, the west just west right there. The one the one that they actually installed or or or
that's on the approved plans or the the proposed plans, excuse me. I'm uh fumbling with my words here, but we do an auditor analysis. fire was had signed off on the allur analysis. Yeah. What is the purpose of that island? Well,
typically uh so the landscape island uh requirement, think of a larger uh parking field, right? And the requirement is that for every 10 parking spaces that you have, you have a landscape island. It's so it's to provide shade in the parking area. this
site because of the size of it and really the size of the parking field. Uh I I I think the code doesn't work as well in this particular circumstance, but on average it it does perform pretty well.
Okay, I've got a got a quick question on the benches. Now, am I understanding correctly that this is a mitigation technique for eliminating street trees or is this a mobility thing that they need to do? Okay. Yeah. Yeah. It's not a mitigation technique. It's part of
mobility strategy. So per the comp plan, the comp plan requires uh developments to provide a mobility strategy. The mobility strategies are there's a table in there in any way your PM peak. Uh the the amount my question's
answered. I'm good. I just wanted to make sure that we were not crisscrossing the like if if if providing a mobility strategy is considered a a punishment or a way to like earn a deviation for street trees like that doesn't line up
but if you have to have a mobility strategy that's just an independent standalone thing that is a completely different thing so thank you. Okay. Thank you. Okay. All right. What is the pleasure of council? I move we adopt resolution
4600-25. Have a motion. Is there a second? I'll second. Any discussion? Mayor Slitic. I think it's important to note that this property has been zoned commercial for a really long time. So something going here on this very busy
intersection on 434. U it makes sense. And it has been pretty much completely empty with no trees. So, like this doesn't even really require, you know, it might have had an old house. Is that something staff knows about? Did it have an old house that got knocked down? I thought I thought so.
Yeah. So, it's redeveloping a corner that that you know, it it brings some value to the area. So, I think it's a good thing. All right. Council member, uh, you said it's been zoned commercial for a long time. Well, like for a while it was commercial. It was It was primarily office. Yeah. Office. Yeah. It
was it was resed to office, but it was an old house there. There was an old single family home there and it was falling in on itself. Uh it was reszoned to office and then the home was removed. Okay. And it's currently vacant. Right. Right. But the current
zoning is not. Yeah. Okay. That's all. Okay. Council member Bonafford. No questions. Council member Britain. I'm good. Thank you. And I will also say it's kind of pleasant to get a lot. That's empty of trees and pretty clean slate. So, I'm
good, too. Uh, I'll ask the clerk to call a roll call vote. Mayor Slick, I. Council member, I. Deputy Mayor Turt, I. Council member Bford, I. Council member Britain, I. Motion carries. Moving on to item number
11, resolution number 4601-25, fair share fee impact fee credit agreement for Broad Oak Ovido LLC. Mr. Cobb. All right. Thank you, Mayor, Deputy Mayor. Uh this is a request to approve a fair share impact fee credit agreement uh with Broad uh
for the Broad apartment complex. The property is approximately 13.81 acres. It's uh located north of the dwell uh off of Sugar Mill Road. Uh part of the the development of the property involved the dedication of a 30- foot wide ride
ofway uh along the uh along the eastern boundary of the property and it is an extension of Sugar Mill Road. The Sugar Mill Road, a small ride of way. I think it's around 20 ft was already there. Uh they're adding they're dedicating an
additional 30 ft that goes up from the where from the bottom of the property um along their eastern boundary supplementing that rideway to get a 50- foot ride ofway. Uh they also have uh
they will be constructing the roadway within that rideway up to their entrance and they have also put in some other uh other parts of the ride of the roadway that that um that they are putting in as well. Uh the applicant has asked for this impact credit agreement to do two
things. One is to defer the payment of any uh transportation impact fees uh to the CEO of the last building and then two to receive impact fee credits for the dedication of the ride ofway as well as the improvements constructed uh within within the ride ofway. The total
amount of the impact fee requested credits is $250,381.99. Uh the applicant the state statute was uh revised a few years ago that basically uh what it says is that if a local government requires an improvement or contribution that it must credit
against the collection of the impact fee any contribution whether identified in a development order proportionate share agreement or any form of the exaction related to public facilities or infrastructure including monetary contributions land dedication site plan design and construction. So that's one
of the things is that the state statute uh does does provide that we for these improvements is for the for this rideway dedication that um credit be allowed. Uh so it is recommended that the city
council adopt resolution number 4601-25. The applicant is here tonight so I would recommend that you allow them to speak as well. Okay. If the applicant would like to come up, please state your name and address for the record.
Good evening, Deputy Mayor, mayor, fellow council members, Brent Spain, Theak in Spain, 1809 Edgewater Drive, Orlando, Florida. On behalf of Broad Ovido LLC and I would just stand before you to answer any questions. I had to review
the staff report. The staff report sort of lays out the history on it and how the dollar amount got reached. The city engineer has reviewed the cost estimates we've submitted and has concurred with those estimates as well as the property value, but we appreciate your support of
the uh fair share agreement this evening. Thank you. What is the pleasure of council? I move we deny resolution number 4601-25. We have a motion. Is there a second? Second for discussion. Okay,
Mayor Slitic. Um, so I I'm trying I I'm I may change my mind, but I'm I'm looking at some of the answers to my questions from staff, and it looks like this to me is a road going to a dead-end place that benefits only the people who
will live there. So, it's essentially a publicly subsidized driveway as it is for the existing portion that is already actual rightway. Um unless somebody can show me the breadcrumb trail that we are are legally obligated to accept the
other portion as a public road. Um I am not inclined to do so and I would rather accept the impact fees and use that to improve things other places in this area to improve
capacity. Yes. Um I guess so we only owe the impact fees if we accept them as a public road. The public road and it's not a road that serves the public because it's a dead end thing. So
you see the circular logic of well if we did accept it well then we would then everything here applies and we would be required to credit back the cost of creating the road that benefits only this project. Yeah. I mean it does it does kind of raise a question. Is this the thing that we were going to do
already or is this a thing that we were maybe going to do or maybe never going to do or um are are you able to speak to that Mr. Um, or there was no map on here showing exactly the road either.
