City Commission meeting of the city of St. Pete Beach. Today is Tuesday, April 22nd, 2025. It is 6 p.m. Let's stand for the pledge of allegiance, please. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the
United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. City clerk, if you'll please do a roll call.
Commissioner Moholland here. Here. Commissioner Resniki here. Commissioner Robinson here. Vice Mayor Marriott here. Mayor Petrilla here. Quorum is present. Thank you. Thank you. I would like to open this meeting
uh in honor of a longtime St. Pete Beach resident employee. Um Bonnie worked at the St. Pete Beach Library for more than 23 years and she passed away recently after
a short um short illness on April 8th. Um, Bonnie loved working at the library. She loved serving her community year after year with smiles and and the knowledge that comes from being an avid reader. Um, Bonnie and her husband Steve
served the community many capacities over the years and we offer our condolences to the family and to the friends of Bonnie. And if we can please take just a moment of silence. Thank you. We're going to begin this evening with a couple of
presentations. The first one is the recognition of outstanding explorers club participants. One second. Hi, my name is Andrea Nicholson. I am the um childcare coordinator for the city. And I really want to tell
everybody, thank you very much for welcoming us to this meeting. Um my good citizens of the year, the criteria is based on something real simple. It's be a positive influence, be helpful, be cheerful, and maybe give us a little
grief. and both of my candidates um have done so perfectly this year. So without further ado, I would like to please introduce um my first good citizen, Mabel Meadnik. Please come on
[Applause] up. I first noticed Mabel when she came to us in kindergarten. She ran or skipped everywhere she went. everywhere she went. She can skip backwards. I was
wishing then, as I do now, that I could capture her undying energy. Her spirit is as enticing. Mabel is always smiling. She's a happy, positive child in this group, and she gets along with everyone. When she's asked to give a hand with
anything, she does so with a smile and without any hesitation whatsoever. And I just got to tell you, we have asked her to do a ridiculous amount of help for us this school year. Uh, Mabel's smart. She's a funny girl who isn't afraid to ask us any questions. She spreads her
joy and infectious smile to those of us in her presence every single day. Mabel, thank you for your willingness to help, your great stories, your engaging smile, your happy disposition, and your top-notch energy. It is absolutely fun
to be in your presence. Congratulations, and thank you for being this year's good citizen. There you go. One, two, three. One, two, three. Good job. Congratulations. [Applause]
Nico Hughes is the other recipient. Nico, please come on up. Wow. Nico came to our program a few years ago as a very high-spirited boy. We were immediately equally charmed and
frustrated by him. He managed, however, in very, very short order to wholly win us over with his engaging smile, his raspy voice, his willingness to help the littles, the coaches, his peers, his ability to get along with everyone, his
steady presence, and his tolerance for us coaches. Uh, Nico's fun personality, a striking self-confidence, and funky style make our program way more fun and a little more easy to run when he takes up tasks we know we can count on him
for, such as walking the littles to the restroom, helping with attendance, picking up stray balls, and occasionally kicking them into the water, and running gym games, just to name a few. Nico, we absolutely love having you in
Explorers Club. We're grateful for your help and your demeanor. I mean, what would we do if everyone was well behaved all the time and boring? Thank you for being a wonderful asset to our program and for being this year's good citizen.
You got it. Yep. One, two, three. One, two, three. Congratulations. Thank you again for welcoming us tonight. Thank you. Next we have a presentation on the Pasagilla shuffle board and Mary Pier
Bay shack update and I also have a request if there are no objection from the uh commissioners to also open it up for public comment after the presentation. I think we have a lot of uh residents here eager to speak on this
issue. Sure. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Good evening, mayor, vice mayor, um commissioner, charter officials. Uh for the record, my name is Camden Mills and I serve as your public services director. Um appreciate the opportunity tonight um to give an update currently
where we're at uh with these two facilities, our shuffleboard building and our Mary Pier Bait Shack. Um and really we want to just give you the details of the information we have on hand currently and then seek your uh direction for moving forward. Um, first off, we want to talk about our our
shuffle board um club building. This is located down in 9inth Avenue in Passa Grill. Um, and this facility is um registered as as historically designated. Our shuffle board building um was determined to be substantially
damaged um by our our building official. um replacement estimates um that we've received so far uh are in the range of [Music] $176,000. Um to date, we have received um just under $83,000 from our
insurance. Um I'd like to point out this is just the payout that we've received so far. Um not the final determination. So, we are still coordinated with insurance to try and get some more money there. Um we have completed our site inspections uh with FEMA um for this
facility. We presented to the historical preservation board um back in January and at that meeting um there there was a five um 0 vote in favor of of demolition of this structure. Um currently the the
replacement valuation from our insurance is um $102,000 but um as I mentioned um as shown in this slide um the contractor estimate that we've had so far is is around 176. We have solicited quotes for demolition and the lowest u most
responsive quote that we've received was uh just over $8,000. Um so these are kind of the the values of where we stand currently on the shuffle board building. Next I'd like to talk about Mary Pier um bait shack. Um this one's
located down at 801 Passil Way. Um this structure is is not um historically designated. Um, from my understanding, this the structure was built in in 1979. Um, the site itself of Mary Pier does have a historical marker. Um, but
the the building itself um does not. Um, similar to the shuffleboard club building, uh, our building official determined this structure to be substantially damaged. Um, we do have an appraised valuation of just under 75,000. Um, I'd like to note that this
appraisal is from our insurance company. This is not a private appraisal that was done. We have um repair estimates from contractor Cotton Global at at $96,000. Um this repair estimate does um
replace um you know the flooring and and some repairs to the roof and the walls. It does not include um plumbing um replacement. So we wouldn't be proposing to to bring the restroom back in that facility um based on the estimate that we have on hand right now. Um we've
received just over $62,000 um from our insurance company or insurance provider um so far. And similar to the shuffle board, we solicited for quotes on the demolition. We received three and the lowest most responsive quote um to demo this
facility was just over 65,000. Um the reason why why the demolition cost of this structure is is so much higher is just um due to the complications of of the building being overwater and the intricacies of of um taking that apart without having any adverse impacts um to
the environment. Uh we completed our site inspection with FEMA on the 13th of March. Um as I mentioned this this appraise value shown on this slide is um based on what our insurance has given us. Um so if you guys wish to do so, we could um pursue getting a private uh
appraisal just to to confirm what that value would be at. As we're looking at these facilities and considering, you know, what we want to do for for next steps, um se several aspects we took into consideration. Uh first and foremost is is public health and safety and their in their current
condition. You know, the these structures both pose a hazard. So as we're approaching storm season, I think that's something um important to consider. Um, second is community impact. Um, I know a lot of residents have have reached out to me personally and I'm sure you know they've reached out to you as well of of their interest
of of having these facilities repaired and back in use. Um, so I think that is very important that you know we consider the impact that this has on the community. Um, the historical nature of of both of these facilities and and the wants um to have these being functional. um permitting constraints. Um that
that's something, you know, we have to consider with the Merry Pier structure. Um it's a commercial building that's subject to the 50% rule. Um similar like what we were looking at with our residential properties. Um with that 50% rule, um you know, what that would mean
is that our repair cost would need to fall below or at or below 50% value of of the building um structure. Um some constraints that that we're evaluating with the permitting is with the the state environmental protection agency um
since this structure is overwater. Currently in place there is um an emergency declaration that allows for um state permit exemptions and that exemption is in place um up until um the end of May. So at May 31st is is when
that exemption criteria ends. So, if we were to do any demolition or or repair work within that time frame, um we would be able to to keep that exemption. Um otherwise, we would have to go through the process of of permitting with with D since the structure is overwater. We also have a county permit for this
structure. Um and they allow for two two up to two years um you can repair the facility um from the storm damage impact. Um so that's that's something we considered as well. Um also bring it up up to construction codes. Um, as we repair these facilities, we need to make sure that they're meeting the current
standards of the Florida building code. Um, and really evaluating that FEMA 50% rule. Um, it's important to note that the Mary Pier facility is in the VE flood zone, uh, which is the velocity flood zone. So, if we were to demo this structure, um, rebuilding a new
structure would not be an option, um, bas based on what we've heard from FEMA, um, so far. So, um the shuffleboard shack is is in a different situation where if we did demo that, we we could replace it and rebuild it. But if the Mary Pier um was determined that we were going to demolish it, it would not be
rebuilt. Um and then also a consideration is time and cost. Um you know, as we're working through these these FEMA funding projects, that's that's funding that we may not see back, you know, in in up to three to five years. Um, so tonight we'd like to ask for your direction on how you would prefer we
proceed um with our next steps. Um, if demolition is is the direction you want to go for these facilities, we can be prepared to to bring those contracts forward um to you guys in May um for review and approval. Um, one thing we would have to consider is the existing
um lease agreement we have for that bait shack at Mary Pier. Um, currently that is going to be up for renewal soon. Um so that'll be something you know we'll need to um consider as well. And then whether you know we want to rebuild these structures or not. Um something you know we definitely have to take into
the balance as we look at the city as as a whole and and all the priorities that we have um from the different different impacts from these storms. Um, so I would note, you know, with Mary Pier really our options are are do we want to move forward with demo in the structure or do we want to continue um to explore
options to see if repairing it under that 50% rule is is is a feasible option or not. And then with the shuffle board court um you know one do we want do we want to demo that now? And then two do we want to plan for a rebuild or or um wait and consider that um over time. Um
so that's currently where we stand today. Um, with that, um, I'd be open to any comments or or direction. Okay. Questions. They don't work. No, don't work. Mine works. Yours was a
red. Go ahead, Commissioner. Thank you, Mr. Mills. And so, I've I've got a lot of comments and a few questions here. and a little hard to gather them all up. But first of all,
I want to say that thank you very much for all the efforts that you've made for this city since you've been in your position. Uh you've been absolutely incredible. Uh I do want to also say that I hope that you don't let that go
to your head and you get complacent because that often times uh happens when people get too many compliments. but you've been uh under the circumstances you've been absolutely wonderful um in carrying out your duties and your
position. So, I do want to publicly state that, but I also want to stay don't let that go to your head. Appreciate that. Specific to these matters, um the community wants both these
structures rebuilt in some form, shape, or fashion. uh if at all possible. Um, so I'm probably going to shotgun it to here a little bit with you
and it it may not come across uh as smoothly as I'd like it to, but as it relates to Mary Pier, it's my understanding that the city is going to um request a new
appraisal on the damage to the property. Is that correct? If if you guys um provide that direction, we we can do that. Okay. So, meaning the commission provides that, correct? Okay. Well, I'm only one person here, but I certainly
would recommend that we do that. Uh and what does that do? um not dissimilar to what individual residents have had the ability to do
with reappraisals of their home. Um, it's if a property is not appraised as high as it should be, the reappraisal creates a
new value on the structure that then makes the 50% rule easier to obtain. Is that correct? That is correct. And I've confirmed that with our building official. So, I would absolutely ask that the city
continue on with that endeavor. Um, that we do get a new appraisal. Um, because once again, I do think that the Mary Pier facility from a culture or not cultural, but from a community
perspective, uh, is important to a lot of people. Uh, so I would I would ask that we move forward with that. There are some or there are a number of waterfront
properties not only in Florida but nationwide that are oftent times classified as working waterfront properties. um not dissimilar to historic
properties, but similar in so much. It's like, hey, this property has been a pier or it's been this or that. It's been over or near
um water and the dangers that come with that. Uh, I would also ask that we explore the possibility that the Mary Pier Bait Shop somehow fits within that
niche of a working waterfront property. Um, I know we've had many properties in the city, particularly in Pasigril, and I know the chairman of the historic preservation board probably
will cringe when I say this, um, but essentially, we've been able to retroactively retroactively um, designate or not designate, but assign historic properties as historic
properties. I wonder if that option is available for the Mary Pier Bay Shop. Is it possible that we could retroactively um somehow get working waterfront consideration for that property? And I I
I don't suspect you know the answer to that, but I before we decide to bring a crane in there or backho or whatever we got to bring in there to tear that place down, uh I would like to see us explore that option. Okay. Would it not have to
be over 50 years old? Working waterfront is separate program. Working waterfront the the historic designation. The historic designation. The historic designation. One of the criteria is over 50 years old. I believe it was originally built in 1979, but
it's had some modifications to it. So, we'd have to have an in-depth historical resource analysis. Working waterfront is separate. It's about businesses that are on the water. So, we have a few years before we can do historic, but we could take a look at the other at the working waterfront.
