##VIDEO ID:yqkvytk1y7A## [Music] seems kind of likees for all are you eating a lanberry I'm are you dead yet you should do it there am supposed to it or that sounds messy I'll have to [Music] [Music] say huh [Music] [Music] J [Music] so so not only you bring question uh [Music] Street [Music] I have to know oh yeah can't do it you don't really I do that's that's why every so often I go and I'll be sitting there at night yeah yeah yeah how's Caron do yeah I really we did though so you have to like go outside look at natur that that I mean [Music] they that's funny yeah that was when treade learned how all right we got 6:30 so we'll go ahead and get started here good evening everybody welcome welcome to AAL city council chambers if very blind will rise and join me in a pledge of allegiance a pledge of aliance to the flag of the United States of America to the for stands one nation God indivisible andice all thank you if you could join me in a moment of silence please thank you we'd like to call this meeting to order it is Monday August 19th 2024 approximately 6:30 uh we have four of the five members of council we are missing uh councilwoman tuer tonight uh we have no ceremonial items we have no presentations um next up is the approval of the minutes for July 1st 2024 regular session what is the favor of council I'll make a motion to approve the minutes of July 1st 2024 second all right have a motion a second any discussion okay that see none we'll take a vote for approval all those in favor say I I opposed the minutes are approved next up we have public comment I don't have any for this in general is there anybody in the audience that wishes to get up and say anything okay not seeing none we will close public comment next up we have the consent agenda what is the pleasure of councel I'll make a motion to approve the consent agenda as presented second all right I have a motion and a second any discussion okay seeing none we will take a vote to approve the consent agenda all those in favor say I I I opposed Senate agenda passes okay next up we have public hearings and we have resolution number 4491 d24 Mr Hall we read the ordinance by title only uh resolution M uh dep Bayer resolution number 4491 d24 a resolution of city of Ido Florida relating to the delivery and funding of Street lighting services with within the city amending ratifying and confirming the final rate resolution for fiscal year 24 2024 through 2023 determining that certain real property is espcially benefited by Street lighting Services approving the assessment role providing the method of collection and providing for implementing administrative actions scribers errors conflicts severability and an effective date great thank you Mr Hall Mr cob can you give us a brief introduction uh thank you deputy mayor I this uh this resolution we're doing we we have to do this every year and the primary reason that we have to do this year is because fla statute says that you have to certify your tax role and your assessment when there are people who may be receiving the assessment for the first time uh so with people moving in and out of AO we rarify the tax roll and the uh the assessment every year and this year once again uh the current rate of $783 per equivalent benefit un unit will remain the same as well as the discount for those that are living in the private private neighborhoods um which portion of their fees obviously is paid through their HOAs so uh it's recommended that the uh city council conduct the public hearing and adopt resolution 4491 d24 great thank you uh since this is public hearing uh we have no written request do we have anybody on so wishes to get up and speak on this matter Sun hand movements always kind of throw me off there Bobby all right see n we are closed public comment uh what is the pleasure of council I'll make a motion to approve res resolution number 4491 d24 second all right I have a motion a second any discussion okay seeing none we'll take a vote to approve all those in favor say I I opposed okay next up Mr Coba believe you want to kind of do a brief introduction on how to group these together yes I would thank you Deputy Mayor um tonight you have three ordinances ordinances ordinance number 1748 ordinance number 1749 and ordinance number 1750 and these ordinance all ordinances all deal with the uh Mobility fee in Mobility plan uh the Oh Mr Paul here good uh um the what we would like to do tonight is do one presentation for all three ordinances ordinance 1748 is an ordinance that adopts the Mobility plan Mobility fee and the extraordinary circumstances report that Mr Paul did and did these special work sessions for uh this will allow us so that we can adopt the fees and not have to phase them in uh ordinance number 1749 that is an update to chapter 28 of the code of ordinances and that this chapter 28 of the code of ordinances is our impact the ordinance so what it does it goes in and takes all the references and all the administrative uh regulations that deal with the multimodal fee which was our former Road impact fee takes those out and replaces it with all of the with the mobility fee schedule and the administrative regulations that go with the mobility fee then the last one is ordinance 1750 and this is an amendment to the Land Development code and this one in article nine of the Land Development code that's our currency requirements and so what it does is when you adopt a Mobility fee or an alternative uh alternative funding source as the statute calls it you are basically repealing Transportation concurrency so what ordinance 1750 does it removes all of the references to transportation from the concurrency uh article article 9 and and basically says we're going to do a Mobility fee so that's those are the three ordinances U Mr uh Jonathan Paul who is our consultant who developed the uh the Mobility plan technical report and who also developed the fee schedule as well as did the extraordinary uh circumstances report he's here tonight he's going to walk you through the technical side of all these things and what I'd like to do Deputy Mayor is this when he is finished our recommendation is that you schedule the second public hearing for September 16th of 2024 that and so each of these are a public hearing so you would have so what we' recommend is we do this once Mr Paul is finished then uh open have the attorney read 1748 by title have your public hearing and then have a motion and discussion on and hopefully action to schedule the second public hearing do that then once that is done do the same thing for 1749 and do the same thing for 1750 and that way we'll have three public hearings and we'll we'll but we feel like with because these are all related to one topic that we could it would be best just to do the one presentation so I'll turn it over to Mr Paul and let him do his presentation good evening council members Jonathan Paul principal of new Urban Concepts tonight we are going to present the city's Mobility plan and Mobility fee I'm going to go through this rather quickly so if you have any questions please feel free to let me know uh next slide please so Mobility plan is something we've been working on uh myself and City staff and um in addition to several workshops and public hearing hearings it's really a vision over the next 22 years for how to move people in and around the city of uh Ido and also it leads to the identification of Mobility plan projects within the city and those projects form the basis for what's known as a Mobility fee and a Mobility fee is an assessment on new development only not existing development it's not a tax on existing homeowners it's a fee that's assessed to new development they pay at the time of building permit and that is used to actually fund the multimodal projects in the Mobility plan next slide so the intent of the Mobility plan is to really look at moving people and providing choices whether somebody elects to walk bicycle ride transit or drive their own vehicle next slide next slide and so the Mobility plan itself and this is several presentations now but it's comprised of six different individual plans uh the detail is available um upon request from the city staff that goes in and identifies each of the lines on the map um there's roadway projects multimodal projects in terms of sidewalks and bike Lanes there's intersection improvements um there's also improvements for Access and connectivity and so those are all detailed in the Mobility plan and Mobility fee technical report next slide so all those projects that were identified form the basis of the city's Mobility fee next slide please uh the mobility fee looked at both the city of Ido and the surrounding areas of unincorporated SEO County we went all the way down to the uh Orange County line all the way out to the 4177 including the Ovito mall and surrounding areas all the way to the urban service boundary to the East and to the north we did a number of analyses and um we also did An Origin and destination evaluation and essentially what we found is that the core of Vito and specifically its downtown area functions as the downtown of Eastern seminal County so it is the main draw for the areas to the east of us to the surrounding cities around us and it functions in much the same way as a Sanford wood or an Altamont in the western portion of the city and it really is the draw for Eastern seminal County next slide for anybody that's really interested in all the detail of the plans and the projects it's about 225 pages of reading and it goes through all the data analysis and methodology that we need to do to document that the fee is consistent with statute and then it meets all legal requirements these are just example of some of the formulas there um again it's it's available from these um City staff upon request next slide and so all that the plan the fee the analysis is results in what's known as a Mobility fee schedule um there is an existing Road impact fee that the city collects from new development there's also a Mobility fee that's from seino County that's also collected for new development and it's collected for residential uses for retail uses uh for office uses