Can can we pull something like that up? I tried to find a map that would I even went back and looked at some of the construction plans and they were so detailed that it was very difficult to to discern where the ride the ride ofway was and what the improvements within the rideway was. If I could have found a
very if I could have found one that was clear for you, I would have I would have had it up on the screen, but I I could not find a good a good uh a good one that uh that I could use to demonstrate where this 30ft ride ofway is. Um well, what go ahead. No, I mean that that's
the thing is that the um the the project the project was required to provide the right of way and the construction plans the approved construction plans do provide for the improvements within the right of way and so per the statute uh
it's 16331 8015A per the statute the city must give credit for the improve dedication and for the improvements and this agreement does is the vehicle for the city granting the credit and the um we also have the the non-monetary
request that any fees that need to be paid would be paid at CO rather than at building permit which is when normally the impact fees are paid. Is it possible for us to go back and say that we don't require that the right of way be gifted to the city because I
don't want this free gift that cost us a quarter million dollars and the cost of continual maintenance. I' I'd like to give that free gift back. And deputy mayor, if I could address that. Our I'm the mayor. She is the deputy mayor. Yeah. I said deputy mayor. She's
presiding officer. Absolutely. So when our client actually came forward and applied, they actually proposed a much smaller driveway. And it was the city that requested the dedication of the rightway. And at that time, our client proposed dedicating 20 ft of rightway.
and the city came back and said that the city wanted 30 ft of roadway. So, our client has responded favorably to the request of the city has approved plans that were approved last year and is moving forward. We have a vesting
agreement on the impact fees and here we are ready to move forward and break break ground and we're simply asking for what the statute allows. Um, and as the city manager alluded to, uh, the language is on page three of the staff
report under the statute, and I'm not responsible for the statute, the fine folks in Tallahass. I concur. If we have already agreed, and I guess it's a question for legal counsel, but as uh you may have noticed earlier, I I have very little confidence in our current legal counsel. So, I need somebody else to help walk me through how we get
legally to a place where the statute does in fact apply. So maybe somebody from STEM I'm getting shaken of heads over here. So nobody maybe Mr. Cobb can help show us how we have already approved and we have I think we have
extracted the width of a ride away from you. Am I understanding? We that's on the approved plans. Okay. So we made you do that and because we made you do that and then we told you in advance that you had to give it to us that would trigger everything. it's being dedicated plus our client is actually building the
improvement. So the the city and that's part of the reason for the delayed payment of the impact fee is essentially our clients fronting the money to build the expense the expense of the improvement at the end. It's just okay well here's here's what it was per these cost estimates. So rather than our
client paying an impact fee and then the city giving it right back, we're just at the end before the final CAO going, "Okay, well, did you do the improvement? Was it built to city specs? Final inspection? You're going to convey it to us? We're going to accept it." And at that time,
that's when that sort of evening out of the impact fee that we owe versus the cost of this improvement comes. So at this point it is not really optional for us to you know we have pre pre-aggreed that we are going to take this right ofway from you
more or less. So it's it is still a little bit circular but it is a different set of expectations and legal situation. I would say from the developer standpoint that this was approved back last August September of 2024 and my client was required to give
30 feet of right away. Have you already built everything or could you go back to the 20 ft? I think it's fully engineered. It's fully engineered. Fully engineered plans. So that's just spending more money to unengineer fully engineered
plans. Council member Butterford. [Music] No, I get nothing. Council member Braden. No, this we've been talking about this thing for Yeah. over a year. I I believe there was some discussion about cross cutting over to 426 and I
think this was what we finally ended up with. So, um I hate to go back and undo what's been done. So, the motion on the table is to reject what is on the table. Reject it, but I withdraw my motion. Okay. So, is there a
motion? What is the pleasure of councel? [Music] Make a motion to approve resolution number 4601-25. Is there a second? I will grudgingly second it. I am disappointed that uh we shook somebody
down for more road than they wanted to build and now we have taken it from them and we're going to forever have to pay 150% as much to maintain 30 ft of pavement instead of the 20 ft that the developer wanted to maintain and keep as private road.
Is there any further discussion? All right, I will ask the clerk to call a role. Council member Bterford. I, Mayor Slick, I, Deputy Mayor Tukurt. I, Council Member Britain, I. Council member Aut,
I. The motion carries. Thank you. Uh, next up we have item number 12, resolution number 4602-25, order of business and rules and procedures for public meetings, standard operating procedure. Mr. Cobb, would you provide a brief introduction?
Okay. Do we need to go now or [Applause] I'm sorry, Deputy Mayor. Uh, thank you. Uh, Annie, if we could pull up and what I'll try to do, Deputy Mayor, is to hit the highlights. Uh,
this obviously is the revisions to the order of business and rules and procedures for public meetings. And if you could blow that up, please. Um, and what I would like to do is really just go over what we uh we talked about
uh at the March work session. I think that would probably be the best to to address there and then we can we can go from there. And if you could go down, please I'm trying to pull it up still. Oh, okay. All right. Well, you can see there under public comments uh that
highlighted area there. And uh this was one of the things with it during the March 31st work session, the council um your your direction was was that you wanted that folks addressing the council to speak into a microphone and that your preference was that the persons would
address you from the podium. However, you wanted to make an accommodation that if a person could not physically address you from the podium that they would be allowed to address them from their seat and that uh we would provide them with the microphone. And so that is one of the things that that first highlighted
area there that is uh that is what that addresses. Uh the second highlighted area there it talks about that speakers who submit a request to address council form before speaking do not have to state their address. Uh obviously something that Mr. You and I spoke about
to today that you know we don't really require the form to be submitted. We prefer that they we ask them to to submit the form to the clerk before they speak. And so that uh one of the inputs that you got was is that folks should not be required especially in this day and age to provide their address over
over our uh YouTube uh uh uh over the video. And so that was one of the things that u it says that generally yes they will provide their name and address uh for the record but if you've submitted the request to address counsel then you would not have
to you'd only have to state your name. Uh going down a little bit further, uh this was deal this was uh when we talked about when if someone brought us a a digital file that they wanted to do a PowerPoint presentation before council,
uh when would they have to actually provide it to us? And the uh direction from the council was that it would be the morning of the meeting. And so that's that's what this one does. It says before noon on the actual day of the city council meeting.
Annie, if we could go down uh a little further. Keep going down. There's another highlighted to the next highlighted area. Uh keep going. Here we go. Uh this is under the motion to uh reconsider uh one of the things that you mentioned at
your work session that you're not allowed to abstain from voting. And so that was something that uh we wanted to make sure that we did address. And so what we've stated here is that a council member who was either absent or could not vote due to a conflict of interest
uh would be prohibited from making or seconding the motion to reconsider. Uh if we could go down further, Annie, to the next highlighted area, this right there, that's good. Uh this was uh under the motion to uh resend. Uh we were talking about what
would be constituting uh advanced notice if if a uh if a member wanted to uh to do a motion to resend uh that they could give notice uh before the meeting and that then it could be a majority vote.