Yeah. I I mean I I don't think anybody's going to argue as it relates to the Mary Pier even though I thought that it was probably historical. It's not. I've It's not old enough yet. But it No, it's not old enough yet without without being able to be designated. There is but not
the bait shop, right? Okay. But if the bait shop has the option for working waterfront, I think that's another option that we should cons consider. the community wants the bait shop to
live. I mean, I feel very confident in saying that, that the community wants that. Um, and you know, it may be that we get to the point where it just has to be knocked down. Um but like so many other
residents that were able to be historic or find whatever reappraisals or whatever in order I mean when we sat here six and a half 7 months ago I can't quote the
number but whatever number of homes that we thought we were going to have to knock down in this city at that point in time seven months ago ended up being many less than
where we are today. Now, it doesn't make anybody that had to dock their home down feel any better. But the reality is that through reassessments and through historical designations, a lot of people
were able to stay in their homes that they otherwise or rebuild their homes, I should say, or their properties that they otherwise would not have been able to do. And I think both these properties based on the significance that they have
to the Pascal community um deserve the same treatment. And I would ask that we do that before we bring a excavator in there or whatever we have to do because it's over the water to knock it down. So
I would ask that we explore that before we come back to the commission and ask for a vote to destroy it. Okay, that's my position on that. As it relates to the shuffle board uh or the shuffleboard clubhouse,
uh it is historical. Um there's really not a lot to it. Uh it just kind of looks like an old frame structure and as most of you know, um budget and money is always an
issue with me when I'm looking at things. But um just throwing some mud against the wall here, I kind of feel like that the the path forward for the shuffle board, and there may be many
people in the resident or or in the uh audience that disagree with this, but that we ought to try to maintain the roof structure and whatever else we need to to uh preserve the
historic pres preservation part of it. Um, but really at the end of the day, if we could just turn that into an enclosed bathroom facility with an
open covered uh seating facility for for people that wanted or were using the shuffle board um to be able to get in out of the sun and, you know, escape the, you know, the
the eat. It would seem to be a way that might be more cost effective because money is an issue right now. But if we preser preserve the restrooms in that facility, it allows us maybe more
flexibility on our budget as it relates to Mary Pier. Um because the two are close enough to one another that you know maybe Mary Pier needs to have a restroom within a certain distance of
the facility or whatever. Um the shuffle boards, you know, 400 ft, 300 ft from Mary Pier. So I I kind of look at both of them intertwined, but what I do know
is they represent a value to the community. We're not talking big money, no matter what we do here in relation to what we spend on a lot of other stuff that in my opinion is probably stuff we shouldn't be spending money on. um that
we should try to salvage both these facilities with the options that may be available to us as we've done with many residential and business
communities within the city over the last seven months. So, uh, I'm sure I've left things out. Um, but, um, I I I did want to say my piece as it related to all
that. And I would ask ask you uh you and the commission to consider all these things and hopefully allow the city to um do a little more research on this before we bring the excavators in. And
last, the last thing, there is certainly a group within the community that's willing to put their money where their mouth is. I will say this, I had similar
comments uh as it related to repairing the uh concess concession stand at the uh little league baseball park. and when it kind came came time to put their money up and their efforts up, um, they
got short arms on me. So, um, I'm just being totally transparent that, um, I I I I say that people are willing to step forward and help the city allow these facilities to exist. I
will say that my principal point of contact with these particular matters, I have the absolute utmost confidence in his integrity and his pulse for the community. So, I truly do believe the
community not only wants it, but will step up for it. Um, but we need the city to do what they need to do as it relates to the new appraisals and and some of those things
to move that ball forward. So, thank you, Mr. Mayor. I may have more on this before we close it, but um I hope I've covered um most of what I felt I needed to. Thank you, Commissioner.
I have I have a question too. What? Um, can you put your slides back up for uh repair costs real quick? Okay, just um am I reading this wrong? Replacement
estimates is 210,000. Yeah, you had a repair cost of $90,000. Um I've I've since we just today we got new numbers um since this was published. So, um, previously what you see here is a replacement estimate of 210. That would to, um, that would be not only to repair
it up to current standards, but also to floodproof the building if we were to, um, try to make it FEMA 50% compliant. The $96,000 value that I referenced today would be a repair um just to bring it to to minimal use where essentially the
building is, you know, just a shell structure that doesn't have plumbing um and restrooms any longer. Okay. Because I was doing the math off of mine and it's needs to be done. Okay. Um and then will you pull up the other one for the uh via shuffle board? Did
that that change too? Right. because I had replacement estimate as 101 and this is 176. So the the 101 estimate um was a replacement value um estimated by our insurance company. The
the 176 shown is based on a contractor's estimate that we received and that was for a for a freestanding building. um basically to replace it similar like for like um but up to current codes. Yep. So yes, a
freestanding building. Seems like a lot to me. And if we wanted to I'm sorry if want to do something similar to what Commissioner Mohalland proposed which would be you know an open air structure without walls with the exception of two bathrooms. Would that I mean that should
significantly reduce the cost right? That should be a reduction in cost. Yes. Yeah. There might be a better design plan, maybe something that would still work. Okay. Yeah. If um you know that direction was to seek, you know, more repair option costs, we would pursue
multiple different estimates. Yeah. Are there are there any FEMA funds coming from either of these properties? Both of these projects um do have um FEMA projects created for them. Um so we are pursuing that that option. If we were um we we have some different options there.
Um through the FEMA process, if we were to demo and and not rebuild, you know, we could still collect on on what that would be worth and and put that money to a different project. Um FEMA calls that like an alternative project. Okay. Use um so that is an option, but we we are
pursuing um a FEMA claim on both of these structures. Both of them. Okay. Um Okay. Um Commissioners, it it I don't know. This is just a silly question to ask. Um but um fundraising to help in any any of this I mean
or can the city do and or uh private citizens do gofundmemes for projects like these to help assist with the cost? I think that would be feasible. Yeah. Um because if they hold that dear a value and as well maybe it's something that
would help to offset some of those costs. Um because originally I was looking at the original numbers and they weren't substantial, but looking at some of these other numbers and they they they grew um quite a bit. Um so um just, you know, as everybody's aware, there's
little funds, you know, um or there's a lot of items requiring a lot of funds, should I say. Um but thank you, Commissioner. Um yeah, I have a couple of questions.
um for the shuffle board um since it's designated historic any modification of what it is right now would rem would that remove the designation and and just because I'm hearing the commissioners talking about
altering it and making it a shelter or bathroom um when it's locally designated are we supposed to bring it back to what it was and not make alterations because and then that would
be considered a new built in a question. I'm not sure. Yeah. But my understanding is um since it is historically designated, you would bring it back to its its condition prior to um but historic designation isn't you know exactly my wheelhouse. So I would need to do a little more research on that to
see what our options are because if that's the case then then this would have to meet the 50%. Right? Because you would be demolishing and rebuilding. Um, so I mean it wouldn't be historic anymore, you know, if we're building something else. And I only say this
because that, you know, when when you listen to what or when um a building or structure or whatever it may be becomes historical, it could be for architectural and I mean looking at it doesn't ring to me an architectural design or feature that we want to um
keep, but what the significance is is the community and the historical significance of what it was used. And if what we're trying to preserve is the historical significance of what it was used for, demolishing and building something
that would sustain um another upcoming storm, a flood or whatever may be provide bathrooms, shelter, or what or whatever is needed for that shuffle board area or whatever the community is looking for to me would
seem more reasonable um because we're making it more resilient and then the money that's being brought from insurance or or donations from um you know how how we're saying and I think I read from an email from someone and I think the chair of
the historic board had mentioned that he could find money for um these projects then we could build something more resilient. Um so that's my comment on that. Then for the Mary Pier almost same thing because it is not historic or
designated historic but the pier is. Um and and we're kind of pressed for time and the expense and and everybody knows you get a a bid from a contractor and that will change in a couple of of weeks. Um a lot is going uh you know around in in the
um United States um that can cause a change in prices very quick on on materials. So what could be 176 there but was 101 um two days ago can become 250 and you know the prices will keep
changing codes would need to be met. We might not make deadlines um again to preserve the intention of what it's for what the community likes about it. I mean, I'm in favor of building something that's going to be more resilient, you know, and I know what we're trying to save is because
it's over the water and um, you know, why not build it off the water, you know, knock out uh, three parking spaces or whatever it is in front of it and put it on the ground in front of the pier. Um, just an idea. I'm
trying to think out of the box again. And if what we're trying to save is what brings people there, why not do it another way where we could spend the money on something that would be more resilient versus, you know, risking um,
you know, if everybody's been hearing the weather forecasts, right, things coming in the future, this would all be wiped out again pretty quick. So that's my comment. So we probably ought to rebuild the whole city. Really? Well, I I don't I
don't say that. Everybody makes their choices, but again, this is money that is from um taxpayers, right? And and being free, I'm not saying get rid of it. I'm saying insurance and contributors within the community, right? But when you see the insurance
payout, it's not going to pay out the whole entire amount. So, and like you said, arms got short, right? So, do we wait for the money to be upfront before everyone's arms get short again? Well, I'm all for elevating the whole city 11 feet to be perfectly honest with
you. So, if we can figure out a way to budget that and to build 8ft seaw walls, I'm all for that. In fact, I proposed that we have a new seaw wall ordinance or update the seaw wall ordinance where you couldn't make improvements until you
had an updated seaw wall. But I didn't have any support for that. So, um, you know, we're either going to deal with the realities or, uh, we're going to do nothing. Think we should hear from the community.
Do we have any, uh, public comments? We do. I have a Peter Kman. Great. If you would like to speak on this issue or any other topic in the general audience comments or a future topic, there are yellow cards in the back. You can fill those out. then please bring them forward to the city clerk. You will have three uninterrupted
minutes to um to let us know what's on your mind. And when you come up, if you'll please state your name and address for the record, we certainly would appreciate it. Thank you, sir. Good. Thank you, Mayor Petrillan. Thank you, commissioners, for um hearing me out. My name is Peter Kleman. I live at
288 Elton Drive, Vineyard Delmare. And we, my family and I have been continuous residents for and taxpayers for 44 years. Um, my need a second my three minute clock for this.
[Music] Miami Dade County Aber. Sorry about that. Good. No, so I can appreciate the um challenges facing the city and I heard Mr. Mills speak and what I was hearing
about it's all about the money. Um you know the lure and charm of pass has been sort of centered on if you go to 8th Avenue you see the seahorse Mary Pier Vander Preston's building and the shuffleboard courts. The shuffleboard
courts themselves are expensive infrastructure. You know, to pour that concrete, be 63 feet long, smooth. They're eight courts there. That's not a cheap thing. You cannot play shuffle board unless you have a place to store equipment. the um Pass Girl Shuffleboard
Club where I've played on and off since the mid 80s maintains the building, provides equipment for the public use, keeps the bathrooms clean, and this is a city with
very woefully few public structures that are in the in the city domain. This building came by barge in the 1920s from Gulfport. You know, to just level it and put some concrete pylons on and a roof and make it a public
toilet. You know, you can just take the name historic out of historic passive grill. If you get rid of this, you get rid of that. So, I think some effort should be made in this case to try to bring this building back to life. Now, I'm not an engineer, but I am a common
sense person who has restored a couple of old wooden buildings in my life. And if you look at that structure, and I'm there three times a week, and I see it up close, the slab is intact, the roof is intact, one wall was knocked out. The
quote of $176,000 is $350 a foot for what really is a kind of a garage. It has no interior walls. It just has studs, lapsiding, um, you know, some minimal electrical.
The bathrooms seem to be intact. I mean, I would posit to you that two or three carpenters working for 10 days with a few thousand worth of materials will be able to fix that building. Now, if you want to take the
$86,000 from the insurance and go spend it somewhere else, that's not something that I could control. But I think it's within the city's means to bring the building back to life as a historic structure. Thank you. Thank you, sir.