any type of new development um one thing unique about this new schedule is there is a separate category for mixed use and the way we've essentially set this up is that the city council or staff can work further to Define how it is that you want to stay mixed use occurs you know whether it be a certain percentages of retail and office whether it be a proximity whether it be a certain area essentially that use would not go into effect until the city essentially agrees to say we either designate a project mixed use and is eligible for this criteria or we've established this criteria but what essentially recognizes is that uses that are interconnected tend to have less of an overall impact to the outside trip generation outside Transportation Network and in general for the types of of mixed use developments you likely to see throughout the State of Florida you know it's roughly at 25% are there some projects going to be a little bit less yes are there some projects that could be potentially more yes yes as well and if somebody wanted to make a case that they should have a higher rate then they have the ability through the ordinance to submit a study to say we deserve to have X rate for this development so essentially that is a unique feature it does not exist in the current city fee today and also does not exist in the county fee um today as well so it's something that the city um has discussed um I believe the last time we had several options either an area type of development or to leave something up to be further defined or as you're going through development review designate somebody eligible as mixed use um next slide please and these are just so schedules if you had any specific use you had any questions on um this is all in the report none of these numbers have changed from the way from the technical report that we finished last year next slide please next slide one thing unique that we have done since we've last met is we've held two public workshops to discuss extraordinary circumstances and the findings for those next slide please um there's actually a detailed study that was performed that documents the findings for extraordinary circumstances and that's dated of April 2024 next slide uh there was a public or two actual public workshops that were held um they were advertised in in the Orlando Sentinel they were posted on the city of Vito's website and they were available to any member of the public and I believe also a video was recorded and was available for um for review after the presentation as well next slide just a real quick summary the basis and the findings documented in the study is that the city has undertaken the necessary steps to develop both a plan and a fee that's forward looking over the next 20 plus years years the fee is intended to replace concurrency the city historically has had population growth that has been consistent with that of the State of Florida um the area is continuing to expect it to grow over the next 20 years in both terms of population and future traffic projections um there has been a significant inflation that's occurred since the city last updated its fee um and the program itself is offering lower fees for affordable housing small retail uses and mixed use each one of those categories would have to be further defined but it's already been pre-calculated if any development qualifies for those they would be eligible for lower fees and the overall fee schedule itself is streamlined and is based on the most recent and localized data next slide so as the uh city manager alluded to earlier there are actually three ordinances for consideration this evening one one is actually essentially adoption or exception of the technical report the mobility fee schedule and the extraordinary circumstances study next Slide the second ordinance is actually an amendment or the is actually an amendment to the city's existing ordinances related to the assessment of both impact fees and existing Transportation impact fee which should be replaced by Mobility fees so this would be a second ordinance that the city would consider for adoption next slide um the third would be elimination of Transportation concurrency in proportionate share replacing that with Mobility fee there would also be a modification of the traffic analysis requirements right though right now those are required for somebody that comes in for site plans or development plans those would switch at that level to an evaluation of their site access connections to to the major roadway networks and then the more detailed traffic analysis will be reserved for somebody amending the comprehensive plan next slide this is the last slide here um essentially this evening you can direct uh staff and myself to make any changes to the report to make any changes to the schedule the ordinance or the concurrency recommendations the second um adoption hearing is scheduled for the September 16th a written notice has been provided to seal County per the time frame in their ordinance that essentially States the city would no longer be collecting the County's Mobility fee upon adoption and effective date of this ordinance um there's been a draft interlocal agreement sent to the county that's something the city would likely need to follow up on and eventually hopefully um come to an agreement between the city and county but in essence the notice has already been sent upon the effective date of the mobility fee ordinance the cities of ovo's Mobility fee will be the only one collected within the city of Ido quick question for you while you're up here yes did we not send that notice in August of 2022 I that might be a question more for Mr Cobb my my understanding was that that was the Line in the Sand for calculating how much we may have uh remitted to simal County perhaps in mathematic you know kind of front loaded it am I understanding correctly how that could work the letter that was sent was specific to this study and the ordinance I'd have to defer um to the city manager in terms of the earlier one in terms of what use that would have um as it relates to this all right thank you and then just the last component um when we amended the comprehensive plan I guess almost a year and a half or two years ago there just was a provision in there that if there is any conflicting policies from eliminating concurrency that the city within a year of adoption would clean those up um and with that that concludes my presentation i' be happy to answer any questions you have any questions I think we're good all right thank [Music] you okay so we will go through each one of these first up is ordinance number 1748 Mr Hall can you read that ordinance by title only absolutely Mr stepan Mayor ordinance number 1748 an ordinance of the city of Ido Florida approving and adopting the city's Mobility plan a mo mobility fee technal report and Mobility fee schedule consistent with revisions of section 1633 3180 at squa Florida Statutes specifically section subsection 5 I with regard to Transportation concurrency providing for implementing administrative actions providing for savings provisions provision providing for conflicts providing for severability providing for scrier errors and providing for an effective date great thank you Mr C before I move on just want to make sure that you you're comfortable with what everything that's been presented so far is there anything else you would need or to add there's nothing we need to add okay very good we'll move on to public comment I do have one written request a Mr David Axel is he here in the audience I Am David Axel Axel real estate 1757 West Broadway Street sweet 1 Ovito and I stand uh today with a suggestion or request if you have with regard to how you adopt uh ordinance 1748 you heard the presentation from Mr Paul he references the fact that there are two rates in your ordinance the regular rate and the mixed use rate there's been a number of discussions as this has come through to work sessions and so forth and and hearings and as this matter has moved forward and you heard this evening from Mr Paul the study the ordinance the rate you would adopt today does not give anyone or any area or any specific form of development by right the lower rate uh so it is my request given experience with working on the approval of the water tower district in the village four uh it's been suggested that maybe another study is necessary to do the mixed use rate there and it's my view and my request that the village core at a minimum the CRA perhaps uh I'm sorry downtown core it's called now uh downtown core Andor downtown transition at least and the CRA possibly should get by right by action of this board as Mr Paul suggested you could do the lower rate so in the ordinance uh analysis there is an economic analysis and it's not exactly the same thing but there's a reference to possible savings by applicants that will avoid the full-blown traffic study of 18 to 45,000 uh technically folks in the transportation concurrency exception area which includes the CRA and the downtown core areas now would not have that savings because they don't have to do it now but it would cost approximately that amount to do this full analysis whereas the study has already done an analysis providing justification for a 25% reduction and as stated by Mr Paul the study also suggests if you seek as part of a project a greater reduction you would have to do a study so just last week meeting with the staff it was suggested based on the current status that the water tower district would have to do this study it's almost impossible to actually do because this is intended to be a flexible mixed use District where you can't determine the exact mix of uses or it'll change over time so I'll just ask as you adopt 1748 uh you asked the staff to make at least like I said the downtown core land use the geographic area that deserves the impact fee at the lower rate by right and I will point out yes uh I'm representing someone who has 28 Acres that'll be a mixed-use project but this will have more of an impact perhaps to folks that are developing individual properties that might not be mixed use in that District so the purpose according