Uh there was a lot of discussion during the work session and I think from what I could tell that the that the direction was that we would say six days. I remember uh council member Rod you felt that 10 days was excessive. Uh one of the things that we looked at with 6 days
was that that would put us at Tuesday uh before the Wednesday that we publish uh to the website and so it would give us time to get it onto the agenda. Uh also you can see there we added a number six uh on a motion to rescend under the items that it could not undo and that is
a previously adopted ordinance and that's because ordinances are adopted uh via state statute either sometimes it's most of the time chapter 166.041 but also chapter 163 has ordinance procedures for adoptions of zoning map
amendments and comprehensive plan amendments and so these ordinances follow estate statute. In order to reverse an ordinance, you have to do an ordinance to repeal. And that ordinance to repeal has to go through the same process that the prior ordinance went to. So the motion to reconsider would
not it would only give us direction to begin the process to do a motion to repeal, which you could do that under just saying we would like to giving staff direction just to go repeal the to bring you forward a motion an ordinance repealing the previously adopted ordinance. And so that's why we added
added that to the motion to that that would not be an item that a motion to resend could undo. And if we could go down a little further and then under public comment, this is this is just uh we carried over
uh what we had up in above when we were talking about uh public comments uh in a regular meeting. This is public comments in a work session. same same language that's provided in the regular meeting. So, I just wanted to point that out. It's that it's the same. At least I hope it's the same. I I tried to make sure
that I did get get the same language. And if we could go down just a little bit further, Annie, I think that's it as far as changes that were made from the March 31st work session. Uh it is recommended that uh the city council
adopt resolution number 4602-25. Thank you, Mr. Crop. What is the pleasure of councel? Make a motion to approve resolution number 4602-25. We have a motion. Second. And I am going to back you up here for a second because I do have one written
request to speak. I apologize for that. Uh Mr. David Williamson, if you can please come up and state. [Applause] No worries. Uh David Williamson address has been submitted on the request to speak. Um I was really happy to see the reconsideration of that requirement. Um,
but I think there's been an oversight. So, let me just go through this since this isn't a Q&A. Um, on its face, the resolution acknowledges the concern that I had um about, you know, stating your address orally from the podium as compelled speech uh and now live on the internet. Um, but it doesn't align with
the form. Okay. So, bringing people in their opinions to bear on these matters ought to be encouraged as much as practical. People seeking to address council already have too many barriers between them and that opportunity. public speaking fears, crafting a coherent message, being broadcast live on the internet are barriers you cannot
remove. The final barrier um is one that you can address. Again, this form, the original and the proposed new form look very similar in this section. It says when you speak, you must come to the podium and clearly state your name and address for the record. Maybe it's
just an oversight that that wasn't changed. But not only is this not what your resolation resolution intends, but it's also a significant discouragement to those who might not mind telling a room full of neighbors where they live, but not everyone in the world in perpetuity. Uh if people are motivated enough to come and have an audience,
whether it's to propose a new program to encourage residents to care for the community or if it's to give you an earful about the next multif family unit going in, if they get the courage to speak, if they prepare remarks to read from, if they get off work on time or take the evening off or happen to be in town when that issue is on the agenda,
they may get through all those barriers and when they get here and they're told they have to fill this out and then it tells them that they have to say their name on the record along with their address. Um that's not a problem for everyone. It may not be a problem for many, but if it's a problem for one person, it's a barrier and it's a barrier you already agreed you don't
need. Um, so my suggestion is simply to make sure that the form, which is the public face of your policy in practice, matches the resolution and nothing more. You already have to remind us to say who we are and where we live when we come up here. So, all you need to do is when we don't have a form, you say state your
name and address. And when you do have a form, just state your name. Thank you. Uh, so since I did that out of order, I will call for a motion again. Make a motion to approve resolution number 4602-25. Second. Uh, any discussion? I guess this
what Mr. Williamson said. Mr. Cobb, is that something we can do to get that form changed? I Yes, I do. I believe we should. I actually did not revise the form because I wasn't sure exactly how we the how the SOP would be if we had any further revisions in the SOP
regarding public comment. Uh yes, we will we will make the form match match the uh match the SOP. And actually, you may want to once we get through with all of the discussion, I would recommend that you amend your motion to state that the the
form be updated to reflect the uh the standard operating procedure. So that you need to change the motion. I would wait until you have your discussion and then then do it when when we wrap everything up. Okay. Okay. Anything else? No. All right, Council Member
Rout. Yes, I I agree on the form. Um there's Yeah. No, like like you said, um so I wrote a uh position paper on this and I sent it to the members of council. Um apparently this is um has not been done here in some time, if ever. Um so I
just wanted to um make that known that this is a uh this is a public record. If anybody would like it, somebody can have mine or they can uh ask the clerk for it. Um this is also something that is uh allowed under the sunshine law attorney general's opinion uh 2007- uh 35 uh
provides for this uh as long as we don't start talking about it on the email which we did not. Um and I wanted to say that I did that so that the uh issues that I had that I wanted to talk about um could be reviewed by others in case they wanted to prepare something to
refute me or support me or or whatever uh in these changes. So, um, if if it's okay, I'd like to go down the list if that's if that's all right. Okay. Uh, thanks. Um, so, uh, in the public comments, uh,
the proposed changes read, "A person who wishes to speak to city council would need to complete the, uh, essentially the form provided in exhibit A and present it to the city clerk, uh, uh, prior to the start of the meeting." Um then later it says that speakers must
identify themselves uh by stating their name and address which we talked about a second ago. Um speakers who submit a completed request to address the city council form do not have to state their address. Um this makes it sound like the public can speak without filling out the
form. Um which is our custom now which it almost sounds like we're trying to change to not be our custom. So I I don't know um what the consensus is about whether we should allow people to come and speak without a form or or not.
Yes, please. The more speaking the better. That that would be my inclination as well. Is there I believe if you're asking our intent was if you did not want to say your address, you could fill out a form, but you could still come up, but then you would have to say your address if there was not a form. But also correct me if if I'm
mistaken there. I I think the statute allows you not to state your address or to reveal your address ever, even if you have not turned it in on the written form. And that's a concern that I I have kind of carried through reading this as
well. Back to your your list. Okay. Um let's see. Uh further in public comments, and this is this is small and I brought it up before. speaker. It says speakers are permitted to read prepared statements if they wish. Prepared
letters should be addressed to the And it says prepared letters should be presented to the city clerk. Multiple copies should be provided by the presenter for distribution to council members. And I just want to make sure that prepared statements are not the same as prepared letters. So if somebody
comes and they read off of a a sheet, like many people do, that we're not requiring them to submit that. And I say that because the this paragraph doesn't really make sense when we start talking about letters. So it almost sounds like that's what the intent is. I would like
the intent to not be um that they have to pro uh provide us with anything that they brought to the podium. Um and additionally, I I don't even know what a prepared letter is in that case. Um, so should we strike prepared letters uh
being presented to the city clerk? The only time I've ever seen something like that happen is where the person who did not write the letter came and read the letter on somebody else's behalf and then distributed it. So I I I like where you're going with this that if
somebody does not want to submit something that they carry to the podium, you it's optional. It's absolutely optional. So maybe just strike that whole thing. It's not a public record unless they make it a public record. So speaking words from notes does not make
something a public record. So a person ought to have to take an affirmative action to do that thing. I I think the intent, Mr. Mr. Rod, I don't think the intent that if somebody walks up and just reads their notes that they're required to submit it to the
clerk. But mayor, you're right. We have had we have had uh instances where someone walks in they say and then they say I'm presenting this for the record and they walk over and they hand it to the clerk and then it's expected that it
be handed down the line and that each of you get an opportunity to look at it as it's handed down the line. And so the idea behind that is that if someone wants to hand something to us that they bring copies that they can give each of you a copy so that you're you're you get to actually look at it while they're
talking. But if they're just reading those from their from the podium, then no, I don't I don't there's this doesn't require that. It only addresses that if they come in and their their intent is to provide something for the record. They want you to see it while they're presenting it, then we're asking that
they bring enough copies for each of you to look at it rather than making you pass it down while they're speaking. Can we move that to another section so that's not under public comment perhaps?