Mary Shaki, if you'll please state your name and address for the record. Yes, I will. My name is Mary Shaki. I live in St. Petersburg, 24 um 0816 Street North. Um, but my great great aunt brought a
cottage to 4th Avenue on probably a similar barge to the shuffleboard court in about 1923. She came in 1895 and was a very important resident of St. Pete and then moved to Pasigril. So, our
family has been connected to Pasigril for all these generations. My grandsons and granddaughter played shuffle board this morning. We my grand my daughter-in-law bought new tangs and tiles for me so that we could all play
because that's not possible anymore because those uh wonderful the equipment is not available. I certainly agree with my predecessor to Peter that this building could undoubtedly be repaired
and and brought back to life and $86,000 part of it at least could go to other structures. The shuffleboard courts when you drive by them, they're often empty, but often you go by and there are 25 people playing and another
25 or 30 sitting around and enjoying the atmosphere. And I think it's really uh that park lives with the shuffleboard courts. There's not a lot other happening between the beach and the bay. So it is really a a great yeah a great
uh asset to downtown PAS a grill. Thank you very much. Thank you. Bill [Music] Lowry. If you please state your name and address for the record. 2405 pastor way.
I'm here as individual not from the historic board. Uh first off I'd like to since I only got three minutes I would I'm going to be pretty direct. I would suggest we obviously did a new appraisal on the Mary Pier. I've been down there. I've had a contractor down there. It is
structurally sound. Okay. What's happened is when the water came up, it pushed the plywood off the floor joist and then it floodproofed itself because the water ran back out. And so really it's the floor. Uh contractor went down there just today. We looked all over. Estimates about $3,000 of materials to
fix the floor. Uh electrical, I'm not sure. I like the city. Well, yeah. And the walls. Thank you. I'd like the city to get give me a better idea of what the they think the electrical is going to cost. Um I've been been down there with other
folks. You know, I really think it's overestimated what it's going to cost to fix that place up. People want it open. They want it open now. They don't really want to wait on this. Excuse gentlemen. Excuse me, sir. We're not able to hear Mr. Lowry. Thank you. They don't really
want to wait on it to get around to the city because you got many priorities that take priority over this. And so I think with just a little bit of work, we could get that place back open. As we say, we don't need a bathroom if we can use the bathrooms at the uh clubhouse.
You know, there's been a structure on that uh dock since 1902 continuously. It's changed numerous times, but it'd be a shame. It's a symbol. It's probably the most symbolic thing of Pastor Grill. That was the whole gateway to the island. If it if it wasn't there, 8th
Avenue wouldn't be there. The city wouldn't be there. All that stuff. It's already got I wrote a email last week. I hope you all had a chance to read it. Goes in much more detail. But the dock already has water. The dock already has electric. We're just talking about putting it in the building, which is actually 2 feet higher than the dock.
The sub the piling was all redone three years ago. It's all in good shape. So, it's just a matter of getting somebody down there and actually saying, "What's it going to cost?" and I'm happy to be involved. I've already had some people involved with it. So, I think we need to get it reappraised. We need to get the
actual estimates for what's going to cost for the electric and the repairs. My estimate, again, I'm no professional, would be 10 or $20,000 and we already have it appraised at $65,000. Uh, it doesn't have to be fancy. It doesn't have to be have air
conditioning. The roof, the interior inside the ceiling's in beautiful shape. I mean, it's they put a lot of money into it a number of years ago to get it straightened out. So, um, that's that on the clubhouse, I think. And if you look at the
pictures, you can see how there's those like green beams that got exposed after it got knocked down. Clearly, that was open air at one point. Okay. Uh, FEMA doesn't apply because it's historically designated. So we can get a FEMA variance without much issue and not
even worry about the 50% rule as far as that goes. So we need to redo the bathroom, maybe have an area for an office or something than otherwise it could be open air. Less is more historically. Okay. PE it would look more historic if it had if
it was back to being open air really. So not only is it cheaper, it's quicker to do. And then just one last thing. Yeah. Um the ballpark and the short arms. I wasn't one of that people. None of my people I think are this would be a whole different situation. If the city need the community needs to get involved,
they will. I've talked to dozens of people that are willing to put money up. And so I would just like to be have a a better dial I have a good dialogue now with CAM, but continue on this uh you know way and try to get that sounds like somebody said by the end of May we have
to do something. So that's something we should be doing quickly. Thank you very much. Thank you, city manager. If uh one second, city manager, if you don't mind. Um I I think are we running up against So I
think the issue is we're we're running up against these are city-owned properties, correct? Okay. Correct. So because they are city-owned properties, we have to go through the standard bidden bidding process at a government
entity. We can't just pick a contractor because they'll do it for 10 grand or whatever. we have to put it out for public bid now. Is there a way for us? Just just help me think through this here. Right. Rather than doing that, is
there a way to do it like the way an owner would do it where they they pull their own permits and instead we would have volunteer workers doing some of the work? Again, if what the gentleman suggested, is that an option for us? How
can we how could we work around this? Is there a way to work around this? I don't know the answer to that. Okay. I would want to get back to you and we have time to do that. I do know that the city does follow our own permitting
process when we do of course city construction projects. So, I'm not I need to check whether we could defer that permit process to someone other than the city. Well, I'm not saying that we wouldn't we would defer to somebody
else's, but rather than having a contractor to do the work if some of our residents want to do the work the same way that I, as a homeowner decided I wanted to do the work myself, you'd have to have volunteer architect and a volunteer local builder. But
that's possible. So I I'm hoping you you understand where where I'm going with this, right? So normally because the city is a government entity, there are specific rules that we have to follow by Florida statute that say, okay, if you have a project that you're working on, whether
it's a shuffleboard court, whether it's a building, whether it's a new roof, new AC, whatever it is, you have to put it out for bid in a public notice. You know, there's a whole process. And what happens often times is we may only get one bid, right? Or sometimes we only get
two bids. And while you and I may know that, okay, I think I could do this as a homeowner for, as Bill said, $3,000 for the flooring, right? A contractor may not do that for that amount or nobody will even bid it for we may only have one bid for
$200,000. So, I'm trying to think of in terms of how can we work with that so that if the residents or the community wanted to contribute and volunteer or in some way help us um so that we can work through this process that we don't have
to spend 200 or you know $86,000 on the other building. So, if we get just add that to the list of things that we can Yes. Next comment. Bonnie Gustiffson. Great. If you please state your name and
address for the record. Hi, my name is Bonnie Gustoson. I live at 685 Bajia Delmare Circle over in Isl. And a lot of things have been addressed that you have brought up that I were like, I'm going to say this and this and they have. But I also wanted to
speak as a former physical education teacher about the availability of a facility for people with disabilities, people with handicaps, the incredible amount of people as we play through the whole season who come down there to ask
questions, to take pictures, to speak to us and say, "How do we do this? how do you do this? And it's so community invested people in the neighborhood that I'm walking by and we bring up engage about this and everybody's so happy to see that we're here trying to advocate
of the significance whether the building has four walls. We had people that were generous enough to provide their pickup trucks for the last five months to store stuff. We're down there. We're cleaning. My husband went down there and we
because we do a collection of funds to keep it maintained. Um, you know, we invest in blowers, we invest in my husband got a product that will keep the courts because of all the sand that destroyed on the courts, a wax that is
giving us great surface use. And it's just so important to know how we are all invested. And I know the community is the same and having it for every age group. They're not going to go out and play pickle ball. They're not going to go on the basketball court. We as a
group really support the community and the restaurants around, but also for the community to say, "I can do this. Whether my hips don't work right, I can have those benches to sit and enjoy." It's just super important that people
are just fascinated by it or they played it on a cruise ship and they would love to see it stay here. So you have addressed the can we or not. So thank you. Thank you.
Diane Halverson. Please state your name and address for the record. Diane Halverson, 8615 East Bay Drive, Treasure Island. my husband and family and I have been uh residents of the area
off and on um since the early 80s and um we have come to um know and love the joys of shuffleboard um both um playing with family members and with the club
for the last uh 15 years since we've been uh more than vacationers here. Uh and we are impressed with the opportunities that it has given us for socialization, for recreation, be it my
cardiologist says it's not really uh exercise. Um but um it's as good as I'm going to get. So that that's the way it goes for me. Um but we are also impressed with the numbers. We play seasonally with the club, but we come
down in in uh starting in late September, early October and through at least June when it gets really too hot to play. Uh we play several times a week. We are always impressed with the number of people
who come as casual visitors and use the equipment that we have provided as a club to and maintain who have never played before but who have we have seen five times a week um playing uh in the
after in the after the season hours because they too have come to know and love it. Um we have children of all ages um playing and adults and families and people who come immediately after our
12:00 uh day ends because they know the courts are beated and in better condition after we've left than uh at other times. We are impressed with the number of people who stop and ask questions and want to know when how how
to play and when they can play and and uh it has just become um a reason for existence uh five days a week for uh for within the season and uh throughout. We have made many friendships and have
really enjoyed um the opportunities that having the shuffleboard club has has offered um both to us personally and to the community. Thank you. Thank you, Deb Shener. If you please state your name
and address for the record. Um good evening. Deborah Shener Bokea Drive in St. Pete Beach. There is history here with the shuffleboard courts and I don't know how long many of you have been here but I know Lisa has been here a very long time and the
building was named after a man Auggie and I'm embarrassed I don't remember his last name. He was a great citizen of St. Pete Beach. He helped form the building and you have to understand that building holds shuffle
board. I don't know the name sticks Q's. Thank you. Um for everybody to use. So you just open that little door and whether you have the cues or not, you're able to play. And I feel
like it's honoring him again and he was an amazing citizen and did so much for our city to repair it and hopefully have an area where you can still store things. And then, you know, somebody mentioned to me before, if there's a storm or
lightning, that shelter provided an area for people to sit and there are leagues who play here. The only other shuffle board that's uh I know of is in downtown St. Pete, which is also very historic. But
just because a building's not 50 years old doesn't mean that it has history and means a lot to people who not only live here, but play here. and I hope we can do something to bring it back to where it was. Thank you. Thank you, John RDE.
If you please state your name and address for the record. Good evening. My name is John RDE. I'm at 453540th Street in St. Petersburg. Um, this facility has been a great asset to the community. I'm hearing more about it, the history of it than even I ever knew. Um, one of the
other things that we do in addition to our leagues is the women's club also comes over there and uses our facility as well. So, there's a lot of people that you see that you might not go by there and see, you know, 247 crowds there, but a lot of people are using it.
I would implore you all to keep the character and charm of Pacril intact. Try to get that building restored or at least put back in use. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Allan Stab Stab. If you please state your name and
address for the record, Alan Stall, 1037th Avenue. Uh, I'm probably the most directly affected because I live right at the end of the pier and I play in the shuffleboard courts. So, uh um I have been a
uh owner down here for over 50 years. First time I came down here was 19 40 48 and I was impressed then as a kid. Uh and I'm impressed now at the things that
we can do to keep part of Pasril. As you come approach Path Grill, there's a sign that says historic Path Grillil. It's getting less historic. And to take that building down that's in the court and and make it a
pavilion is just terrible. Uh you you lose a total character of the building. You lose uh the ability to have meetings inside the building that we do. uh we you lose the ability to store all our uh
uh equipment that we have. We have uh things that polish the discs. There's quite a bit of of equipment and there were lockers inside that we put it in. Uh it's just I want pass to be
pass. I I don't want things torn down just because it's okay. uh a a pavilion, it just doesn't work. You gota have a building there and that building is was over a hundred year
or is over 100 years old. Uh also I encourage people to put other things in that park that are usable like botchi court. There used to be a um
uh horseshoe. There used to be horseshoes down there. I remember those. Uh and and it just make that that area is should be used should have a lot of things in it that could use. You can't put paddle ball and tennis and all that stuff, but there are other things that
you can put in there. You can put in some more uh uh uh places to have uh uh grilling and things like that. Passive things that don't cost a lot. Uh, I I
I implore you to rebuild that building the way it was. Uh, it it's part of the when you drive down to Pasigril, it's the thing you pass and you see it right there. An
open pavilion. Uh, you you you have to try to keep Pasigril a little historic. Uh, and I I also vote for rebuilding the pier. Uh, although I'm not nearly as excited
about that as I am. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you, sir. Claudine Reese, [Applause] if you please state your name and the address for the record. Claudine Reese, uh, 3120 East Vienna Delmare Boulevard.