to what was adopted in the comprehensive plan which is referenced in the introduction to the mobility fee is the city of Vito amended his comprehensive plan in 2022 with an emphasis on encouraging mixed use so encouraging is giving people the lower rate by right and steering development to those districts it's discouraging to make everyone do a study just to get where the study we've now paid for has achieved so that is my request I'm here if there's any questions of me thank you very much for your time I appreciate it great thank you I do not have have any other written requests is there anybody in the audience that wishes to comment on this subject okay seeing none we will close a public comment what is the pleasure of council I'll make a motion to schedule a second public hearing for Monday September 16 2024 um to also include the um item that that uh Mr Axel uh had just discussed with the um given the downtown downtown district uh mixed use by right second all right we have a motion in a second any discussion I've got some questions for staff if I could um I'm hoping you can point out the portion so I've got this 250 page Beast open uh and there was talk of uh giving credit for buildings that have been built and then Dem demolished and hoping to get a little bit more detail I just want to make sure that our community is up to speed on what what the changes will be for that because I know we're all familiar with the concept of grandfathered in buildings but in the case of ovido we have some buildings that used to be here that have been demolished and have not been here for in some situations several decades so I know that there's uh been some Provisions proposed for that and I want to make sure that we get on the record where in the so that is ordinance 1749 okay in the next one so uh what is changing is now um this ordinance established a time frame for vacant and U and demolished buildings um to be considered um inactive use okay so that's going to be for ordinance 1749 okay so opening up 1749 that's a p five-page thing it's not open for me right this second where' it go so in the memo so I have here in the memo okay so hold on a second do we just want to go ahead and take yeah we come back okay yeah yeah that's cool we're good um if so is the proposal to have it be in the downtown core everywhere or are we talking just the water tower district because I know there had been discussion and there seemed to be consensus from everybody on Council to perhaps even drip it beyond the downtown Corp to the downtown transition area um I'm am not opposed to extending that beyond the downtown Corp what do you guys think of of that concept because there there are places that are bikable and walkable that connect our most intense places that I think would be appropriate I'm okay with extending it to the transition area as well another one I don't really have an opinion on that okay if it's advantageous for us then we should do it yeah well I'd like to make a friendly amendment to extend it to include yeah I'll change my motion okay do you agree all right okay do you have all that I I I was going to when we get there I was going to see clar ification make sure that I understand exactly what we're doing but as as a followup on that the way this is written it seems that you have to have to get the full benefits you have to have internal to each piece each parcel A diversity is that correct my understanding of that or is it because you you can have a 100% residential thing adjacent to 100% commercial and that still is the diversity that we're aiming for so the technical report in page 57 gives um Jonathan Paul gave us guidelines so although it did not it said that the city can establish the program it gave here the the guidelines so it says gives four options okay are we on page 57 or page 57 of the of the technical the study okay let me let me scroll just a second here cuz I want to make sure that all of us can find this again when the when everything starts going into play and there are changes if anybody's not up to speed uh that will be problematic okay I'm on page 57 so page 57 has um the following is an example of a definition new Urban Concepts has created for establishing criteria for what types of development would qualify for mix use and similar definitions have been used for other Mobility uh fees in within Florida so we give four different situations so it could be a vertical mix use building so that would be on the site it would be approved um a special area PL so mle end use plans that have mixed use within the Marcle end use plan or compact developments that can prove that have a distance a half mile distance from another another use so this would get you the discount even outside downtown core and downtown transition if you were to prove this by doing a study so today it the the study did not um um provide it for a geographic area so this was kind of guidelines for a program that the city would establish for anywhere in the city okay so we would have then if this passes this evening we would have the 25% I write discount in certain areas plus the possibility if you invest in a study you could do this and it sounds like Mr Axel suggesting that this study outside of those areas could cost you know $20,000 or something um is there a mechanism and I see Mr Paul coming up I'm I'm hoping that there's a mechanism if a if a regular person is to create you if you look next door and say there's a house I think I'll do you know not a house I'll do a business here I'm hoping there's some way to not make it unfeasible to create mixed use spaces so really the um Jonathan Paul new Urban Concepts principle The Intern internal capture is historically meant to be a site specific development specific so really what we're talking about is another concept introduced a few years ago by the legislature known as Community capture so Community capture would be an area so it doesn't say that this specific project itself has to be mixed use you could say the downtown area you have a mixture of office retail industrial other uses they all interact together so we're going to say in terms of a community capture this area could generate 25% savings and not put traffic outside of the roadway so it sounds like there's a mechanism to there is and you've got enough I would say initially if you want to your policies in your downtown core and downtown transition they're at the end of the day you're going to get a mixed use development in an area um I would say if you want to explore other areas of the city you probably should look at that a little bit further maybe the mall maybe the other activity centers those may be areas that you may want to designate and the difference is Mr um actually use the term by right you know so they don't have to go and and proove that um they did this so the one thing with an individual homeowner or say a small part project the city would have to basically say we're going to allow you to consider Community capture in an area as part of your study um otherwise if you just took the strict term you have to be a mixed use development in and of yourself alone um so I'd say there would probably be opportunities for staff to further Define this I me your staff extremely knowledgeable in terms of mixed use I don't think there would have that much of an area you know difficulty in terms of defining areas I will say though you know your downtown core already has a mixture of uses one thing we found in some other communities where it say the mall where it's primarily retail today it may take 10 or 15 years for you to get enough residential density as part of them allall to start getting a mixture of uses you're going to update this study in five years from now so if you're looking at areas if you don't think they're necessarily right today it'd probably be best to say you're downtown your downtown transition area then leave it open too um you know you as um Council especially because it's a lower rate the thing you can't do is necessarily increase the rates but you could always elect to at any time identify additional areas that you feel would be eligible or allowed for Community capture or direct staff to say evaluate this area a little bit further for us and tell us some other places that may be ripe for this am I understanding correctly that if we approve a 25% discount now that when it's redone in five years even if the rate goes up we could not have a smaller than 25% discount for this area or could we reevaluate that then well once you reevaluate your study you can reevaluate you can reevaluate make sure that we were not the one thing you couldn't do is you can't you know if you put it in now and then you take it back back um that could be a little problematic somebody can CL now is is 25% the right amount because I I look at that and I think well that's kind of arbitrary um this actually when you look at a whole whole host of studies that have been done by dot that have been done by various developments if you're talking if you looked at your downtown area and you looked at all your existing retail all your existing residential and somebody did a study you're probably going to get somewhere between a 20 and 25% capture rate today okay and that's a fairly realistic term where you're not going to get it is somebody does some office and then they do Residential above that's you know you're probably at 3% but you couple that next to a grocery store or next to some other retail uses and you allow them to look at all three of them 25% is a fairly realistic number it's one that I've used in communities across Florida I will say it's could you justify 35 45% I'm leaning towards 20 that's the lowest number you've said and it's essentially taking you know saying you if you're in these zones you automatically get this discount so my inclination is to do this the more conservative discount until we see how this pans out in the next five years I 20% is definitely a viable number I mean below 20% I don't us to know that you're getting a whole lot of benefit to to do this but I mean 20 25% is a realis rate it really you know you could get into the level of going into analyses and