Which paragraph is that? I'm looking for uh so where it says uh well, I don't know. I'm just reading off my sheet. Uh, in public comments, speakers are permitted to read prepared statements. Let me see. And it's in a few of these documents. We might not be looking at the same one. I don't know. Let's see.
Um, oh, there we go. It's the under public comments, there's the bullet, and it's the first paragraph under the public comments bullet on page seven of 12 in the PDF. Very interesting. How about we just add in that sentence
if Well, let's discussion before we start changing things. Okay. I have an idea since we're on it. Uh if a prepare if prepared documents should be presented to the city clerk, multiple copies should be provided by the presenter. So, it's a tiny little change that says, you
know, if if prepared letter, if prepared documents are given to the city clerk, more should, you know, give her enough to pass down the line. Yeah, I'd be okay with that. It's fine. Okay, good. Um Okay. Uh in the consent
agenda, it talks about items removed from the consent agenda will be moved to the resolution section of the agenda. Um, I I'm kind of not in favor of moving it all the way after resolutions only because consent agenda items are supposed to be the easy ones that
there's supposed to be kind of, you know, general consent on already. Um, and we're moving them down below all the the hard stuff, so to speak. Um, so I don't I would clarify after reading this that uh in the past you've taken things
off consent and we have had zero discussion about it and on our policy it says you're only taking them off to discuss them. So in the future I would say if we're not going to discuss anything they need to stay on consent. Um and if they're pulled off and they are resolution they should be in the resolution section. So I actually think
that makes a lot of sense if that's okay. Does that make sense? You're saying because they are resolutions. They're resolutions. If you pull them off consent, they should go on resolution and we should not be pulling things off unless there is a discussion on them. Um, well, I guess you could pull it off if you just want to vote
now. But yeah, that I think it makes sense to put them in resolutions as well or wherever a different vote or separate from your consent or an actual discussion. Otherwise, it should stay on consent. Okay. So I'm yeah I'm I'm then but I but I do like to have some things
read if if that's I mean you say you pull it off for discussion but like that's that's not what this really says if you're going to discuss it. If you're just going to have something read that's the whole point of consent agenda just to read the title. So if if you're just going to have things read I mean you
should just get rid of the consent agenda if you're if that's the only purpose of pulling them off in my opinion. Um when you're saying get rid of consent agenda, I mean some things um you know you can so I I used to fall on the air on the side of more transparency
and pull more off consent. Uh and a lot of times I it would be just to make the people in the room aware of what was happening. Uh and sometimes to vote no on things. So when when you want to vote opposite of yes, you have to pull it off. Uh, but sometimes there's just like
a really good news thing that it's kind of interesting to pull off and you're like, "Hey, good news. Everybody's sitting here that this thing is happening." So, what you can do instead of pulling it is just as part of the discussion of the consent agenda be like, "Here are some good news things that are happening here, guys." And then
it stays on consent and it doesn't move below public hearings, which I think is fair. People are here for the public hearings. There's been notice and stuff. So, if we're pulling stuff off consent, we should put it in the right place below all of the, you know, people showed up for the public hearing stuff.
Yeah, I I agree. Okay. Um Okay. Um so, we talked about the or we didn't talk about yet the motion to resend. Oh, and Mr. Cobb, you you told me that you made some notes on this and so feel free to jump in even if I don't did you have anything to say on anything I've said
already? Uh I just had a few. Uh, one of the things when you were talking about um when you're talking about people submitting the form and one of the things that I thought about was that just stating that they submit the form before they speak. Uh, I know it says
before the start of the meeting and sometimes folks don't arrive before the start of the meeting, you know, and so but they also have still have the opportunity to address council without submitting a form. Uh, then and that is true. We do allow people to speak. I don't think that and and I agree. I
don't I do not believe that that custom should or that practice should change. I think if someone wants to speak during public comments, whether or not they've submitted a form, they should they should be allowed to to do so. And I I'm glad that you do that this board the council does allow people to do
that. Regarding I'll just try to catch up to where we are. Um, as we talked about the prepared statements in the letters, so I don't really have um I don't have anything more to give you on that one that you know I don't I don't think that that anyone should have to provide their their their notes that
they're working off of, but if they do bring something, they should bring enough copies for each council member. And uh one of the things too, I agree with uh I agree with Deputy Mayor that uh these are resolutions. And one of the things about it when you do pull it off the consent agenda, you are inviting.