And, um, I just wanted to comment. I know that nobody's saying we might get rid of the shuffleboard court, but um it's a multi-generational uh something that's been happening just for so many years. Kids come out with their grandparents. It's so important not only to have it,
but I think part of the appeal and and I would say this also is true of all of St. Pete pe St. Pete Beach and I'm worried about that with all of the demolition and all of the new construction that we especially need to keep it looking
historical. So if it needs some modifications because of you know whatever understandable but we need to focus on the charm and I would say that's true not only of pass girl um just to keep that ambiance and it has it has everything to do with the tourists
as well like if we think it's um beautiful and it's the ambiance we like it's it's also good for the tourists. So, I just wanted to um really focus on keeping the character. Thank you. Thank you. I think
that's it on that. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Commissioners, comments, suggestions, thoughts? I've got a couple. Sure. So, uh um I think that you know for for for a very long
time the citizens of St. P Beach have had a lot to say about about maintaining the character of St. Pete Beach. And um I think it's absolutely accurate that these two buildings are are prime examples of of what that is. You know, sometimes it can be hard to define what
is the character of St. Pete Beach, but I think if you put up a picture of Mary Pier in the shuffleboard court, that's it. Like that's absolutely what the character is. And so, um, I'd like to see us do everything we can to to, you know, keep keep those buildings
as as close to what they are as is possible. Um, and I wonder if there is some way to to the mayor's point about, you know, creative ways of um of doing the repairs. Is there, you know, if there's some way if if the the
shuffleboard club or or some other folks wanted to, you know, form a form a group that's friends of Mary Pier or friends of the shuffleboard court that is is it possible in that situation for the city to like pass off the management of a repair project to that group? Is there a
way to give them control of the property in that fashion where it's not necessarily the same, you know, pro problem we might have where we put out a request for proposals and get one bid that it turns out is not very competitive even though it's supposed to be a competitive bidding process or if
there's, you know, something creative we can do to help make that happen. I'd like to see both of them kept as well. I think they definitely um add to the character. The concern again is going to boil down to money. Um so I'd
like to see what we can do and everything that we could do to get those numbers lowered. I agree if there we need to get creative on it, then get creative on it. A GoFundMe, whatever we need to do to try to to keep them. Um, I
think the pricing of ones that I'm don't mean to chuckle on that, but that was real really high. I mean, I just got a quote for my house for UF wiring and half of it, which is the underwater wiring, and I have to do a full rewire on my house. I got high quotes of
$32,000 and uh got a nice quote for 165. So, I'll take the 165. Thank you very much. So, there are other quotes out there. I think it behooves us to try to shop that as as creatively as we can to get outside of uh normal means if we
have to. Um and I don't know legally what we can do. So I will default to the city manager for that. Um but I would suggest like uh Commissioner Marriott said if you can form some groups friends of um try to start doing that. If there anybody wants interested in going and
doing a GoFundMe, start that process. Start doing that to try to get some interest, some funding. You might even as a GoFundMe get outside of this area and get St. Petersburg or other shuffle board organizations. You know, every
it's like in this town with the water rising, every inch counts, every dollar counts that you can get. So, um, if we can do this as a group project, maybe we can get it done. It would be nice to keep them both. Got an IT sponsorship.
There you go. Hey, you could, you know, I don't know. Can we sell na names on it? You know, just they do it for venues all the time. Maybe that's a possibility. Again, you know, there uh it's good to think outside the box. Maybe they'll something that, you know,
would work. Thank you, Commissioner. City manager, do you have enough direction to work with for the time being? Yes. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Next, we move on to the agenda. Are there any proposed amendments to the
agenda, Mayor? Yes. But Commissioner Rosniki, I I needed to excuse myself from tonight's meeting early. I'm already leaving later than what I intentionally wanted to do, unfortunately, because I have a family commitment and I was
supposed to leave at 6:45. So, I'm already late. So, I apologize for that. I didn't thing you said leave early. She has to leave early. I have Robinson. Yes. I have an um item for discussion.
Um and um that would be um upping the community meetings for development projects from 1 to three. Okay. And then um also I have a comment on um consent item
J. Any other changes? I would like to add a discussion item for the comprehensive plan review process. Isn't working? Is my mic not working? Okay.
Um, I'd like to add a discussion item for the comprehensive plan review process. Uh, and since the planners who are working on that project are here tonight, I would request that we move that
um to right after general audience comments. Just had one discussion item. Okay. Are there any other amendments to the agenda? Okay. Is there a motion to approve the agenda as amended? I move we I move we
approve the agenda as amended. Second. Great. City clerk, if you please do a roll call. Commissioner Robinson. Yes. Vice uh excuse me, Commissioner Mohalland. Yes. Vice Mayor Marriott? Yes. Mayor Petrilla. Yes. Motion carries. Thank you. Do we have any
general audience comments? We do. Deborah Shner. Uh I don't know if I should hold this comment until after you have the presentation. Okay. By all means. So, good evening. I was very disappointed in the presentation at the workshop last
week. There were many people there who do not come to commission meetings because time is very difficult and many of them have to leave work. The lack in my opinion the lack of knowledge and preparedness of the presenter reading
from a script they seemed a bit rushed disorganized. I don't think the presentation adhered to the directive ignored residents vast majority concerns that wanted our sewer system infrastructure and resiliency in place
before any hotel development. There was a feeling that the program orientation was a push for largecale development only. Again, residents were being heard, not being heard, but they were
being handled. And I've been to probably 20 or 30 of these in the last how many years. It's always the same. The most egregious offense was when there was a section of blocks that was in my opinion
little juvenile. The lead presenter talking about the hotel size made two statements. Development will be happening. Then he started talking about 20story buildings which did said to me he did
not look at the history of St. Pete Beach. We will not ever accept 20story buildings and I can tell you that was the biggest fight that we've had. Our input will just background noise to them. Marginalized residents marginalizing residents does
not install trust in this process. his other statement regarding the 20 stories because we'll have more water views. He subtly pushed it as he was at his station. He doesn't understand who we are. And I almost felt
as though we'll be the bunkans that they can push anything over on us. And I will tell you the people that I know that were present felt the same way as I did. And people were very aggravated with the the way the
questions were formed. He wanted a certain answer. He was pushing us to those certain answers, ignoring what the residents talked about and ignoring what was important to the city of St. Pete Beach. You know, how many times are we going to see the same thing? Put little
stickers on the same thing. They're not presenting us or working with us as residents. You have to hear the residents. can't marginalize us and that's how I and I will say many other people those who can't come here because
they work late felt and I spoke to a lot of people so I was very very disappointed thank you thank you Dana Richardson please state your name and address for the record
uh Dana Ina Richardson 5830 Bahama Way South. So Deborah, he did a great job. I won't be able to do as good, but uh I've gone to the first two meetings and I am very frustrated. I walked in, I talked to Kristen, one of our planners, and I'm
like, why aren't these meetings being put on Zoom? I'm displaced. My whole street is displaced. Um we're not getting the community input that's needed. And this is a really big issue. The comp plan was
from 2001. It's like 25 24 years old and we need to make changes to it, but we're not getting the time for residents to input what is important to them. Um, I
was very disgruntled with the meeting. Uh it seems like C uh CGA Solutions is working for the hotels and developments. That's how I felt. It's our money. It's a taxpay. We're paying for this workshop
this this to be done and why are we the residents not being heard? We are being steered to give our one or two issues and that's it when it's like all of the above and more that we have issues with. and um I don't understand it. So, we
really do need to work hard to get a zoom zoom done for all the rest of the meetings where we can get participation. Um I think that's very important. Our comp plan in the very beginning, I've been up here before saying this, it talks about community
and how the residents that the city is essentially a builtout community. There is a strong community objection to high density unmanaged overdevelopment of our coastal Gulf community that will further degrade infrastructure and public
services. There is a strong desire to protect the quiet character of existing residential neighborhoods from encroachment and overdevelopment of non-residential uses. This was from December 2001 to May 2007 and it says
amended in 2012. residents have consistently been against overdevelopment and we are consistently not being heard during our non-elected commission where we had not we did not have residents
representation. We got two cup applications approved that totally take away our views, our um beach access and it it totally is destroying this town. and we really need to make changes
before we continue to do that. We need to keep the character of St. Pete Beach and we need to come up with a plan for a cohesive look. Thank you for your time. Thank you. I think that's it. Okay. Thank you.