showing every development there but it would take some time to to do that um we we've studied it a lot for two years a little bit longer I mean I've been doing this for 20 plus years now and 25% is a rate that I use a lot but we also have some communities that that do 15% others that do 20 um I haven't re the only time I've recommended above that is is when they have a rail station so they're you know to plus mixed use uh we've gone upwards to 35% um what's the most common number you've seen in a city similar to ours 25% 25 25% we good yep okay so my motion to reiterate is to have the public here said a second public hearing for Monday September 16th 2024 and to to add or include the downtown the downtown uh use and downtown transition use to have the um mixed use or down downtown and downtown transition to have the mixed use by right at 25% and how about for downtown transition it's 15% no just leave it at 25% all the way through that's my motion and ke you agree okay all right council member could you state downtown core and downtown transition term transition yes perfect thank you all right we have the motion in a second we'll take a vote all those in favor say I I I opposed all right on to the next one ordinance number 1749 Mr Hall will read the ordinance by title on yes sir Mr Mayor ordinance number 1749 an ordinance of the city of Ido Florida amending certain provisions of part two code of ordinances chapter 28 impact fees and Mobility fees by public facility relating to the adoption of a of a mo mobility plan and Mobility fee schedule providing for impl administrative actions providing for a savings provision providing for conflicts providing for separability providing for codification and scrier errors and providing for an effective date great thank you Miss C just ask again just make sure there's anything else you want to add at this point have no further information all right we will open it up for a public comment I have no written request to speak is there anybody in the audience wish to speak on the [Music] subject seeing none we are close public comment what is the pleasure of councel I'll make a motion to schedule second public hearing for Monday September 16th 2024 second all I have a motion a second any discussion same question as before with regards to uh how how we are allocating what we call grandfathering [Music] in so um it's page eight in the ordinance actually can you pull that up what we yeah I'm I'm seeing five pages so I'm in the wrong place or something like what mine is pulling up is uh exhibit one so it's the actual changes okay Article 28 uh and so yes it's on it's on page eight of 27 down at the bottom so you'll see the blues the blue underlines are additions if there's a deletion it'll be a red strike through M if you could go to I don't know if you can get to page eight or not so and I will say this Council there's two things that in in this ordinance uh there's one section called offsets which deals with the determination of a vacant building versus a building that we call active and then there's another section later on in the ordinance that does talk about besting that are for projects that are already in the process and there is a like with when the county adopted its Mobility fee there's a process for vesting it to the current uh multimodal fee and the current County Mobility fee is what it does uh there's a process for those folks who are already in the process that started the process the development process um that when they started it that it gives them the opportunity to invest themselves into the old the fees that they started with so I I'll put it turn over to Dr kah and mine if there's any way to blow that up that'd be [Laughter] great oh good yeah that looks good there we go and if we can get down to page eight at the bottom of page eight yeah right there that's where it starts and it'll go on over it'll flow over to page as well so it establishes that gives a period of time if the building is vacant and uh or um what what has been demolished that it becomes an inactive use so if there is Redevelopment after and I think this the ordinance here established five years um and give some exceptions so um five years if a property is vacant or the molish it becomes inactive unless there was um um annual a traffic study has been done within a shorter period of time because and Jonathan can speak better than me but if the there is a traffic study and it did not consider those strips then those strips are not into the city in the system right and that's why we would then assess a new impact um so it gives different exceptions and gives um in the last one the exception uh that through a development agreement then it would extend to 10 years before the development agreement you know established so the 10 um um years prior of development agreements and during the effective uh period of the development agreements then would it would be 5 years why do we need the development agreement can we just extend it for 10 years and just put we can we could give 10 years to the whole city that that was a um a proposal today from one council member I am more inclined to have a rule that applies equally to everybody even if they are not in a position to negotiate a developers agreement I don't know that 10 years is the right amount um so 10 years would give two cycles of because usually we do um um a Mobility plan update every 5 years so it would cover two cycles so I I guess my question is this if a building was knocked down 20 years ago what rights like what what is the situation from staff's perspective of what Mobility fees are owed if if the building hasn't been there already for 10 years does it is it vacant land as far as we're concerned for purposes of passing this ordinance so for today or the new with the new ordinance today we would give we would um give the impact fee credit for the new building today we would so if this passes then we would no longer give credit because it's been gone for so long for for the period of time that we established if it's 10 day 10 years then it's going to be 10 years okay so if a building was demolished say four years ago um then it would fall within the permissible time so you then the then it by development agreement or perhaps by us tweaking this ordinance we could say well it's only been gone for 4 years so now you youve got six more years to do something to get credit for the previous use that is provable and we can recall is that how it would work out yes and then if if the intensity is greater or different use we they would pay the difference but we would give the discount for whatever use was there okay uh my inclination on this one is to propose that we change it to seven years across the board that gives a lot of time to get a project off the ground and figure it out because I would presume assum maybe I shouldn't once a building is knocked down the taxes that that building is paying in the meantime are substantially lower so and and the traffic is substantially different and a lot of things can change so if you guys are okay with the idea of just seven across the board that I'm I'm I'm either going to go with what's here or 10 across the board is my my thought okay because 10 years really long time yeah but a lot happens I mean look at look at you know the Albertson for instance or something like that I mean it takes a while sometimes to get the projects going and to to go through development services and to to put together with all the all the you know requirements to to build to do the project so I could see either either the development agreement 10 years and leave it the way it is or just 10 years across the board for the city well I guess the next question is if something was built when a parcel was uh you know under an a exemp status for example or a different zoning what would how would staff be inclined to calculate that would you say well this is an agricultural use or would you say well now I think if it's exempt it's exempt we would not give well uh well so say say at the time it was a exempt and it was built and or agriculture whatever and now it has shifted to the comp plan and the zoning now may say that it is C1 C3 so what credits would be awarded in that strategy is not for the zoning or it's for the use of the building actual use of what is the structure yes okay so if it was being used very lightly even though it happens to be for you know a tile shop or whatever we would not give credit for the maximum thing that is allowable in that area it would only be for what actually was built because I it's based on square footage and use so we would assess whatever that's how we do today today but if we if we were to change that's what I'm asking about because right now that is how it is so you've got a a commercial site you go redevelop and it's something different well you've already paid your impact fees even if it's a different traffic situation you don't pay New Impact fees because you already paid the impact fees so are we changing from that system where so unless you change square footage or use you would pay the difference okay so if the if the use is the structure is active we would just if it it's redeveloping so if you knock it down and starts from scratch you would go from say you've got 10,000 square feet being us retail or and then you would do if it's so so it would be calculated based on whatever the current zoning is not zoning the use what is the use if if I demolish a store a commercial retail 10,000 square ft and tomorrow I'm going to build um 20,000 uh office structure I will give 10,000 credit for retail and I will assess 20,000 of office and see the difference well let's get real specific you're going to demolish 10,000 s feet now these are not true numbers 10,000 F feet that has been used as a storage space for tile and you're going to build back the same thing retail 10,000 squ ft of retail so that is the same thing if it's the same use it's the same there would be no there would be no Mobility fee at all in that situation okay so that that I think is the thing that is fair to preserve um and it sounds like this still does that correct yeah what yeah so what we