Now we're inviting public comment. And so under resolutions, it's when when it's in the resolutions section, public comment is given. And so it would allow that opportunity for public comment as well. And there is a primev procedural thing that would help the city clerk
tremendously if we would move it to uh to um to the resolution section. I cannot explain that to you. I would have to let her do it, but I know it was a request. All right, I retract that part. Yeah. Okay. Anything else? Uh yeah, so um on
the motion to resend um so we have the text in there about um with notice and without notice and uh 2/3. And I I I want to point out that what we're putting in there is a
deviation from Robert's rules which um you know the charter says that we follow you know barring any kind of uh um you know specific specific devi we can make a deviation if we want but I think it's important to to note here that that is a deviation the thing that we've written
about the 2/3 uh being required um under the um under the Robert's rules uh document that Mr. Hall sent us earlier this year uh when we talked about this stuff last time. Um a twothirds vote is only required if notice is not given and
if all members of the body are not present. Um so under Robert's rules if all members are present both times for the original passing and for the recision then a simple majority can rescend. Um, and so I would like to
strike that section and leave it the way it is um, currently, which is to that we by default follow Robert's rules. I like how it's written. Okay. Just you're looking for consensus there. I like the sounds of that. You I I like
doing that idea. Which what I said what you said. Just follow Robert's rules. There's no need to deviate from that. Okay. Any other any other comment? No. Okay. Um, under work session meetings,
language was stricken about um presentation materials, but this is this is kind of a separate thing and maybe this is a separate topic, but um could we add language? Maybe this isn't the right part about presentation materials being in the packet. Um cuz
you know like like today we've had a couple up there that weren't in the packet and I couldn't read them and we keep saying we can't read them but if it was right here even if it was put here today I could pull it up that's the thing that right there that is your packet that is attachment two I didn't
see anything from your packet um it was in there today the the bench map the benchm yeah the benchm I think that presentation wasn't and it's not as well one of the things Yes. And a lot of times when we're putting the when we're putting the agendas together, yes, the
staff presentation is the very last thing. Yeah. And but we will we will make a concerted effort to get uh get these things in. It may be that they come in a little bit later than than the rest of it. And also, I'm hoping that the upgrades to our AV systems will also
help in making them easier to read. One of the things that I know that I mentioned to Mr. boot. Uh we were working on the presentation for the loan over the weekend and I said when you get this thing finalized what I would like you to do is one let's see if we can get it loaded into prime go so that they can
see it on their on their screens but also let's put a copy on the dies as well and so that was one of the things that we did with the loan one we were able luckily we were able to get that one into is that one of these so oh it is here sorry yes so that that was one
we I could have looked no that was one of the things that I noticed And yes, we will I do want to try I want us to do better in getting the information uh into prime gov so that you can see it on your monitors. Hopefully the upgrades will make it better as well. Uh I know that I one of the practices that I've
been doing such as this is that utilizing utilizing the attachments actually taking the attachments and trying to blow them up into a larger font so that it's easier to read and rather than preparing a um a PowerPoint presentation just using the information
that we already have uh in the uh in the agenda package. So it was just something that but we are that is something that we have been have been talking about. Okay. Okay. Um yeah and the last thing is uh under the decorum and order at regular meetings work session uh it says
that every council member wishing to speak shall address the presiding officer and upon recognition the presiding officer shall be printed to speak. Um we don't really do this currently where we address the presiding officer. Um one of our commenters did um but it it's just not something that we
do. If we want to start doing that and be like the House of Representatives and Mr. speaker all the time. Uh, we can do that, but I since we don't do it, um, maybe we should take it out or or we could leave it and not do it or we could
leave it and do it. And that's all I have. And with that, uh, uh, not sure what to do. Is is is there any interest in making any changes or is there consensus
to make any changes? And uh yes, I mean there was a couple times. Would uh would it make sense to look at this in a week at the work session and hash out the rest of these things just to get the line? It would be hard to change this language on the dis. I think
uh I mean we've already seen this several times so I don't know how many times you want to bring I I think we should just hash it out tonight. We could do this. I don't think there's too much. It's little stuff. So, we're fixing the um public speaking form, I think. Are you guys good with that? Yep. Okay. Uh did you need direction on what
we're changing on there or you have that, Mr. Cob? I No, I my my thought is is that we will we will change I know Mary, you had a good suggestion. So, I I actually sent over some suggestions uh on exhibit A. I said, you know, the words don't match the policy. And the suggestion was just nyx the first line
and replace it with complete list form to address city council and no requirement like you don't you don't even need to comment that you have to or don't have to fill in the address like you get the name you call it and everybody's happy. Okay. But we're covered. Yeah. Okay. And then the next issue I think you brought up was
uh well so so to that um people being able to speak without filling out the form. Um, so maybe just striking the language that says those who wish to speak or a person who wishes to speak to the city council will need to complete the uh form provided in exhibit A and present to the city clerk at the start
of the meeting. We could say that they can and they'll be called first or something like that. Or I like that you'll be called first. Is everybody okay changing the form of the ways that are not yet? Usually we do written requests and then we do who doesn't. Yeah. So but is that okay? All
right. We have consensus next. I'm sorry. Can can can we You do not need to do a written request to come up and speak. Okay. But written goes first. Okay. Next. Uh okay. Um name and
address. Uh I think we covered that. We want to we want to strike that as um Oh, wait. Sorry. I'm sorry. Speakers who have completed a Yeah. So I I think this Yeah, I think that next part is fine. If we strike the first one. Okay. What are
we talking about? Uh I was talking to myself. I'm sorry. I got I think the second change we don't have to make. Okay. So in public comments it reads speakers are permitted to read prepared statements. So that's the part about you had some language that sounded good for that. Um yeah.
Make make it sound more suggestive and less this part right here. Yeah. Since I've already shown you this. Okay. It's already public record. Yes. This part. Uh yeah. So speakers are are permitted to read prepared statements if they wish. Uh if a speaker
wants to present any items to the city clerk, multiple copies should be provided. So the sentence there that begins with prepared and this is going to be on Oh, I've lost my place in it's in two different places, but I've got it. Yeah. So just add an if. If if
prepared documents should be presented to the city clerk, multiple copies should be provided. Not even multiple. Say enough copies should be provided. Seven copies should be provided to you. Make sure everybody has one. Yeah. Or seven or eight. Eight probably. Yeah.
Eight copies should be provided. Yeah. Okay. Next. Okay. [Music] Um see there was not consensus to change motion to rescend or um moving from the consent agenda. Oh is there not oh the
consent agenda that's different but discussion item that I think is coming which how to get a discussion item to be a discussion item. That uh was not part of my Okay. That's that's on mine but that can be on yours. Yeah. Yeah. Um the
the last one was um addressing the presiding officer. Do we want to that that was not a change that was in here, but it's something that just in the document that I found puzzling. It's an aspirational goal. I always mean to and I think we should aspire to.
Well, so the thing where I that I wrote here was that um in our council, speaking to one another, addressing the specific points that others raise, in other words, having a discussion is perhaps where the most effective communication and exchange of ideas happens.
And that you're over there laughing, man. See, I like the casualness of it. I think this is great. So maybe we should take it out because this casual interaction I don't think we should take it out because sometimes every single one of us up here has interrupted each other and we do make it more formal to
get us back on track. So I like it in there. It's aspirational. I like it. No, but I think it's something we should try to do because right now y'all are going back and forth on each other when he should be the one talking and it's making it hard over here where they don't feel like part of the conversation. So we're pretty much giving the example right now of why we
should actually do Well, maybe we need to sit in a different shape. shuffle our let's stay on topic here. So, uh I think we should keep it in and continue operating how we are and have it as a tool if we need to bring meetings back to the subject at hand and I will let you continue. And with that, I have
nothing further. Thank you. Okay. Uh Council Member Broader, I'll move it. Okay, Council Member Britain. Yep. I think we've picked out the color of paint. All right. My daughter, did I did I share my thoughts yet? I don't think so. if you have anything further to add.