Somebody put one on top just a second ago on your on your pile right there. Yeah. Okay. I snuck it in there. And if you'll please state your name and address for the record. Reese, 3120 East Venad Delmare Boulevard. And um I'm just
going to beat the same drum I always do. And that is um I had the exact same experience. I only was able to go to the first workshop, but I will say that I felt like um it was not reflective. I felt
like no uh research had been done at all. I was told by somebody that went to the workshops 20 years ago that they had some of the same designs as they had in the 20 years ago and she even had a
flyer from it. So, um I expect I think a little bit more. Um nothing was FEMA compliant. I mean, we can do better and I hope that we'll press the people who
were paying a lot of money to do these projects to do a better job than that because again the character thing, we're special because we're St. Pete Beach. Not that everything has to look the same. Not that we have to have cookie cutter and you know everybody private
property is private property but we should be striving for more to make this an experience that makes us different and special from all of our surrounding communities. But don't just build to build build to improve the character and
improve uh living here and improve the experience for the tourists. Make ourselves something special or and and preserve are something special. We have a lot of uh things that need to be redone, but if we're going to do it, this is the chance to make ourselves
what we want to be, not just to rebuild something. Thank you. Thank you. I think that's it. Okay. So, um I next we move on to discussion items. So the first discussion item is going to
be on the current process of the comprehensive plan review. Um and what I want to do really quickly is just um so that everybody understands kind of where we are and how we got here today. Uh just give you a brief history of the last couple of years and the process
that brought us here. Uh the last time our comprehensive plan was reviewed was in 2014 and that really was done without resident input but rather because of a lawsuit. Right? So a lot of the comprehensive plan and the current condition is because of that. So as a
non-elected official resident of St. Pete Beach um you know I'm looking around and saying what's what's happening here? why, you know, when I moved here, we had a moratorium. All of a sudden, moratorium's gone. And next thing I know, there's all of this
proposed um overdevelopment. And so I I ran. I won, if I may say so, in a landslide. Uh and one of the campaign promises I made, which I brought to the commission on the very first day in my office, was that we should have a
comprehensive plan review for the purpose of giving the residents of St. Pete Beach. Gez. I mean, I know I'm long-winded, but [Laughter] I'm Adrien [Laughter]
Petrilla. And so on the very first day, I I brought it up. Um it was met with some reluctance. Um but after about six months of proddding and um cajoling, we we got to the point where we put out a request um for
bringing on a firm to help us review the comprehensive plan so that it uh so we have a plan that represents what the community wants, a plan that has specifically a high level of community involvement. Uh we had two firms at the time. um the firm that we selected and a
different firm. Uh and at that time um I and the other commissioners presented several questions. We interviewed both of them here in chambers um in one of the actually in several of the commission meetings. Uh and one of the things that I brought up at the time is
you know what if at the end of the day the community decides that they want less density, less intensity, less height. You know, if the community decides that as the comprehensive plan states in the first paragraph that we are essentially a builtout community and
that we cannot handle anymore beyond what we currently have. Now, that doesn't mean that we can't have new. It just means what if we just we're just full, right? It's like you can replace this water with something else, but there's only so much you can fit in
here, right? What if that's what the community decides? And at that time, um, the city attorney provided some suggestions as how that could be done within the framework of the Florida statutes, our comprehensive plan and charter. And that
was a question that was posed to the two applicants, you know, the two proposals. And at the time, the firm that we currently selected, uh, Calvin Jordano, they said, "Listen, this is something that we do all the time and they had a long list of other coastal
cities that they work with in uh in the state of Florida and they said in fact we also have when you hire us we also have this great partner over here this law firm that this is what they do right they help us navigate make sure that we write revisions to the comprehensive
plan you know that you know can withstand scrutiny and so based on you know those statements based on those um based on those presentations um we selected this
particular firm. Now I will tell you my experience so far with them I've had nothing but pleasant interactions. I've not had any uh any reasons to be dissatisfied with their performance until last week. So I attended a community meeting
just like many of our residents did. In fact, we had a almost a full room uh at the community center and I started having alarm bells going off in my head within the first 5 to 10 minutes. The conversation was not about weather
development, but when development, right? So, hey, here's what's going to do. If you want to squeeze more density in here, you can do these types of apartments and you can do these types of transient logics. And so, I'm like, well, hold a second. We we never said that we wanted more. In fact,
we haven't said anything yet. The whole purpose of this was to hear from the community and say, "Well, what does the community actually want? What do our residents want? Do they are they happy with the current status?" Right? Is is this fine or do they feel like we're here? Right? Were they willing to blow
this up like a balloon and squeeze more in here? I don't know. I think I have a sense of what the community wants based on my election, based on subsequent elections. Uh I think the community has given us a very strong and definitive mandate as to the direction they want to see the commission take. But again this
was a purpose the purpose of this was to get community involvement. So even though this was a town hall I I just had raised my hand and I said hey when are we talking about whether the current level is enough too much or too little of development of density intensity
traffic everything. said, "Don't worry, it's it's coming." Few slides down, just more a couple more in the presentation. Well, a few slides more came and I I didn't see it. And I I raised my hand again and it's like, "Okay, actually it's over there at one of the tables where the workstations are." I said, "Great, we'll
wait for it." I get to the workstations and I was like, "Hey, I have what I have here is the selection of do I want A, do I want B, do I want C?" And both of them were the same density just of various heights. And so I asked I said okay
where is the option what if people want to select option D which is less what if the community says we don't want any more what we currently have is too much we actually want less intensity less density you know less strain of infrastructure less height less
everything of that so at that point I received an answer I wasn't particularly pleased with the answer and I did remind them about the conversations that we had at the commission where I presented the what if scenario. What if the community decides that they
actually want less and I think the first or second slide at the community meeting actually had that same law firm that was provi you know given to us as a as a as a you know here's the law firm that can help
write or rewrite the comprehensive plan based on what the community wants if the community wants less. So my challenge with the current approach is one it does not ask the community what
the community wants. We do have one at least one maybe two Zoom meetings built into the thing. That was a discussion that we had just a few months ago because people are displaced and out of town and may be so in some cases for a year or two if
they're rebuilding or tearing down. So that is coming. that was built into that. Um, so that was my my first so that's what I want to bring to the commission discuss is you know the the current structure the current
questions that are asked and which is really funny because out in the lobby there was um a communitywide survey thing which actually had far more in-depth questions. You know, we want to hear
from everyone. You know, do you feel development happening here reflects how the community focused? Does it, you know, um if you're dreaming up the perfect future for the district, what would it look like? You know, things like that, you know, where
it says, uh, you know, do you feel development reflects the purpose of creating? Do you feel the development here happening reflects the community? um if he were to dream up the perfect uh you know future for your district and development what that look like so it's I mean it had was far more in-depth than
what we received at the community meeting and again I think the the very first big shortfall of the current structure is it does not ask the community exhaustively what it wants but rather it provides a specific set of
questions that may be steering in a specific direction. And then my second uh challenge that I have with the current process is um that we were very
clear when we were going through the request for proposal when we interviewed the different firms very clear as to what the mission was, what the scope was and that there was a potential that the community would come back if we were to ask them that
they would say we want less. we want less density and that would we would need help on how to navigate that. That was a very very clear, you know, directive that was a very clear possibility and reality on
day one. Um, so, uh, to me this then brings us to the point of, you know, we're spending a lot of money here, a little over $150,000. And I would like to address this very early on in the process now
that we're, you know, two meetings in. I don't want to wait till the end because I don't think what the commission or what the community envisioned was for us to redesign you have a you know study
and aesthetics and design of the large resort district and Corey Avenue and everything else and what size sidewalks we want and so on. I think what the community really wanted to address and the reason the commission brought it up was we want to address you know our
infrastructure. Can we handle more density? Can we even handle the current density as it is? And then what steps does the community want us to take? And so if the firm doesn't feel like they can actually help us in that then I think we need to
look at whether we want to continue with this process. um if they don't feel that they can help us, then they need to say so now and say, "Look, we'll just we'll have to bow out because we actually can't get the job done." If they tell us, "Look, I
think maybe we misunderstood. Maybe we need to go back to the drawing board, come back with a new plan that we can bring before the commission and say, "Okay, here's how we're going to go forward." Again, these are my thoughts. um when the gentleman is here from the firm, I want to give them an opportunity
to present, you know, their side to again, I'm I'm trying to see if there's a way for us to continue working together. That would be my that would be my my desire to figure out, you know, let's
let's make this work and give the community what the community is asking for because the last thing we want to do is spend $150,000 and get something nobody asked for. So, please thank you, mayor and commission.
uh Luis Cerno with Calvin Gerardono and Associates and I I sincerely appreciate your comments uh again early in the process and uh hopefully we can clarify this. Um and I do I'm glad that you brought up the survey. The survey does go quite a bit more in depth than we are
able to in the uh in the workshops. Uh and we are they are more open-ended. uh and we do want to get the community's complete input on what their vision is. And uh that being said, I think we had some very good positive feedbacks and
some positive comments on um the vision for the future and a lot of important issues were brought up that we intend to explore further. um as to the concern uh at the workshop, you know, can we offer
an option uh to uh say no growth and um yes, I mean that that is a possibility. Now, I I do want do want to make it clear. We work closely with the city staff on uh the questions beforehand, and I think everybody staff and
ourselves included, we said we want to be realistic to the public that um Florida has very strict property rights laws and uh to say we're going to reduce density and intensity, uh there's very real implications with that legally. and
um we can we can report that and you know I'll commit to that but whether or not there's a solution to that um you know that you know I have to be realistic and I can't promise that uh if the city says they want to reduce density by half or whatever that there's
a a legal way to do that that's um you know that's in the realm of of what the lawyers do and even then I don't know if they could come up with a solution but what I can commit to you is that we will work closely with staff and our
attorney and the city's attorney uh to see if um you know we can resolve that issue. And again, we're willing to ask the question, but we don't want to give the public the impression that if if indeed everyone says they want to reduce
density that uh the city will that we can find a way to do that legally. uh you know that I I couldn't commit to but uh you know we can we would be glad to ask the question and report back. I hope that helps. I I have a question in regards to pool density. Pool density is
an ask. It's not it does not fall under B Harris. Correct. Correct. Correct. Okay. So that would be a way to reduce density in instead of getting all these developers getting a
um density for nothing off the backs of the residents. I mean that is that is a way that that is one way. I understand the other way. We can't mess with their vested rights or or you know um we can't mess with that. That would fall under Bert Harris.
But in no way does the pool density fall underneath that. Correct. And there are other things that you can do. There's unless it's unless it's already been approved and and we're we're trying to take that away and it's not legal to do that. If it's legal to do that, then that's a different aspect and that's an
important clarification and and we can definitely make that, you know, statement definitively at the meetings and uh we can work with that. There's things like transfers of density that you can do or or even reduce the amount of pool density that we have, but we don't even have a study or we don't have
any indication from anybody, you know, when are we full? Yes. Like you said, so so I guess we're looking to to to that point too. When are we full and what can we help? What can we do to red reduce that so we are not overcrowded,
congested, uh you know um burdened with traffic and still the residents are the ones that pay 80% of the tax base here, it's not the hotels, it's not the tourists. So I I mean some of that needs to be very clear
and I think all the residents are are very aware of what they pay for here. Yeah. And I appreciate that input and we'll work to to improve on on things like that that we can work with. Sure, Commissioner. I want to make sure I get it right
there. Sure. So, the Florida legislature is considering changing the rules on what cities can do as it relates to the comprehensive plan. Are you aware of that, sir? I assume you are. I am. Yeah. Very. It's an important point. We're
watching that closely. Sure. Right. And right now it appears likely that they will restrict municipalities from being able to redo their comprehensive plan until
FY28 maybe something like that. Mr. City Attorney, uh, it's House Bill 1535. And no local government under this bill, if it passes, may propose or amend its comprehensive plan or land development
regulations to enact more burdensome or restrictive provisions. And they also may not adopt a moratorum which would uh put a temporary halt on on growth or in density and intensity. Um, and if
passed, that um is true through when? July 1st, 2027. This contract goes through January of 2027. We'll know by the end of session, which is May 2nd, whether that passes or not. So on May 3rd, we'll know. Right.
So the next meeting the next meeting we'll know. Uh so then the on May 13th. Okay. So that would be um seven days later or so. Right. So I I guess the question
is do we need to allow that to come to fruition before we decide anything on any of this? um or if we wanted to continue to go forward
um with some new guidance um for uh the the folks that are working on the C comprehensive plan for us. [Music]
Um, is there a benefit to doing it recognizing there's a very real possibility that we wouldn't be able to enact anything or this commission wouldn't be able to enact anything until
late 2027, 2028? Um, do we want to have that in our back pocket? Um, do we want to fish and cut bait? And if we decide
to fish and cut bait, what do we owe you, sir? If we terminate your agreement tonight, what do we owe you? Uh, we'd have to see where we are in the in the in the process. Um, you know, on to your to your question, um, we could move forward and
ask the question, but, you know, with with the caveat that there are certain things that the city may not be able to do because of the legislature, uh, but, you know, we could at least report the findings, and I'm not going to make any assumptions, but the finding that
perhaps that the city uh, wants to reduce the residents want to reduce density, for example, to X number. Um so you know reporting and public input that could continue but you know the action you take on that you know there's a possibility that cannot happen. Yeah. It
would have to be tabled until let's just say January 2028 or thereabouts assuming this legislation were to to pass. Yeah. And and the other point is I think there's a lot of things that came up at the meetings that um
that the city could do could address uh without reducing density and restricting development uh like setbacks um preserving views access facads facads architectural guidelines infrastructure uh a lot can
be done with infrastructure improvements um so there's a lot that can come out of this um you know that uh beyond what the legislature I think uh is limiting the cities to. Okay. So I I just wanted to
you know put that out there that you know I mean that needs to be part of the consideration as well. Um to answer your question earlier about what do we owe you? The contract I reviewed it says the city wishes to ter if the city wishes to terminate the
agreement at any time for any reason. We give 30 days prior written notice to the contractor and that the contractor would then be paid for all work performed up to the date of termination and that the contractor would provide all completed original or draft work to date included but not
limited to the research records, surveys, data reports, maps, technical notes and other relevant documents. So, so you have to give you have to give 30 days notice uh to terminate for any reason. That would
be like what I would call like without cause um right they would be owed the money for the 30 days and it looks like the legislature will decide on May 2nd. So napkin math sir that's probably I do a lot of napkin math. It's not really
popular around here, but uh I I I like to do it. It's always worked well for me. Um so, napkin math u we'd probably be about 50% into our contract with you. And I'm not asking for a firm
commitment. I'm just asking for a ballpark. Would you would you agree with that? My napkin math would be like 40% but okay. That's my Yeah, I could be wrong. Okay. Well, I started to say 40%, but then when we figured that we're going to need another week or two, uh
that it might bump up to 50%. So, um but it sounds like you believe based on the restrictions that are likely to come down on us
that you can still deliver benefits to the community. as it relates specifically to infrastructure as well as um some other things as it relates to appearance type modifications and those
type things separate. Oh, absolutely. I think we we've got a lot of good information. We're still processing it, but we did get a lot of good input and we're picking up on themes. Uh the the a big part of this project is public engagement that can continue. Again,
it's the action that you take on that that has to that could probably halt, but we think it's very useful to continue the public engagement. And I think um we received a lot of good feedback and u you know, apologies to to the people who spoke today if if they
felt like we weren't um completely uh organized or uh didn't reflect uh what they were saying. But uh you know we can again work closely with staff and and uh address those concerns. So yeah, we feel
it's a very important project and um I think we we've got some valuable information that we can build on. So I just you know so you know I've been to both meetings. I had to leave the last meeting prematurely. Um my feeling is generally ambivalent
about what I have heard. Uh, but I will tell you that uh both residents and officials um you guys aren't real popular right now. Uh so uh I I guess if the contract
were to continue, I would certainly ask you to uh uh you know focus on the things that you can deliver for the community. uh because I think by and large as I say there's not a tremendous
level of satisfaction in what's been delivered so far and we absolutely want to provide the city the best product possible. So um that's why I'm glad we're having this meeting now we can we can course correct and we we do that anyway. Uh but you know hearing these
specific comments we can definitely work with work with the city on on doing that. So, um, yeah, we we want to, you know, we're we're here to listen. We're at the meetings to listen. So, uh, we we're not taking a position, uh, either way. So, um, you know, I think we we'll
we'll get that from both sides that were progrowth or we're anti-growth, but uh, we we do want to listen and, uh, we are committed to, uh, working with you on making those adjustments. And and just just to be
clear, some of the feedback that I've received is maybe from the the not faright anti-growth crowd, but more the centrist crowd. So I I think I'll I I think it's
important to share that with you that it, you know, it's just not whoever these extremists might be considered to be. It's not the feedback I've received is not just from extremists. It's more
centrist. So I I would share that with you and uh you know you you you seem to indicate that you want to do a course correction and you know given the opportunity to do so I I I hope you will
do that and I assume you will. So uh I just wanted to ask those questions and thank you Mr. Mayor. Thank you. Um yeah, I've got a couple thoughts. I think um uh I I wasn't able to attend the first
meeting. I was at the second meeting and um I was I was generally disappointed to see that that the the crowd of folks who were there um both was nowhere near as large as I would would have hoped that it would be. Um, and people walked out
of the meeting generally more disgruntled than they walked in, which I don't think should ever be the the the point of a community meeting like that. Um, and so I think that
um I I think to to me I feel like that that perhaps there's not a lot of real clear uh real clear information about about what the what the the goal of the
meetings are. Um, and I know that I've heard from a number of people um, who haven't been able to attend either of the meetings so far who have said things like, "Well, I I wasn't able to go to either of the ones that happened already, so there's probably no
like like as though as though it's a sequence of meetings that you have to attend them all for it to do any good. Um, and so I think we need to to get the information out there a lot better about the meetings. Let people know what's happening at the meetings. Let them know that that, you know, you can go to one
meeting, you can go to all the meetings, that there's lots of opportunities to give input and and maybe even delineate between or or or or if there is such a delineation between, you know, what kind of what what meetings are duplicates in
some respect of of of meetings so that you don't have, you know, the same group, you know, I think at that last community meeting, I think for if you took out city staff and elected officials, there was about, I don't know, 25 people there. Um and and and so if you have those same 25 people showing
up over and over expecting something different to happen when when your goal is that it's the same thing is going to happen and it's just another opportunity for more people to show up that that that can you know that would certainly cause people to to think that nothing productive is happening.