are giving here is a time frame that after that we don't act we do not acknowledge the previous uses yes after 10 years or whatever is the time frame we we establish here okay in that case I'm thinking it should be infinite because that should be preserved forever but I don't know what other mechanism we have I think the the problem that that that uh um Dr C brought up was that the traffic studies stop after a certain amount of time they stop considering that property in the studies because it's it's no longer there and so then all of a sudden you put it back yeah I get it okay I can live with 10 you can live okay for without a developer agreement just across the board yeah and without the exceptions so we removing all the exceptions going to be one rule for everybody yeah that's that's one of the things that if you could look up here on the screen we're talking about number two number two says a building structure or use of property that is inactive or has been abandoned or bacon for five years or more which what if I hear you right Mr poic we would change that to say 10 years or more shall be not be considered an existing or active use for the purposes of calculating the impact fee or of Mobility fee offsets okay mine could we go go down to the next one so then we get into these other exceptions and one talks about uh for like for impact Fe so it's police fire Recreation administrative Services uh that if the city did an Advan in a vacant land study during the technical report of those because we have to do those every five years as well then if it was showed up as vacant on in that study then it would be considered vacant because of the study said it was vacant and it wasn't cons considered part of the calculation of those fees you get down to number B and it talks about the mobility fee and about uh one year before the date of the adopted Mobility fee technical report so in other words if the city when with five years from now if we did a technical report update if there was a vacant if it was vacant during that technical report update it would be considered vacant um you get down into this one's the one that's really concerning I guess you might say concerning to some folks if the city does a traffic count program well we don't have an annual traffic count program but if we were to initiate one anytime we did those traffic accounts if it was vacant during that traffic count it'd be considered vacant and then that's that's how that one Reon and then you get down to the uh the if we enter into a development agreement and what we were looking at when we when we brought this in was we were still considering the first part that said 5 years if it's 5 years or more it's considered vacant so if we did a development agreement we did up it to 10 years years but one of the things that we looked at was like well what if was mentioned alberon's good good point what if during that development agreement during the life frame time of that development agreement that a bu building set vacant for five consecutive years should it be considered you know going back up to the top five years or more should it when when the building still is there and exists and we can see it it it says yeah set there vacant for five years which would be one one thing and so that's why always said okay well if it's five consecutive years during the term of the agreement then it would be considered vacant after that fifth year um I we set up a situation where people who are unable to find tenants for their buildings have to come in and do do something to preserve their rights like the thought of them evaporating is problematic for me well that's the thing I guess if I'm hearing it correctly the what Mr Po I'm not trying to put words in your mouth I'm just trying to make sure I understand what you would prefer that we do is go back up to mine if you could go back to number two change it where it says five change that to 10 and then delete AB C and D if that if that if I understand you correctly we to keep D unless you yeah I guess we would keep but do we I guess that's a question I'm not sure I want to make sure I understand what Mr P wants to do but yeah I think M if you could but that would be the first one we change that five to say 10 then you've got AB C and D there and it didn't know if you wanted to keep any of those might sounds like you want to get rid of ab and C right because that those that could be actually less than your 10 years in those three yeah that that would be a super jerk move to have somebody unable to get a tenant and then somehow their building gets zeroed out like that's not so the question comes if you want to keep the D or not because the D's already at 10 but you do have the five consecutive years there well the the um so doing that would allow anything that has not existed for the 10 years prior to today's adoption or I guess September 16th potential adoption those would be zeroed out because they haven't existed for the previous 10 years yeah so it we have to see what is the effective date it will be December or September but it will be 10 years prior years prior to that okay that to me seems fair if it hadn't been around for 10 years so we would recognize until um 2014 today so that Bas so basically it's giving rights to every existing structure or previously existing structure for 10 years like the so instead of needing a developer agreement you you just have those rights for 10 years well you need to keep the develop but there's two separate you you need some some develops will have develop agreements some won't I'm sorry I some some develop will have developers agreement some won't the smaller ones won't but the larger so you need to keep reference to both of them in the code and the well we don't need to keep the developers agreement reference in there if you get it by right because then you don't need to address it in a developers agreement well using the developer agreement you also address the time frame which within which they have to develop when you don't have a develop agreement then your building permit kind of controls that but when you have a developers agreement you you typically would have say a vacant property enter into velop agreement they have which you cover the last 10 years but then you would normally give them some time to develop it's a large project typically so they would need time to develop out so you you could allow for five years so let's let's leave the developer agreement part in there I am not loving the maybe as an let's have an outer limit of 10 that a developers agreement can't outdo but I don't think under law we can have an ordinance that creates that outer boundary if we create a scenario where developers Agreements are enabl then depending on the resources you have access to you can get more lenient rules and I I'm not not a fan of different rules for People based on the level of resources they have access to so the way it's written here now the development the 10 years uh if you have a development agreement it's 10 years prior to the effective date of the development agreement and 5 years after you know during during the effective go 15 yeah so you may go 15 so so deleting a through D huh I guess your motion I know I'm I'm trying to my iPad keeps messing up on this document and I can't read behind me very well up there Mr chairman can I speak well sir yes s AEL if you'd like to say something go ahead while he's looking David Axel Axel real estate 1757 West Broadway Street I just want to add a little Nuance to this discussion so everybody understands so the the whole basis of the water tower District developers agreement we're working on is an intent to create a downtown core and an intent to by this family I'm representing to achieve that which takes time and sometimes takes bypassing opportunities that might be in front of you now that don't fit that goal so we can do a shopping center now we can do a Wawa gas station now we can do all kinds of things we can do surface Park departments now because we can meet all the criteria the in is to not do that so the way the developers agreement is being entered into it's saying don't evaporate these previous uses we had and I did the math for my client to get some direction before I came tonight so it may seem innocuous to say we're giving everyone 10 years but there's a distinction the 10 years the way the developers agreement language is written the day you adopt the developers agreement you have vested rights for the life of that developers agreement for things that were demolished within 10 years prior to the date of that adoption the 5 years the way I understand it is if during the pendency of that developers agreement when it's in force you knock something down then you've got five years so so we've got a bunch of buildings that went away in 2016 when all the road work was done uh in concert with that road work being done so today the way it's proposed there's a couple of buildings that and I'll tell you what they are there's the uh Citrus packing house and the fertilizer plant disappeared in 2011 and a couple other buildings the impact fee Credit Value for the categories that apply to those buildings at the new proposed rates without a 25% reduction because we have a single use area now that amount is is roughly $80,000 if you go back in time and say seven years okay 2016 would be out and we'd be at like $350,000 so if you subtract and delete D then we have this 10-year clock those buildings have already been gone eight years if we didn't come out of the ground in two years which is going to be virtually impossible then we're going to be at an evaporation of $350,000 so the developers agreement mechanism is basically providing a way to say we're coming to you and telling you what we have today we've got evidence of it we've got surveys we've got plans we've got all this stuff I gave the staff a chart we're locking that down and we have an opportunity to use it if we start tearing down as we go along hey we're recognizing and kind of measuring when do we knock down when you knock down you've got no businesses you've got no tax generation from that as the mayor said so I'm asking