I do. Uh I thought that at the work session consensus was that you only needed two people to agree to have a discussion item, not a majority of council to make it make something a discussion item. I believe it was majority. Was it really a majority? I
anybody open to one majority two people? I think the idea was if you have a majority then it's worth discussing. Okay. Well, this creates a weird scenario where if somebody really wants to address like if I really want to address you guys, then what I do since I'm not allowed to in a
discussion item, that's what reports are for. Well, I guess it could be a report or I could at public comment come and speak about the thing you don't want to hear. So, the whole audience can still be here to hear the thing that my colleagues don't want me to say to them.
Um, so I don't know. It doesn't happen very often. Maybe it'll never happen that I I won't be allowed to have a discussion item, but it it used to happen and hopefully it won't. I would say I'm I'm in favor of that. We there was there was it was mentioned, you know, the analogy of a motioner in a
second. Um but I think ultimately, yeah, there wasn't consensus for that or at least there's not right now. Well, there's not right now unless anybody wants to change their mind. Doesn't look like it. Okay. Anything else? Um, there is a there's mention about how people should be prohibited from calling into
question our integrity of public comments. I think this should apply to the city attorney perhaps, but I think the public should be able to come and tell us we're, you know, we're smelly, we're terrible, all the things uh, and accuse us of bad motives and terrible personalities. And I like we we
specifically talk about that people can't talk about our motives or personalities. And I don't know, I I think we could do that. Um, but that perhaps we should add that the presiding officer, if such a person does begin a diet tribe, could encourage the person
to clarify with, in my opinion, you are a terrible person or, you know, whatever the person may want. I like how it's written. I don't think that's acceptable. All right. All right. I'm willing to be a punching bag more than anybody else. I don't think that makes for a good
meeting. Perhaps not. Okay. Yeah, that's all I got. Anything else? Okay, Mr. Cobb, do you have all those changes? I'm going to go back and rewatch the video, but uh but I got most of them. Yes. Excellent. All right, I got the important ones, I think. So, the motioner in second, I assume, are good
with these proposed changes. That's up to the motioner in the second. Yes, I'm good. Okay, then I will ask the clerk to call a vote. Council member Bodford, I. Council member Aught I. Mayor Slick I.
Council member Britain I. Deputy Mayor Tukurt. I. The motion carries. We are on to our discussion items. Item number 13, the discussion of election costs. Are you guys all good or does anybody need a minute? No, we're good. Okay. Well, I
need to do a quick page. All right. Then we'll take a two-minute recess. Okay. Oh, sorry. No. Okay. [Music] actually. Okay. So, we are moving on to discussion items. Item number 13, which is
discussion of election costs. Mr. Cobb. Uh, thank you, Deputy Mayor. This is something we do have an election coming up in November. Uh, it is a city-only election. And so, uh, we, um, one of the things that we do each year is that we, when we have these elections, we go over
while we're developing the budget, we go over the perspective costs. And the costs are based on the number of uh, precincts or polling places that we have and whether or not we do early voting or not do early voting, uh, how many days
of early voting. And so, uh, one of the things on your dis that we have for you tonight, and Miss Miss, uh, Rivera, we did, you did put it on the DIS before. Okay. Um, I wanted to I wanted them to put it on the DIS because it is not not the easiest to see those numbers, but
these are the perspective costs. This this one deals with if we opened up everything. Normally on uh these on the city elections, we usually have three uh polling places. So, we try to have one on the west side, one in the middle, one on the east
side. And but you can see there if we opened up all of them, the total cost would be around around $44,000. And so, uh, what we wanted to do tonight was just to get your input on the type of cost that you're comfortable
with so that we can get it into the budget, number of polling places, do we want to do early voting, not do early voting, uh, that sort of thing. So, um, we would just request your direction on how to move forward with the, uh, with the election in November.
Thank you, Mr. Crop. And I guess this is open to discussion. Why are there cost for stuff like, uh, absentee ballots so much different in 2021 versus 2023? Like 23, it's saying we only spent
$4,000 on absentee ballots, but 21 we spent 9,300. the state law changed and everybody got w got wiped off of the automatic being sent an absentee ballot in every January.
The application for an absentee Yeah. The abs the application only lasts two years and it expires after that even number November election. So you have to get everybody back on the order the ballot cycle. Yeah. I think also just co between 21 and 23 is a lot different.
What's the charge for supervisor elections of $6,200 in 2021 and $81 in 2023? I can Chris Anderson just took a discount. I can't explain it. I'm sorry. I'm sorry, Mford. I I can't explain
why. I mean, I would recommend that we do three public places uh for this election. Oh, yeah. I'm I'm fine with three public places. I'm fine with the one day of early voting at city hall and at the supervisor elections. Yeah, I agree. That's what we've done in the past and it works and I haven't had
complaints about access to voting or anything like that. So, it seems like we should stick with the status quo and make sure people have accessibility here. Anybody else? That's good. Okay. I think you have direction then, Mr. Cob. Uh, as far as the early voting is concerned, do you have a venue that you
would prefer? Uh, what have we done in the past? City Hall at city hall. Let's do that again. Okay. Is that better than the aquatic center? It's more whatever's the least disruptive. I I it that's that's what it is. Especially if we do the early voting
day on a Saturday. Uh then it would be the least disruptive that because we have programming going on at the uh at the aquatic center. Yeah. Uh if I could get it at the library, I would do it. Uh but that's a little difficult when it's a city-owned election. So uh but uh but
yeah, city hall works as a good it's a good early voting day, early voting spot. Are are you looking for direction on where we want the third voting spot to be? Uh, as far as your three polling places,
uh, we would, yes, it would be nice to be able to know what the three polling places, like I said, our recommendation is usually it's either, uh, City Hall, Cultural Center, the aquatic center. Then in the middle, uh, Riverside Park was traditionally the polling place in
this, what I would call the center city. Uh, when Riverside was unavailable, they went to the Presbyterian church. I believe that Mr. Rivera has had discussions about the possibility of using Riverside. And then usually on the east side, it's either the Live Oak Clubhouse or it's the Sanctuary
Clubhouse that it's utilized. And so those are those are basically the three locations. Okay. Well, I think you have direction, correct? I think so. Yes, we can move forward. Be nice to get better turnout. I mean, 22%.