Um, and then I I guess a couple of questions and and and that would one of them would be that, you know, I believe the the the mayor and commissioner Robinson um spoke a little bit to, you know, part of the goal of this
comprehensive plan review was to to, you know, to say what what can't, you know, how much development can we can we handle and and is it part of your do you think it or or would Do you consider it part of your scope or is part of the things that that you all are planning on
delivering at the end of the day to be any hard data about traffic or infrastructure capacity or or is that not part of what you're doing and and that we should be expecting that separately from city staff? Yeah, I think we're going we're
going to uh work with city staff on providing a lot of that. We you know we do want to we do need to get the facts out there that you know there's limited infrastructure traffic will always be an issue no matter even if no more development takes place. So um yeah we
we can we're definitely working on the hard data part as well. And then and then another you know there was a couple of other of things that occurred to me when I was sitting in that meeting last week and that was that you know when when we talk about infrastructure one of the things we talk about is is can the
current infrastructure we have handle development and another thing that we talk about um or that we have talked about when some developers have come to us with projects is that is that then you know with new development comes things like them handling all the storm water on their own property which takes
some of the the impact off of the city's storm water system. And so I think we need to I think we need to get a real clear picture of of at what point is development a burden on infrastructure and at what levels of of development are
benefits to our infrastructure because I think it I think it can be I think it can be you know like not not in every case but I think there there are clearly there are cases where if you have a property that where all of the runoff was going into the city storm storm water system before and now they're handling it on on their
own property. You know, I think those those things need to be taken into consideration. And then another thought that that I had while I was sitting there was that, you know, there's there's I'm I'm I would imagine that there are things in our code, whether by
design or by accident, that make development cost a certain amount. Right? There are there are things that can be written into the code whether it's landscaping or green building standards or or any variety of things that make development more expensive. And
so, you know, to a developer, it's a math problem, right? How how much density do I need to pay for the development and and make a profit? And so, I would love to see a part of the comprehensive plan review be are there
are there parts of our code that would make that would that would incentivize a developer to develop at lower density because the payoff would come with less rooms. you know, where we're not we're not trying to we're not taking density
away from someone where we're where we're running a muck of the Bert Harris Act, but we're but we're finding a way without without giving up, you know, we're not clearly we're not trying to open plastic factories, but but you
know, to to to do so. Are there are there places in our code where we perhaps have unintentionally made development so expensive that a developer feels like the max density is their only option? And so it seems to me like a a a review of our comp plan
should include some of those economics where we would where we would find a way to incentivize the reduced density that people want. Thank you. Yeah, I've been taking notes. Okay, good comments. I had a question too because um it also
seemed that the schedule came out a a bit late as far as what the meeting schedules were going to be and unfortunately I scheduled my my schedule pretty far out in advance. Um and some of them I couldn't I can't attend. Couldn't attend the first one. I'm not going to be able to attend this next
one. Um, and I feel like I can't catch up that uh I can't provide input after the fact. Um, and I also want to know what input are you getting? It's supposed to be from shareholders or
stakeholders in the community being business owners um and residents. Um, are we sure we're getting that or we are we getting other people as well? Yeah, we we did we did targeted notifications. Um whether or not that's
being successful, uh probably not. I mean, that's something we can look at. Um and you know, I I do want everyone to know that the survey is available as always and we'll always uh have that if even if you can't go to any of the
meetings. So, um we do want people to avail themselves of that. But um yeah, I that was that's always a concern. who's going to show up and what the representation is and we'll continue to to do our best uh on that. So, I'm not a big fan of non-committal
answers only by receiving a different answer when asking the same question at the second time. And it seems to me that there's too many ifs here. And it seems to me that we're
getting a different answer from what we got almost a year and a half ago when we started the process. And so I think what maybe is in order is a
pause. We have some things in the legislature that come to fruition on May 2nd. Maybe we put this whole process on hold until we see what the legislature does. Now, just because it passes the House and the Senate doesn't mean the governor will sign it. There's always possibility
he vetos it. So, who knows? Um, and then we need a clear answer, right? So the conversations that we had in previous commission meetings where I presented the very real
possibility that if we asked residents what they wanted that they might come back and say we want less density, intensity, height and etc. And at the time um just going off of recollection here for example the city
attorney ran off a long list of ways on how that could be accomplished. Right? If your infrastructure, for example, is at capacity, if for example your infrastructure, whether it's roads, storm water, sewers, and let's be honest
here, 100% of whatever is being built, 100%, right? No matter what mitigations they may undertake, it runs into our sewer system. You may abate some storm water, but all of
that stuff goes into our sewer system, which is by all accounts beyond capacity at the moment. And we've got, you know, a good number of our residents not even living in their homes right now. And a
lot of the hotels are not even open right now. And so as I remembered at that time the city attorney gave a long list of reasons and why a city may take such measures as to for the
public good and safety reduce height density intensity. And so the question I have for the firm at this point is If you don't feel comfortable, if if that's what the
community asks for, if if you don't feel comfortable saying that you can deliver that, and if your attorneys say that they don't feel comfortable delivering that, then just tell us now. And and I'm not asking you to provide an answer tonight. I'm saying you've got almost a month until the May
13th for the next commission meeting. See what the legislature does. you know, that may make this whole conversation either a mood point or a completely different conversation. Um, and then we come back and see, okay, based on that information, based on your conversation
with the attorneys, um, what do you feel comfortable committing to? And so my proposal to the commission would be is that we pause this process exactly where it is today as if we were as if we had given that 30 days
notice you know that's with if you agree to this as well if the commission is in has consensus on this I would say let's pause this process right now where is let's not spend any more money on it um with the exception of getting an answer to those two questions.
What what does the commission I'm good with that. I would agree. Yeah. I just want to make sure I'm clear on So So you're saying pause the whole process? Pause the entire process. We need to cancel the upcoming meetings for
or postpone them. Postpone them. And then um and then I see and see what the legislature says. See what the legislature comes back. Yep. and then get a definitive answer from their attorney consulting firm that they're working with. That if the community came
back and said, "We want less density, intensity, and height." And if we had legitimate reasons, for example, failing infrastructure, you know, other health and safety concerns, you know, the city decided at that point that the revision of the comprehensive plan were to
include decreased density, intensity, and height. Now again there's also a distinction in the comprehensive plan between what is by right and but what is by approval that's the reason it's called a you know conditional use it's
an application it's not a continual conditional use by right so are there you know are there ways to reduce that component for example so that what an applicant may request that
is above and beyond what is by right. Can that be reduced? So that's what I would propose that they come back and say look we feel comfortable doing this uh or we do not feel comfortable doing this and we're just going to buy out bow out of this process because we cannot deliver you the product that you're
asking for. That's my recommendation. Yeah. Yeah. I'm fine with that. Okay. Okay. Okay. So, we will reconvene this conversation for um the first commission meeting in May, May
13th. And I'm sure we'll have a couple more conversations between now and it. All right. Thank you. Happy happy to, you know, chatting at some point. Yeah, absolutely. Absolutely. And I I I hope I didn't uh you know, by my lack of eloquence, uh give you the impression I was giving
you two different answers. It's just that I'd like the attorney to address that issue about reducing density and intensity. So, you know, as a planner, I don't want to give I, you know, I can't give you legal advice and I don't want to give you misleading advice. So, and I definitely not intent to mislead you. Sure. And my position is I would prefer
for this process to move forward with both of us and the city together uh and for us to give the community exactly what they're asking for. The last thing I want is for us to end at the end end of the process. They're not happy with you. They're not happy with me. And we're short 150 grand. I understand. No,
I appreciate that. I would much rather we continue this process and I can give you a glowing endorsement the next time a mayor calls me and ask me how was your process with Calvin down there. So, no, I appreciate that. Sure. Thank you, sir. Thank you. I have a public comment on
this item. There's no need for it. Never mind. Okay. Next, we move on to consent items. Uh, Commissioner Robinson, you had a quick question or comment. Yeah, I just had a comment on um the adoption of reduced
building uh permit fees. Um, don't want you to think that I'm I'm I'm not for this because it was one of the one of the items um that I I I do support um after the fact. In fact, that was something I
brought up very very early on in this process. Um, but I just do want to say that giving a 50 50% or a 100% to folks that didn't pull permits has felt like
from the comments I've gotten from residents that felt like the ones that did play by the rules are getting penalized for the fact that they didn't get to be in their homes. They didn't. They played by the city's rules by others folks didn't. And now
those others that did not and were able to get in their homes. Um, you know, they're they're reaping basically right now the same benefits. I mean, they're not going they're not paying any any three times penalty fees.