you please don't delete that because it puts me right back in the same place I was and we're forced to do a project within two years that might be impractical and impossible that that's it thank you great thank you quick question for staff uh on the or maybe it's for Mr Axel I'm not sure which one so my understanding correctly that where the road now is and buildings were deleted are the impact fee credits transferable to other portions or the partial so big that they would just sort of scoop back on that same parcel like how how's that calculation being accomplished so that's that's kind of a trick question so the the Florida Statutes and I'm not a lawyer okay but I I read them and I know what they say we've actually got impact fee credit agreements also and IT addresses impact fee credit agreements now the credit agreements we have and there's a number of other ones the city has kind of says use these things within the CRA or the seat area or use these things within properties that are part of this project or that you own what the statute says is use these things you're allowed to use them within the same or an adjacent District whether it's whether it's Mobility or Transportation credits well the city has one District okay but the statute doesn't specifically address what these things are being called which is offsets or credits for prior uses so it's imprac IAL to use the credit in the middle of a new road that took a building down um it's impractical to say when we're doing a Redevelopment we're using it in the exact same spot so my understanding of this which we have to work out as we go along is I'm going to use these within this project within this District because we don't have an agreement that says we can use them elsewhere and the statute may not apply so in the agreement that's what it says that I've submitted to the staff that we're not done with that'll come to the council for approval at some time in the next several months I I don't know when uh so my view is we'll use them within this District within this project we're not going to try to go use them at the mall or sell them to someone else they're not quite the same as credit agreements which are under the statute did that help it did yes thank you thank you okay so we're at your your motion deputy mayor if I can just um remind that uh we need the same amendment was done before for 1748 to 74 night for the fees because this one is the one adopting the fees in the code of ordinances look at you make I know what she said I I think I can help you okay um well that brings up a so this discussion brought up that point on the developer agreement and I can see so basically if it was within 10 years prior to the develop correct me if I'm wrong on this I'm just trying to reiterate if it was 10 years before the development agreement if it was knocked down within that 10 years once they establish that development agreement they've got five years to come out of the ground no no and however many it says in the developers agreement however many it says in the developer agreement during during the during the during the term of the agreement if the building goes vacant for five consecutive years then it would be considered vacant but it's got to go vacant for those five consecutive years even if you have a developers agreement if that's part of the developers agreement yes if it's 10 years prior to the effective date of the agreement it's considered active but if during the let's say you had an active building and it went vacant for five consecutive years then prior to the developers agreement no during the development during okay during yes so it would have to go five consecutive years during the term of the development agreement it would be it would then take vacant status well unless we delete that unless you delete it okay but what if we should delete that but what if it's but what if they don't come out of the ground within that five years then you would you would delete this sentence yeah we need to delete that that's the only cure because it's not the right it doesn't make make any sense so somebody comes and says okay we want a grandfather in our rights we've written a developers agreement we can't have a separate you know part of the ordinance that deletes rights well I think what we're what we're trying to get at is basically give everybody the rights everybody gets the right within 10 years you better go claim your rights with a developers that's how I think it's reading right now no but it's not claiming the it doesn't sound like it's claiming the rights it's saying within 10 years you're not just you're not claiming your rights because you're not getting grandfathered in after that because you've only got 10 years from the time it it is so either you claim and use your rights within the 10 years but if you're not going to use them in that 10 years the alternative to keep them from being automatically extinguished is then you must go do the developers agreement at which point it's hypothetically possible to negotiate them to be infinite that's that's the outcome I'm hoping for at least I mean and and that's my understanding of if we delete you got something you want to say no I was just going to say that it I was I was just going to try to help with the U the words the way that I understand the the changes is what I was going to do okay I kind of I mean honestly I kind of wanted to go back and allow those rights from I mean I understand the I'm I'm going back to your point on giving those rights in definitely and going back but I don't know how far I mean can we go all the way back 10 years I I don't think anybody fuss about 10 years if it's been gone for 10 years and not utilized for 10 years we have to draw a line in the stand somewhere and I think 2014 is not a an unreasonable place to put it and then you can from that point on have infinite rights retention when when did when did O Ovito on the park get established that was what 20 started well we started Construction in 2015 2015 yeah well I thought it was completed in 2015 maybe yeah that's right that was the great right before we got elected yeah we started construction um if I could just make a suggestion I think we can solve the problem by up in number two where it's five change that to say 10 okay okay so that any building or structure any building structure use of property that is inactive or has been abandoned or vacon for 10 or more years shall not be considered existing or active for the purposes of calculating the impact the impact fee or Mobility fee so that's 10 years before the effective date okay now in number [Music] D that gives you a little bit more time because D says if youer into a development agreement it's 10 years from the effect effective date of the agreement and so if it's 10 years if you it says uh if it enters into the agreement a building structure of property that is inactive or has been abandoned or vacant for 10 or more years prior to the effective date of the agreement shall not be considered existing so it wouldn't be considered vacant unless it was 10 years long more than 10 years from the from the uh effective date of the agreement and then you would just delete the second sentence second sentence of D yeah the one about the five consecutive years you would just delete that next sentence is what you would do but wouldn't we also need to delete a a b and c yes okay yeah delete a and and then the last sentence of D and then I think that'll accomplish the 10 years prior to the effective date of the of the fee and then if you have a development agreement it would shift to 10 years prior to the effective date of the agreement that reflects what I am hoping for I the ining then it just gets demolished so presumably though and this is I guess a question for Mr Hall if if we get to the end of a developers agreement and somehow it hasn't worked out we would then have city council would have discretion to either extend the developers agreement and continue allowing the rights to exist or to extinguish the rights at that time which may not be perhaps what we're we're aiming for here but it's reasonable because I think yeah at at a later date if you got if you if you do a development agreement and and we're out 20 years I mean 10 years you know I mean it's yeah yeah and we can always amend the development agreement hey you all right that the council would have a second look at it if if nothing happened yeah if if somebody's being a take a look at it and said s it or to extinguish it if the if there was anything built into that yeah it would be up to council at that point okay St your motion all right I Mr P I'm ready to assist if you if you if you'd like me to I'm I'm trying to I'm this 10 years now is bothering me because I was thinking of oo on the park because don't be bothered oito on the park came about 15 years ago and like 2010 is when it started when or around 2010 2012 somewhere around there well I think if a veto in the park had not had the circumstances that occurred in it it probably would have occurred faster but you got to remember we had we had the suicide and then we had the recession and so that was really what was making that that those were extenuating circumstances if you look at a normal development but lamb was getting clear to make way for that at that point and may not have been developed yet I'm trying to reflect I think it was around 2012 2013 before we actually started doing that but all of that was known ahead of time so developers agreement was already already in the work so I think the developers agreement does solve the problem and the 10 years does draw a a Line in the Sand to say you know we're just not going to have this all floating and have our math be all wonky we're like we have to get our math there has to be a starting point for the math somewhere and this is how to I think this had accomplish five to 10's a pretty good pretty a jump I I think 10's where it's at and then add in the developers agreement all right so my motion to to change okay if I could help you out just one second motion to schedule the second public hearing for September 16th 20124 correct okay want to add want to