It's going up every year. Are these odd elections when we keep having an election every single year? People vote. Well, let me let me ask Mr. Rivera, do you feel that you have sufficient direction? Okay. Excellent. All right. Moving on to item number 14, the last item, the discussion
on the definition of family. Mr. Cop, actually, I'm going to turn it over to Dr. Ka. She will do the presentation. Mayor, deputy mayor, council members. So this is a request uh for city council to provide direction for possible amendments to the definition of family
as provided in the um land development code article 18. So during the 2024 aldy rewrite we had oneonone meetings with all council members except council member art he was not yet in council. He was there the
oneonone meetings we had earlier on the definition of family. Were you there? No, I was at both. Okay. He's at the second one. No, I was at both. Maybe maybe not elected at the first one though, but he was there. What? I don't know. Are you talking about the two this year? It doesn't matter. Not the work sessions. We had oneonone meetings when
we started the elder rewrite to have some uh guidelines on on some uh areas that we wanted direction and we at that time we um um discussed the definition of family. Um so uh this is how it reads
today. Um apart from the family itself all the related people by you know blood um marriage or adoption we allow as part of the family um a maximum number of three persons not related to the the
original family. Um most cities define family in def in in that way putting a maximum to for the number of unrelated people and this is to um um well help deal usually with the
nuisance. I'm going to say before going to the other cities on the zoning side there is no right or wrong of this one. It's whatever the city's comfortable with. Right. Of course, the more people you have unrelated, you may have more issues with with cars, with noise, um with some
nuisances, but there is no right and wrong. It's whatever the city's comfortable with. So, just to review the other, um cities that we have, if we can go to the other one. Orlando allows uh so it has the same definition, but allows a maximum of
five people. Winter Park three, Longwood um four um oh three Longwood is three Samford is four Castleberry is uh four as well getting wrong Sanford is five
Castleberry is four the next slide Alammon Springs is three and Matland is five so that number may vary from in different cities and uh we are seeking the direction of council if We need to
change the LBC um to allow a different um definition for the family. Okay. Thank you, Dr. Marina. And I will ask uh Council Member Britain if you want to chime in on this one because we put it off twice till you were here. I'm fine leaving it the way it is because I think we have boarding house laws and
this will help align with those ordinances. Okay. I agree. Just leave it the way it is. I obviously wanted to be higher and keep thinking it it does not make any sense for the government to try to involve itself in the personal lives of people.
I should be able to call whoever I'm living with family if I so desire. If I may maybe we could have the limit be if I own the house and I dub you my family because you're living with me. Uh as long as you are not violating other stuff because there there are you can't
have it to be too full. So we can we can regulate noise, we can regulate parking, we can regulate the square footage required per person, we can regulate a lot of things, but for us to go around presuming that people are not allowed
under the constitution to call whoever they wish family, I that's problematic to me. So this is a constitutional issue. I think us over overreaching. Um I agree with that. Um I think that uh I think ultimately the issue here is
when you have uh college students or whatever that are, you know, living together like roommates, how many do you fit in a house and, you know, do they make too much noise and have too many cars and and all of that kind of stuff. Um, and I think that we have ordinances
for all of the um effects, right, that might be uh less than desirable, like too many parties and noise and and whatever. Um, I don't think we need to then say that, hey, you know, four people who are going to be quiet and uh, you know, study a lot shouldn't be able
to uh split rent on a house. Um, uh, I never did that when I was in school, but I knew other people who did. you know, uh, four guys living in a house and, uh, uh, it didn't really cause they didn't cause anybody any problems. So, um, I I would be okay with, um, with upping this
and I think three is a little too restrictive. I guess that falls on me. So, uh, I also agree that we should not be labeling this, but as pretty much what you said is what I'm I'm with that the government has no right to label this stuff, but the repercussions of
having some limit, the main concern I have is parking, especially in my neighborhood here, uh, it gets pretty bad back there. So, if we don't have a way to limit that the right way. So, right now, I don't think I'm going to change this. Um, but I am open to
looking at ways to mitigate the issues I have with the effects of it, if that makes sense. So, I'll I can meet with you and talk about that um about basically parking issues on if there was four college kids in the house. We have four cars versus less. Well, yeah. But
but if it's a fourbedroom house and I think that's another thing to, you know, consider in this. I could park Oh, I don't park any of my cars. I don't have a garage or a driveway. So we park all of our cars, all four of them in the ride of way, but you know that we could talk about I do think but in regards to
the issue which is definitely college kids it is is a lot of cars and we do have a lot of issues back getting to my house navigating that pretty much every day. So um I can meet on that one but right now I'm not going to change. So if there's no other changing this to get to consensus the other way we can move on.
Can I ask a question or or do you want to move on? We can move on. I mean I would like to move on. Okay, we'll move on. Okay, so we are up to reports. Thank you, Dr. Korea. Um, we'll start with the city manager's report. Uh, thank you, Deputy Mayor. Um, uh, Mr. George Smith, who is our bond council, is here is here
tonight and, uh, he has he needs some assistance from you. He has a form related to the loan that you approved earlier and that he needs each of you to sign. So, I'm going to have Mr. Smith come up and tell you about this this form that he needs needs you to uh to
sign. He needs each of you to sign it. Okay. Thank you. I'm George Smith. I'm your bond council. Uh it's a pleasure to be before you again. Um we have a certificate as a public meetings and no conflict of interest. We've signed this on all of your loans since I've been your bond counsel which goes back to
2001. Um and it just states and typically we just pass this around the end of the meeting, but um we thought we'd discuss it for just one second if there were any questions. It states that none of you have a conflict interest or work for the bank which is the TD public finance which was mentioned earlier. And
it also states that um you have no personal knowledge that any two or more members of the city council meeting together reached any prior conclusion as to whether actions taken by the city council with respect to said note uh or any action should be taken by the
city council except of a public meeting. Typically we don't discuss this during the meeting. It's just passed around at the end of the meeting and everybody signs it. But I want to discuss it in case there are any questions. And no, no questions. I'll leave it with the clerk to have signed and if you'll sign it before you leave
this evening. Thank you very much. Mr. Cob, do you have anything further? I believe Mr. Smith, do you need myself and the mayor and Mr. B after the meeting? We will. I I've streamlined it so I I I swear to you they'll only take, you know, 5 minutes, but it'll just be quick to sign the documents so we can
provide them to the bank so that they can fund the loan next week. That's all I have. Deputy Mayor. All right. Uh, city attorney's report. Uh, nothing to report, Deputy Mayor. Okay. Council member Bonifford. Yeah, I don't have much tonight, though.