They're not paying any any permit fees other than the small percentage we pay to the state. and now they're going to get a 50% reduction as well as the residents that um are late in the process and getting their permit fees in
and did wait and didn't do the work. I just want to make that clear. I am still for the reduction in that, but I did have to make that statement on behalf of some of the constituents that I have heard from. Just help me understand what
are they saying that people that didn't pull permits Yeah. are get are getting the same benefit. I mean, they the people that waited to pull permits, played by the city's rules, waited to this point or to the point um and um now
those people that didn't play by the rules, that didn't per p permits and, you know, redid their homes or sold their homes in some cases. Um you know, they they are now being offered no uh
penalty for u the the late the late after the fact permitting the three times which is normally a three times um and some of those that have already applied have gotten free and now they're still getting 50%. It's just it's an it's a
even ordinance across the board for everybody, but there's people that actually play by the rules and it it gives them no incentive to pull permits is what I've been told. I think the important thing to remember is that the folks who um are pulling permits after the fact are
um probably going to have some pretty significant pain with inspections and potentially having to undo and redo work. Um potentially. And so and and and I wouldn't say just potentially, I would say highly likely. Um and so I don't I
don't think anybody's getting away get getting away quote unquote getting away with anything. I think you know in a in a in a very they're getting away. I'm just saying that they feel like they are the ones being penalized. I think in a in a in a very uh high stress situation,
everybody made the decisions to do what they thought was best at the time with the information they had and um particular particularly in the case of a pretty traumatic event. Um I mean I I I get how some people can feel that way. I also don't think there's any reason to
punish people for decisions they made immediately post hurricane. So, so I get it, but but I I just wanted to remind people that the folks who are pulling after the fact permits are are going to have some significant hurdles with inspections.
So, I'll add two things to that is one. So, first of all, you are right. If you put drywall up, it's not going to be fun. Yeah. um fact that we have a come clean amnesty program. We've always kind of
operated that way that if you came to us, we generally have been very accommodating with residents. Um but really it's it's two things. One is we let people know please submit your
permits before today, right? Even if it's incomplete, even if you don't have all the information, just get it in. Right? So there was every opportunity even if you haven't decided and I work with a homeowner today they still don't know what they're doing but they've submitted their package and they may be
making a lot of revisions on it who knows right but it's in the second component is we stopped receiving FEMA reimbursements for this on April 11th.
Okay. So, for the last 10 days, we do not get reimbursed for any permit fees that we've waved, which means those funds are coming out of reserve funds. And for the next 45 days that we're waving until June 1st, those funds will
also come out of the reserve funds. So for all of those individuals who have not filed for their permits yet, even though we said just get it in so that we can submit it for FEMA for reimbursement, now all those permit fees that we're waving, they're coming out of reserve funds, which 100% of the
residents in St. Pete Beach contribute to. So now for those few individuals that haven't done as much as submitted a permit until now, the rest of the city, the rest of the residents will have to pay for their permit fee waiverss. So, Commissioner Robinson, for those
individuals that haven't done that yet, just let them know that whatever fees we're waving, whether it's $1,000 or $10,000, that's coming, that's being paid for by all of us, the residents. And again, I understand why some people, even after 6 months, don't know what they're doing. But they could have just
submitted something, anything, and we could have gotten reimbured by FEMA for it. But now, we don't even have that opportunity. So, every permit fee that we wave from here on out is being paid for by everybody in the community. Now, that's okay. That's why we have reserve funds. That's why we have them in emergency fund so that we can deal with
emergencies, right? But they're not they may act, anyone that's submitting a permit after today may actually be getting something that nobody else got, which is their permit fees paid by all their neighbors versus everybody else got their permit fees by FEMA reimbursement.
So, um, there's always more to it than just, you know, I I'm only getting half of my permit fee paid for. Yes, it's being paid for by all of us now. And that's okay. Again, that's what the reserve funds are there for. That's what emergency funds for. Um, but just for
context, they need to understand why there was a limit to how long we could extend this. We couldn't extend it indefinitely. We do not have an indefinite pot of money that we can pull out of reserves and emergency funds. There's a limit to that. So, I don't
know. Is there a motion to approve the consent agenda? I make a motion to approve the consent agenda. Second. City clerk. Vice Mayor Marriott. Yes. Commissioner Robinson. Yes. Commissioner
Moholland. Yes. Mayor Petrilla, yes. Motion carries. consent agenda unless it's pulled a specific item. There are no really no comments on the Have we ever had comments on consent
agenda? No. To read the general public comments where you make those? Yes, that item has been approved. Next we have action item 5A. Accept the Hurricane Helena Milt
emergency expenditures. Good evening, Mayor and Commission. Um Devin Schmidt, finance director. Can you all hear me? Okay. Yep. Yes. Okay. Fantastic. I'm going to share my screen for a presentation. Great. Fantastic. Um so
this item before you this evening is for the acceptance of the emergency expenditures related to um the hurricanes Helen and Milton. So um just a little bit of background um and these items are included in your packet um with
additional details that explains the contracts, the amounts and the expenditures to date. But the city manager is authorized to um authorize emergency contracts for and during um hurricanes. So for Helen uh the contract
total amount is 7.3 million with about 6.2 million spent. And for Milton, the contracts totaled 2.7 million with $761,000 spent. Um again the details, descriptions and the amount are included
in the packet. So the contracts are authorized in compliance with the charter in section 2-228 during a declared a state of emergency. Normal procurement procedures can be suspended. Um this allows for the
emergency of procurements of goods and services using the most efficient and effective methods to protect public health and safety. Um following the uh declaration, uh the city commission must be notified of procurements exceeding 25,000 after the fact. And so that is
what is included in um both of the reports for Helen and Milton. So, this item um just a little bit of a a timeline or um a flowchart for you, but the city manager um by way of this action item is reporting the contracts
related to the emergency of Helen and Milton um as required for purchases exceeding over 25,000. Um part of the um delay that occurred was due to staffing shortages within the finance department. So, there was some delayed reporting. Um but
following the conclusion of the emergency declaration, staff is asking the commission to accept the attached expenditures included in the packet for Helen and Milton. Just a highlevel um idea for the commission and the public to understand
about what types of contracts were included. So, debris collection, um AC repairs, road repaving, street sweeping, plan reviews, um st sand removal throughout the city, uh street patching, um pumps for the pump station,
electrical and emergency services, um contracted building officials and plants examiners, pump station support, uh replacement, waste receptacles, debris monitoring, um water cleanout of elevators, um a temporary fire station,
and um uh work done to pump station one. Um so just a little bit about the funding um for these contracts. So to date, the city has received $3.9 million
um related to Hurricane Helen relief um for category A expenses for debris removal. Um an emergency bridge loan will be discussed at an upcoming commission meeting. Um and I believe it has um been before the commission prior
and we are continuously working with our partners at Deote and expect reimbursement from FEMA on some of these expenditures. But I did want to note that the reimbursement could lag um 3 to 5 years on that um reimbursement.
So with that, um, I have a recommendation and can open it up to any questions from your commission. Commissioners, questions, comments for Devon. Okay. I would ask the city clerk if there are any audience comments, but are
there any audience comments? No. Okay. We can take a motion. Is there a motion? I move that we accept the Hurricane Helen and Milton emergency expenditures following city charter section 2-288 emergency procurements. I
second. City attorney, if you'll please do a roll call. Okay. Commissioner Marriott. Yes. Commissioner Robinson. Yes. Mayor Petrol. Yes. Commissioner Mahalan.
Yes. I'll now transri back into Jenny as the clerk. Thank you. Motion passes 40. Next we have ordinances. First reading of ordinance 2025-11. Mayor, would you like me to
read the ordinance? It it is an ordinance of the city of St. P Beach, Florida. Amending city code chapter 46 environment article 2 nuisances division 2 abatement procedure sections 4661 through
4666 and chapter 46 environment article 5 chronic nuisance property code division 1 chronic nuisance services section 46141 through 46152 to provide for due process special
magistrate hearings and procedures for the abatement of nuisances, providing for codification, conflicts, severability, correction of scriveners, errors, construction, publication, and an effective date. Thank you, city
attorney. Mr. Mayor, I can introduce this ordinance. Our code enforcement director is here, but we worked in tandem to prepare this ordinance. Um, what this does is modernize and update our nuisance abatement provisions. A
nuisance is, for example, a yard that's collected a whole bunch of junk and debris. Um, in normal code enforcement uh is insufficient to remove all that junk and debris, then a declaration of nuisance can be declared. the city can
actually remove uh the junk and n and return the property into its um non-nuisance condition and then seek a monetary judgment and put a lean on the property for the monies that we've expended. Um in order to do so, it's very important to have procedural due
process in that the current code puts all these responsibilities on the city manager. Um, this update would put responsibilities on code enforcement officers to identify the public nuisance, call for a special magistrate hearing, and the special magistrate
hearing would take evidence from both sides as to whether a nuisance exists or not. Um, the magistrate would then give time to come into compliance. If it's not brought into compliance, then the nuisance can be abated by the city. And we've also um made some provisions in
here for lot mowing and tree trimming that need to occur faster. Um if we have a dangerous tree, we can go in there and we can declare that a nuisance and uh re seek reimbursement for those fees as well as lawns that are not kept up. Um
so this is first reading of the ordinance. Um we asked for a motion to approve these updates and modernization of the nuisance abatement code and chronic nuisance code. so that we can begin to address some of the nuisances that are in the city and um survive
legal challenges. Thank you. Commissioners, questions, comments? Does that will that also apply to say pools that after the hurricane they haven't been um maintained let's say and
are we have a long list of of nuisances um there are actually 33 of them um and I think that a pool could fall into this category
depending on how bad the pool was, right? I've just had reports of of pools not being maintained, especially sometimes if the Sorry for interrupting. That's especially if the pools don't have fences or gates and they become what they call an attractive nuisance to
children that could fall in and even if they have no water in them, um some children will go in and skateboard in them or play in them. And that's also um attractive nuisance that can be abated. Okay. It's also they become a mosquito hatchery especially this upcoming time
of the year. True. That's that becomes a real problem. I I think I talked to somebody who said they were actually at somebody's house. They had fish. It's a habitat. Yeah. Thank you. It's okay in a koi pond but not in a swimming pool. Yeah. It's its own ecosystem
there. Um, I do have a quick question on the the there's a section in here about a nuisance and then a section about a chronic nuisance. And so is there is is it just direction from the city manager to staff
or is there um is is there still going to be a normal code enforcement procedure that gives people adequate time to solve the problem on their own? Or is there some part of this code that would allow us to allow the code enforcement to say that's a nuisance property and we're going to
go in there and abate it and we're going to charge you whatever it costs us without giving the the property owner a chance to sort it out on their own. Chronic nuisance is where there's a pattern of nuisance activity and because of due process have to give them 15 days
to come up with a plan to abate the nuisance. Um if they don't then we can go ahead and abate the nuisance. So, we first ask for a a written plan how they're going to get all the junk and garbage out of their yard. We give them 15 days to do that and implement
it. If it's not implemented, then we can go and and abate the nuisance ourselves. And then and then is that the same on like mowing a property or trimming trees or I mean what I'm I'm I'm looking at it maybe from a from a from a the flip side of the coin that you'd be looking at it on. I want to make sure we're giving
people ample opportunity to be notified and sort out their own problems before before we just start punishing them. So, we have then there lawnmowing shall not require a hearing before the special magistrate unless a hearing is requested by the property owner and charges for lots which are either vacant or improved
and the property owner shall be assessed in an amount equal to the cost to the city to have such lot mowing accomplished in addition to the administrative fee. and three, tree trimming and tree removal shall not require a hearing before the special magistrate unless a hearing is requested
by the property owner and the property owner shall be assessed in an amount equal to the cost to the city to have such tree trimming accomplished in addition to the administrative fees set forth in this code. So, we've viewed the lot mowing and the tree trimming as something that could happen more
frequently and that's not as big a deal. we're going to go in and we're going to cut your grass or we're going to go in and trim this dead branch off your tree. Um, we'll go ahead and do that and we'll give you notice if you want a hearing about it. Maybe you don't want that tree branch taken down. You have orchids
hanging on it or something. Then you can request that hearing before the special magistrate who will then hear all the and weigh all the evidence and make a decision as to whether it's a nuisance. And they'll still get the same the same amount of time as you would for a normal code enforcement violation where you get
30. They're all done by a case by case basis. Okay. All right. Even normal code violations are all done on a case- by case basis. Okay. Depending on the nature of the violation, how long it takes to remedy it, if you have to go get a permit, usually we give them a certain amount of
time to prepare the application and apply for the permit. um if it's something that they take action right away then should be less time. We also have remember the U code enforcement citation available to us under the new ordinance as well to correct behavioral
violations. So it won't sneak up on anybody. Nobody's all of a sudden going to get a get a bill from the city for trimming trees or mowing the grass without having known anything about it. That's the exact purpose of this ordinance, to give them procedural due process, notice, and an opportunity to be heard in front of a special
magistrate who's an independent um arbiter of the facts. And then uh for the for the chronic nuisance that goes before the special magistrate, if somebody wanted to appeal that, that's the same the same uh way that they would appeal any magistrate.