make add the mixed use by right in the downtown core and downtown transition future landu designations correct revise section 2 8-6 E2 to increase 5 years to 10 years okay delete a b c and the last sentence of D yeah are you good with that does that I mean that meets your stuff too okay all right just making sure yes that's my motion do I have to reiterate it or do I do I have to say that I would just I I Mr Hall would is so moved to be okay I think so so moved soov now we need a second I guess you you concur to the amendment all right so we got get the motion in a second this is like uh picking out colors of drapes okay I think we've had discussion so I think we can just move to the vote so all those in favor say I I I oppos all right very good on to ordinance number 1750 Mr Hall can you read that one by tile only yes sir Mr dep mayor ordinance number 1750 an ordinance of the city of oito Florida amending certain provisions of article 9 concurrency management of the Land Development code relating to the adoption of a Mobility plan and Mobility fee schedule providing for implementing administrative actions providing for a savings provision providing for conflicts separability codification as well as the correction of scriptor errors and an effective date great thank you than you Mr cob I'm assuming you didn't have anything for discussion on this I have nothing further all right very good this is a public hearing we are have no written request to speak anybody in the audience wish to speak on this subject okay seeing none we will close public comment what is to pleasure our councel all right do I have to reiterate everything else from the other ones no good perect all right I um I make a motion to to schedule a second public hearing for Monday September 16th 2024 for ordinance number 17 what is it 1750 1750 1750 second all right we have a motion a second any discussion all right seeing none we're going to the vote all those in favor say I I opposed all right that was some fun we get to do it all over again on the 16th I got to go out with a bang actually on the 16th we'll we'll go ahead and have these changes made so but we'll make more changes after two two and a half years we're done with changes okay we're moving down here we got no first reading ordinances no resolutions we have a discussion item the appointment of City recreational parks Advisory Board Mr Cobb do you want to give us a background uh thank you Deputy Mayor if you remember back in April you adopt ordinance number 1742 and that established the city's Recreation and Parks Advisory Board uh the ordinance established a seven member board uh board members will serve three years uh of the first seven members appointed uh two of them will be appointed for one year with a term expiring December 31st 2025 two of them will be appointed for two years with a term expiring December 31st 2026 and then three of them would be appointed will will be appointed for 3 years with their term expiring in December 31st of 2026 so just remember actually that would be my recommendation 2027 you mean uh I'm yes you're right 2027 yes you're correct uh I would look at it from that perspective as far as the one-ear terms the two-ear terms the threee terms so it's two two and three or one I'm sorry yes no yeah two two and three that is correct and uh that way after that when those terms expire everybody goes to a three-year term so then you'll have rotate uh I do believe you have around 20 applicants for these seven positions and uh so we will leave the appointments to you if I could propose a methodology that we have used in actually what what I'm thinking we're doing is we just go through and then we kind of give off our top seven and we'll tally it up perfect that's what I was going to suggest yeah it's a method we've been using in the past and I think it results in a good diversity I do know we have a couple people here for this um so AJ I see you I know you guys are back there for for Larry um Jason I see you ma'am I I I don't I don't know your name are you on for the parks and rec boards yes your name is Tiffany Jones Tiffany Jones Okay d d do all right n Mar you want to start okay I've got eight on my list so let's take the first seven first seven okay we're going to go with uh Larry Kane and these are not in alphabetical order or in any particular order AJ range Jay Getty Rick baringer Tiffany D well hold on hold on okay yeah it would have been better if I put him in alphabetical order probably so where's brick rck so like they have other applicants but they've got some of them in multiple lines other C okay there's so I get the I got the Rick Binger who was after that one uh Tiffany Don Tiffy okay Tom Walters and Jason [Music] mclusky okay Mr Pollock six s Okay so [Music] um everybody in this room so we've got Jason Tiffany um AJ AJ and two guys for for Larry yeah okay um Wade Weaver okay five um and then um who are my other two hold on a second um two uh Jay Getty okay and Charlie Rose all right Mr Brittain let's let's get the folks that are here because I agree with that so it's AJ AJ and Tiffany Tiffany Jason and Jason and then the two guys for Larry and Larry that's four uh and I agree with Charlie Rose and Ed uh Jay Getty that's six and I would put Ed Wiggins on there as seven okay who Ed Wiggins Ed Wiggins Ed Wiggins okay okay so I'm also going to agree with the ones that are here so that's AJ that's uh Jason Larry Tiffany I'm also going to do Charlie Rose Jake Getty and one more got consensus on six I'm looking like M yeah do um Ed Wiggins so got one two three four five good so I'm showing Larry Kane AJ range Jay Getty uh Tiffany D Jason MOSI uh Charlie Rose Ed Wiggins yeah yeah and then and then yeah so that's that's the seven so now we have to figure out what terms they get so I say Ed gets one one year well okay that and the one maybe the ones with the most consensus get the three-year terms unless anybody here would rather have a shorter term because three years can be a long time anybody here pref first order and how many can we do with the three years again we can do three for three years three three years two should be one year two for one year two for two years three for three years okay so let's do our three years for so we got four people that have the four votes m but we have three people who are here so maybe let the three people who are here by luck of showing up are the three-year terms and then Larry Kane gets a two-year term because he's he got full consensus okay and then uh I propose Charlie get a a two-year term Charlie Rose M and then we got Jake Eddy and Ed for the one-year terms I'm good with that I can live with that yeah okay all right do you have all those yes sir you got it I did awesome congratulations everybody Welcome Aboard thank congratulations on your threeyear ter for showing up and for all the people lar he may he may be thankful for the two or you know and for everybody who uh applied the credentials of the people who have have stepped forward to do this we can only pick seven but I don't know about the rest of you I was really it was remarkable the level of a background just knowledge everybody stepped up to bring to this there was one candidate that actually put in for the pension board as well so hopefully they they know when those come up in December right I'm excited of the you know a lot of the you know just this and the LPA I mean we've had a lot of interest in in people serving so I'm I'm I'm excited about that well I I think part of what is making it making all of our boards work better and be more encouraging is that we have started doing this new thing where we say our top all of them and find where the consensus is really coming so we're getting I think we're getting a more diverse board and we're getting more collaborative with everybody the way we pick and how everybody interacts as well okay good deal all right congrats welcome aboard City manager's report I have no report Deputy Mayor city attorney's report uh your city attorney's office doesn't have a report tonight thank you city attorney's office okay next up uh Natalie is not here today Madame mayor all right I want to explain my display of interesting things up here this is a a sour apple apparently in an Asian food market this is like a $10 delicacy and it was grown right here in Ovito uh by somebody on Lake Park Trail if anybody would like to try it you are welcome to try it um I I would recommend not eating the brown Parts I have tried that part and that's interesting uh and this is a Loganberry if you have a green thumb and are willing to try to grow one uh they grow really well here it's native of South Asia I'd be interested in our uh code perhaps or or you making sure that somebody in our orbit of it City Hall knows about this kind of tree it does not appear to damaged sidewalks it maxes out about 25 30 ft and they're pretty delicious so if anybody wants to try one I've got a few more up here and you're welcome to try that as well and over the weekend uh this is called a oh I got full car I got to go look up what it is but this is a traditional Punjabi uh piece of attire and you just put it over your shoulder and this is it um so some some members of this eek Society have Central Florida who live here in Ovito were instrumental in bringing the first um teon it's another language it's hard for me to know there's a festival that celebrates women and it happened here in Ovito at the Ovito mall and like it it was probably 200 people from all across the region and it's just a really a really neat uh opportunity for Ovito to host people from other places little bit of Economic Development definitely good Community spirit and I want to make sure you guys knew that that happened so on a more serious note though uh I I was speaking to the tax collector earlier today and the pace challenges continue so Mr hod it sounds like Senate Bill 770 is now in full force and hoping you can go look at how that impacted the statute um there are several cities in the county that still have Pace agreements floating out there and it would be of tremendous help if it is legally feasible for us to stop approving the tax role with