Uh, we got Larry here from the American Legion. Uh you guys have the u Memorial Day uh celebration um on uh on Monday 11:00 a.m. at the cemetery. Correct. And set up for the next 2 weeks, 8 a.m. to
8:00 p.m. Oto Cemetery. There's over 400 crosses and stars of David for Florida veterans that have lost their lives since 9/11. Come out. It's a it's a moving, heart-wrenching experience. The memorial itself takes place starting on
Memorial Day at 11:00 a.m. We want to try to get there between 10:30 and 10:45. Uh, Colonel Dave Smith, Dave represent Smith, will be our speaker. Okay. Very nice. And then with taps at the veterans wall at 7. Taps will be at 700 p.m. at the Veterans Tribute. Very
nice. We appreciate everything you guys do, especially uh on this particular holiday for those that that gave all, you know, for our country. So appreciate that, Mr. Keegan Ford, we appreciate you coming out giving your little presentation uh as well. Thank you very
much, Mr. Williamson. We appreciate your input on the uh on the signs. So, we appreciate you guys coming out and uh sticking through these uh marathon sessions. So, appreciate you all being here. And that's all I got. Okay,
Council Member Britain. Uh I was just going to mention Memorial Day. I just have one item and I don't want to I don't need an answer today, but I've been getting emails about a storm water issue on Lawn Street and I'm just not sure what's going on over there. So, uh
Brian, if you can give me an update on that uh sometime at a later date and I I'd appreciate it. Uh yes, sir. I'll probably have Mr. Gang give you he has Mr. Gang's working uh directly on that. So, I'll have him give you a call. Then, while we're talking about Mr. gain. He
sent out a note about the uh analysis of the crosswalk on Lockwood. Um and kind of gave a a conclusion that it wasn't really viable where they were recommending it. Uh but I'd like to see if we can we can figure out a place to put a crosswalk on there
for so folks can walk across Lockwood and get to the community college. I I believe that the that is what the staff is looking for. They're looking for a safe place for the crossing and in that area around the college that you've got the curve there and so line of sight and
and everything but they I believe they are looking for a safe location. It's a tough it's a tough cross. So it is you know put your thinking caps on. I got to drive it every day and it's it's tough getting out sometimes. So appreciate it. That's all I have. Okay. And I'm up next. So I just want to thank public works. I have sent several things over
the past month or two and they have been on it. I sent them a picture of a stop sign that was run over in the morning and by the time I got home it was fixed. So that's lovely. So thank you so much for that. Um I also we had Calo here at the city this past month and I wanted to thank the parks and recck staff. They
did a really good job going through uh Riverside and um how we've gotten that back up running. If you haven't had a chance to go out there, it it looks brand brand new. It looks great. Um we also in that meeting had city officials take the time to thank our staff.
they've had some of their own kids go through our programs. So, that should be noted that we're we're doing good and we're we're representing ourselves well. And the only other thing I had on here, I did have emailed to me the Pride Month declaration that we do every year. So, I'm looking for consensus to do that again this year as well. So, yes. Yes,
that's three. Okay. Well, we have three at least. So, um, mayors, uh, want to address the request to add in the, um, reclaim water from Keegan
Ford. I think that's a great idea. I did not know until he brought it to my attention that for commercial buildings, we don't have a tiered conservation rate. It's a flat rate. It's the lowest rate no matter how much water you use. U, so I believe that's on the
agenda. is that next meeting the first meeting in June that that's a discussion item talking about the Obito conservation grant and I don't know where the best place might be if if Mr. Ford and his uh team and the uh the two high school interns and
um and Ella who who's the college intern who's been working with me and St. John's and all all of the different groups to come up with some ideas. Maybe all of them could collectively I don't know if it should be in presentations at the beginning include it as a discussion item. I'm
inclined to do a presentation at the beginning if you guys are okay with that idea. And then those who can't make it, if we end up with another marathon meeting, they depart and we can have a discussion later. Is everybody cool with that idea? So you're asking on the work session to
not on the work session. So, at the next uh official meeting to have a presentation. I I don't know that I think I'm I might be able to I need to go look at the charter, create a presentation. Well, I don't know. Our discussion today, at least the way I
walked away from the discussion was that we would do a discussion item on June 2nd for the water conservation program. Yes. And so I if you wanted to have the other folks come in and give a
presentation during the discussion item. Okay. During the discussion. Okay. I think that would be okay. All right. So we'll keep it all lumped together. I think that does make some more sense. Uh also and reading over the minutes that were printed out. I I had
to give some shout outs. Uh Alexis Stewart, people love how responsive you've been. So that made the minutes that you've been doing a great job. So, thank you for that. Uh, also the fix it form uh was mentioned. So, I believe Patrick Kelly may be the guy who gets the fix it forms and routes them to the
right place. Well done. Everybody's happy with how these fix it forms result in stuff happening. So, uh, we're doing a lot of things right and it's kind of great to capture that in minutes as we're talking to people. Uh, and one last thing and I I meant to bring this up and it's halfway on purpose or
halfway silly and halfway totally serious. Once upon a time before at least three of you were elected, I had proposed that every week uh every every council meeting, we sort of draw randomly what chairs we would sit in to
mix up the dynamic because there does seem to inadvertently be this, you know, there sides of the room sometimes coalesce. So, I just want to throw that out there. What's that? I'm good where I'm at. You're always good where you're at. But don't you think it would be
amazing if we were round or if we just like shuffled up? No. H I think it'd be great. I also love this seat the best. This is my first seat, but I've also sat in this seat in the middle seat. I've never sat on that side. I want to sit in your seat. So bad, Mr. Ben. So, one day
I will I will do this. So, the the idea is out there for when everybody is mentally prepared to maybe do this exciting thing. That's all I've got. Council member Bar. Uh yeah, I didn't have uh very much to say today, but um I
just wanted to address the the sunshine stuff that was was brought up earlier. Um I I just want to say that um I appreciate that um members of this council take Sunshine very seriously and uh the city attorney as well. And I just want to say that I take Sunshine Law
very seriously as well. And uh in the meetings that we've had, I mean I mean our desire is to have meetings um with the public. We both like talking to the public and um in order to do that uh together uh there's a procedure that needs to be followed under the law and
uh we're making every effort to follow that procedure with um having those meetings public noticed um having them open to the public and then submitting uh taking and submitting minutes afterwards uh to be part of the public record. Um so um there there is there
does seem to be some some disagreement um about that. Um, and I don't necessarily want to get into the the details of that here, but I just want it to be um made clear that um that this is not something that I take lightly um or
am trying to get around the law or trying to say that the law doesn't apply. Um that I believe we're doing our best to um comply with the law. And uh that's all I have. Okay. Uh future meeting
dates, we have Tuesday, May 27th, 5:30 p.m. a work session. Monday, June 2nd at 6:30 p.m. a regular session. Monday, June 16th at 6:30 p.m. a regular session. And Monday, June 23rd at 6:30 p.m. Uh, Deputy Mayor, we will probably have a CRA meeting on June 16th as well.
Work session and maybe a CRA on the 16th. Yes. Is there anything else for the good of the order? Yeah, I had one more thing. Uh, Mr. Mr. Hall, we appreciate your service to uh to our city and everything. I know you're coming up on the end of your term and going for your retirement. So, we we appreciate everything you've done for us
and and the guidance you've given us. So, thank you, sir. You know, I agree. And you speak only for yourself and those who else wish to join you. No need for that. But yes, I agree. Council member Bonford, the time is 9:07 and
this meeting is adjourned.