regards to pace so today we approved the tax Ro and ratified it and updated it for purposes of the streetlight District I do not recall doing that for the PACE program but it sounds like this new statute which I have not yet had a chance to read uh leaves discretion for us to perhaps not do that in which case the tax collector does not have to collect so if if we could um figure out what our options are I think with with Mrs Ross we had previously talked about we would simply not renew uh when the time came but this would be an opportunity with this new law that just went into place to Pro potentially uh not have this be biting our highes even sooner I will look into it Madam mayor all right thank you and that's all I have okay council member poock um well tomorrow is the uh voting day the voting day so make sure you go and look at where your polling place is tomorrow because it's not going to be at the early voting locations necessarily unless you're me yeah but uh but so look for that um on a on another note on that um I feel like so there's been a whole thing that's been surrounding the super Supervisor of Elections office and I feel like us as individuals if we've got an issue with something that's fine to to bring that up but to bring it up as the mayor or the council member or an elected official I feel like it's not our place to do that unless you have consensus of everybody on that um so it's you know that I don't think there's anything against it but I feel like that that's in poor taste to to to come out as the as an elected official and and complain about another elected official and what you know what they've done or haven't done and stuff and I think that it should be left up to the court or or tasse to determine whether there was any kind of a a violation I don't think they need people making statements and stuff like that on it so that's just my thought on it kind of stay out of it and and let the the ethics boards or the governing boards decide that stuff and not us making you know making public comments on it and stuff like that so um that was my other thing I can't remember now so I guess that'll end my report okay very good okay so I will start off next um on August 9th qualifying ended um I am honored to be able to serve this community again for another two years um I know I'd had to ask some of you that are here tonight for your signatures to for qualifications I do want to thank you all for that and I I am honored to uh serve this community again I think it's a great Community um saw this week that one of our former council members uh Miss Smith who is here tonight she had uh Amari Jones who won the bronze that uh came in the town showed office medal thought that was fantastic I don't know if he was able to get out to any of the uh boys and girls club or anything like that to kind of show them too or yeah well maybe there'll be another time that you can come in and do that that's that was great it was really nice to see that thank you for sharing that with us um also we had the one uh I know saw the uh the post about it here too um the fire department you guys have uh doors and window alarms for pools I understand that so Chief how many do you have and uh what's the process for people to get those sure good evening uh mayor and councel um we partnered with a local organization called the Wesley Seth Foundation um they raise money and provide um any types of means such as uh swimming lesson uh funding to help uh obtain swimming lessons um they approached us with helping to get the word out on these uh pull alarms and um what residents can do um we were we were provided 600 initially uh first come first serve um we've already gone through a good portion of that um we're getting hit up for several requests daily um but they can go on our social media there's an online application they can fill out and our uh administrative coordinator miss Patty Stevens will reach out to them and coordinate when they can come come pick them up when you say the social media is it the fire department one on the fire department and the city social media I think I did see the city actually shared it as well yes so they have that information so reach out through that or reach out to sure the administrative and get that and how many is it per household building the current Florida building code which is how we're administering them um requires a pull alarm to be on every door and or window that opens to a pool area or a lake area so that's what we're that's what we're doing yes wow because kids drown in lakes also backyards it's like battery operated as soon as the door it's a little battery operated uh pull alarm it's basically just a magnetic sensor just like a a door alarm would be and you can set it to either chime or you can set it to arm okay so when a window or a door is opened and it's armed it's going to alert the the occupants wow it's great public tremendous tremendous effort and and the whole goal of the Wesley Seth Foundation is to basically prevent any further deaths yeah from from drowning no so is there anything the city can do to continue to help with that I mean no um we're just we're partnering with her uh with with the uh the lady that that's overseeing her her name is Libby batty okay and um whenever we run low she said let her know and she'll put in an order and we'll hopefully be able to continue the program that's fantastic is she doing with any other cities or is there only oo right now as far as I know just Ovito okay well it was it was great to see that I think it's great service thank you uh also we have uh October Fest coming up in September on September 26 27th 28th you guys already mentioned the primary last week we were at League of cities um a lot of all of our municipalities that were there um some uh some great seminars that went on and then the last thing I have is also another um piece of um information about one of our employees doing something great and that is officer peerce and her uh clothing I thought that was fantastic is there anything chief that we can do to try to help her I mean how does she get her clothing I mean it's it's ins tight I just like to seeing the Chiefs get up get a little exercise in I know it's been a long night thank you for letting me do that uh at this point in time I can't tell you if she what she needs or or does she need but uh I'll touch base with her this weekend send out an email to council and uh she's as you know her she's a uh sees a need and tries to fill it so I'm sure she's uh getting quite a bit of donations but I can't I don't I can't test to what she's gotten so far okay I know I saw the news report on her uh they did a nice travel on that too so again I mean I'm I'm pretty sure I think lisar had already put something out on it Trooper Steve came out and did did a story with her Channel 13 I think also did a story I think you're right it's hard to keep up with her sometimes no that's great I get I'm sure the community would also like to see what they can do to help her out if there's anything to need and then those that are in need how how they can get okay y I'll I'll let you know great thank you and that's all I have Council M Brit okay y I did see the uh the report on Ashley Pierce so teller congrats from all of us Chief um again uh we on the or League of cities annual conference it was actually a better conference this year than I think I've seen in a long time it was uh very well done there was a lot of good uh interaction you know the purpose of going to this is to come back and be a more informed elected official and know what's going on in the state learn from other cities and uh network with other cities and then get uh educated in some of the uh the educational sessions and that that they did a very good job this year with that um we uh we passed in our consent or no not in our consent agenda we passed our lighting District uh uh feed this week Bobby did you get my email I wanted to queue up Bobby to just tell us that you know we didn't increase it this year and but I wanted to know if you can give us a lighting District 101 on What projects are coming up to use that money I know we use it for the electric fee but we wanted to use it also for upgrades and and uh and M maintenance I guess though you got any ideas on what we got coming up well today everything that's existing has been upgraded to LED everything the only project I have left which is going to be significant is to infill Mitchell hammock okay so and that that's West uh there's pieces East on I'm sorry on West Mitchell hammock which will actually be covered as part of the road Improvement we're going to do next year and then we have going east uh from basically 4:34 that way there's several dozen lights that still need to go in it's it's a project I believe it was it's it's over $500,000 total so it's going to be several years okay um because we have a little bit of Gap um in the the revenue that we take in that's allowed for Capital so it' be a little piece out of time to finish it off okay good just to let the folks know what what we're using that money for so appreciate it yes sir and I think uh that's all I have didn't want talk about you uh if through qualifying as well I usually do that after the election but you do it after the election I am I am honored to to be uh chosen again to serve the city council for another term so don't think I don't appreciate the support and the privilege of being up here I don't know if I should congratulate you or conso you what's that I said I don't know whether to congratulate you or give [Music] condolences all right next up we have future meetings we have Monday August 26 5:30 we have a work session is that still happening okay Thursday September 5th regular session I will not be here um Monday September 16th 6:30 regular session and Monday 23rd uh 6:30 work session tenative and I'm assuming that's still tenative that is tenative for the record I probably won't be here on the 23rd my daughter's getting married which one you miss in Canada the budget hearing but you don't want to read all that Megan can do it m will be fine anything else for the good of the order we're adjourned