It's directly to circuit court. Okay. It's under notice of appeal. Okay. Thank you. Are there any audience comments? I do. John Kurszman. Thank you. John Kersman be on the way. Um you zoom in on
this. Um as someone who's gotten two violations with on the second one now. I think I was given three weeks notice in order to put a new roof and windows on my house. I don't have a lot of faith in relying on just code enforcement to
decide on a case-byase basis as to when or how long people should be given. I think that it's very important to have a pre process procedure that's documented. Um, I think that it's terrific uh to do
some of the things you're doing to stop to be able to make sure that the city manager doesn't have to get involved in all these situations. I think it's very important that when you have nuisance properties to continually ignore uh the need to get their property under control
that that's controlled. Uh but the idea that uh a lawn that is not mowed as frequently as as maybe a complaining neighbor or overzealous code enforcement officer believes. Um I think that's a
problem. Uh we don't live in an HOA and even an HOA will have very clear and concise how many inches each blade of grass has to be. Um, I actually, one of the reasons I've been very impressed with our magistrate is I remember a case about a year ago where a woman was here
and the situation was they were they were prosecuting her because they had sent her a notice about a tree branch or some trees on the back of her property and she said, "Well, you know, this is the city's property because there's a right of way of about three feet. You
know, you don't own all the way to the curb." And so she she didn't even feel comfortable cutting the trees because they weren't hers. And they said, "Well, you should do it anyway." Or then there was some confusion. And eventually, uh, I don't remember who did it. And the
magistrate actually said, "Well, show me in the code where the property owner is the one that's responsible for the right of way land." So, we're not even addressing that here. So we have to figure out to if we're going to address
in this code those two or three feet that almost none of us own between our property and the curb. So issue A is the right of way. What are we going to do about that? And issue B is I do think we need to write into this for the for
these two elements what the process will be. Did they get 15 days notice after they're served? give them a maybe, you know, give them some time or if it's a first occurrence, second occurrence, what is the prescribed height? I I don't want to just find out that, you know, my
lawnmower guy was a week late and and and I just got a bill or or I'm getting notices and now I have to come and appeal. I I just think that we just don't want to get out of hand. This is not an HOA environment. and and and I normally would trust it, but I've seen
enough cases already now where there's issues with the right of way and there's issues with with with code enforcement just issuing issuing things that that that uh you would think that maybe you could just write a nice letter and let someone know they need to do something
and it's not happening. So, I think we need to be careful. Thank you. Thank you. I know um a few weeks ago somebody mentioned and Commissioner Robbins, I'm not sure if you're if you know anything about this, but I know we had had a
um recommendation or suggestion or I think even somebody volunteered to put together a group of volunteers to help uh homeowners in these situations that may not even be here to know that there's something going on. Um
so that if somebody does receive a letter or a violation, we can call the volunteers and say, "Hey, we've got a lawn here, you know, maybe we can, you know, it'll be up to the volunteers." So if I was the volunteers, I might do it once or twice per house, but then at some point people are going to have some
point. Yeah. Yeah. Um, does was there any any movement on that or was there any any follow up on that or just No, I have I have not followed up on that. So, okay. Yeah. And we've been we
have not one staff transition into focus the volunteers currently on the permitting process. So, we have not but there was a different group of volunteers not not the permit crew. Okay. Right. Not the not the permit crew. Correct. Yeah. I think there were
some nonprofits and churches in Penllis that were helping citizens demunk their homes and clean up after the hurricane. I don't know if those groups are still out there. They probably are in some fashion. Okay. I think that's mostly related to hurricane cleanups, but
sometimes they can assist homeowners with cutting grass and things like that. Sure. Okay. I do have some concerns also um about the the noticing, you know, especially right now with so many people not here. Um you know, there's a number of properties in my neighborhood I know
that are that are owned by, you know, folks that don't live here full-time in a good year. Um and I know that there have been some some occasional code enforcement issues with with where notifications are sent. Um, and uh, uh,
I I don't know that I I think the city does a good job of of doing, you know, following the requirement of what is legal. I don't know that we always go the extra step of of trying to help people out in a way
that's reasonable. Um, and I know that there have been a number of cases where code enforcement notices of violation are sent to an address that where where the person who's actually in charge of the property never gets it. Um, and so particularly when we're talking about
going onto people's properties to mitigate things and then charging them for it. I I would like to see us try to find a way to be extra conscientious about notice. Um, you know, there's a a house in my neighborhood where the the the house was tied up in a in an estate
um from someone who is deceased and the notices were going to the lawyer's office who was handling the estate and we're we're never getting to the people who could actually do anything about it. Um, and and there's, you know, that that sounds like maybe a one-off, but I think that, you know, there's probably 25 of
those houses in my neighborhood, um, where where notice could very easily never get to the people who have the the capacity to do something about it. So the so the address where the property
appraiser has um to send property bills to is not sufficient. That's where you send it under the statute. Yeah. Not always. I mean it it they often times the you know particularly any property that's held in
a trust or an LLC the the the address on the property appraisers website will be whoever is the the registered agent of the LLC or the or the trustee which can oftentimes be a lawyer or a registered agent that's a lawyer in Tampa that's
the registered agent for 75 LLC's and and the the property is owned by a property owner and the tenant is a renter and you know by the time it trickles down to the person who can do something about it. The the date of the magistrate hearing is long gone and they
also so the property post the property uh as well but sometimes if there's an absentee owner they don't see the posting on the property. So the property owner appoints somebody that has fiduciary responsibility to manage the property
for them. usually a lawyer or somebody of that nature and somehow it's the city's responsibility to make sure that person's doing their job. I'm not sure. I I mean I I I'm just saying that that that you know under
under normal code enforcement procedures, I'm not that pressed about it. But when we're going to start talking about going onto people's private property and and doing work that we're then charging them for, um, I would just like to see us be as conscientious as we can.
I think people need to be accountable and the people they need to hire, the people they hire have to be accountable to them and that's kind of how things work. And it shouldn't be the city's responsibility to chase down the fourth person down the line of who's
responsible for mowing a lawn. um they have a they have a responsibility to have a fiduciary agent on record uh representing them for their property if they're not a full-time resident. And if that person that is the
fiduciary responsible person doesn't execute their duties, then that problem is between the homeowner and the fiduciary. It is not the city's responsibility to get in the middle of that. the city has a duty to enforce the ordinances
uh that we have in place and to to try to continue to go downstream on things um is counterproductive in my opinion. So I think it could be as easy as sending the notice to the property address and the address in the in the
tax assessors in the in the property tax. do that. And then we also post post the property. During the foreclosure crisis when there were many bank-owned properties, some cities uh hired thirdparty vendors who would manage a property uh registry where the bank that
owned it was listed as well as the property manager. Um they'd be required a property manager to be appointed if it was an absentee home. That's something we could look at separately from this or it's part of second reading. Yeah, I mean we you know we can see how it goes.
I I you know I think also with the the post hurricane a lot of houses are changing hands and you know a lot of people aren't home. A lot of people aren't home. Yeah. The city manager is this going to be a profit center for us? No. No. This is going to cost us money.
Okay. So we're not going to be charging so my lawn guys do it for 100 bucks. City is not going to charge people 250. It's the actual cost. It's the Oh, sorry. It is the actual cost. Okay. So again, the to both of your points is
one, we're not going to be heavy-handed. Second, people do need to take responsibility for it. You know, just like the pools, it creates problems for the neighbors that the neighbors wouldn't have to deal with, whether it's rodents, you know, other issues, whether it's mosquitoes in the pool that hasn't
been maintained. And so, you know, yes, you know, it we're in a unique situation. We want to be as accommodating as we can. I think posting on the property, sending out two different notices and then only charging them what we would have been charged ourselves, which is probably less than
what they could get it done for themselves. They're not paying anything extra that if they done what they're supposed to be doing, you know, that's what they would have had to pay for anyway. So, if I read this correctly anyway, it says um provided the event you determined to
take action set forth above, which would be the action to correct the problem. um said nu uh nuisance you may in writing notify the code enforcement officer and upon determination that nuisance has been abated the hearing shall be cancelled. So you have the initial seven
days, then you go into a hearing which is probably depending upon how backed up they are could be a month, could be two months, right? And so all that time period you have to correct what it is. Again, as long as it's going to the
correct address and you get it, um all is good. But um and the magistrate also additional time usually. Yeah, she they will if you have special circumstances. So, yep. Um, okay. Is there a motion? I move to approve the first reading of
ordinance 2025-11. I second. City clerk, if you please throw a roll call. Commissioner Moholland, yes. Vice Mayor Marriott, yes. Commissioner Robinson, yes. Mayor Petrilla, yes. Motion carries. Thank you. All right. Next, we have items for
discussion. Commissioner Robinson, you had an item. I just wanted to um discuss uh currently in our comp plan, we have it listed as one community meeting for a um a uh development projects for
development projects. That's a required minute of one community meeting. Um just don't feel that is necessarily enough um considering you don't get much info on the first one at all. And sometimes you're gobsmacked by it. You didn't know
anything was going on until you get the notice. You attend the meeting. You really don't have a set of questions because there's not a lot of info in front of you and that's the only requirement currently that they have is one meeting. I feel that there should be
additional meetings. Wanted to discuss this with everybody whether um what your thoughts were on it um to require more meetings than just one. I mean because by the second meeting you now have
questions and they have more plans. So you can actually put those two together and actually you know and by by a by a third meeting you actually have now have answers to your questions. you've seen a better set of plans, what it's going to
look like, and then you can really really get into real community involvement, which is what that's supposed to be to begin with. It's supposed to be community input. And the first one doesn't really feel like community input. It feels like
we're all a little surprised at what's going on. And here's some basic questions on some basic designs that you have. mayor if I might comment. Um, so if it's in the comp plan, we would amend the comp plan to add
additional meetings. Uh, or you could also put it in the land development code. Another thing that some cities are doing um to help citizens and communities is instead of just doing notice of the community meeting, they back it up a little further and they say
notice an application has been filed for this property and then they list what it's been filed for for a conditional use for a variance for you can determine what types of projects you would want notice things for more than a duplex or
more than three units. You could require posting a notice that an application is filed in your neighborhood so you know that there's something at city hall that you can go look at to see what's being proposed and you find out about earlier rather than just a few days, seven days before a
meeting. So you can be more uh expansive than this minimum that the state statutes require if you desire as long as this house bill 1535 doesn't pass. And if that happens, then it might be considered more burdensome to have more meetings. But it might not because if
you don't if you work it into the regular timetable and it's not extending the duration of the permit reviews or development reviews which are controlled by state statute and it may could be argued that it's not more burdensome.
Yeah. And actually do believe that's in the LDC anyway. It's the one meeting is in there. So it would be an ad to the LDC or amendment. So, one of the and you'll have to correct me if I'm wrong, but if I understand it correctly, the community meeting is actually
required before the site plan review. Not I wish Brandon was here because he would be able to tell us. I can look that up and provide you with a memo that talks about all the different notices that are required that might be helpful for you to decide what you want
to do. There's a 99% chance I'm I'm right on this. Okay. Um, historically, we've just by it's just just the way we've always done it is we've done them before TRC as part of uh the initial
application process. Um, I think what Commissioner Robinson's proposing is a is a good idea that we codify it, you know, or look at codifying it or, you know, we keep the one that's before site plan review, but then also add, you know, and it could be
as simple as, you know, to to stay within the statutory 180 days, correct? Um, you know, we could have something as simple as, you know, applications in first meeting's due within 30 days, second meeting within 60 days, TRC by 90
days, and for the vast majority of those things will will still, you know, help us stay compliance, then we'll still have the one more meeting, which as far as I remember, we've never actually had one closer to site plan because we've
not ever had a project go that far, probably I wonder if it would be more useful to have a second community meeting after the technical review committee where and that way if there's if there's changes that the that city staff is going to
require of the project that then that information is available at the second community meeting rather than two before then. So the purpose of the community meetings um as outlined in the comprehensive plan is
for the staff to use the comments and questions from residents at the community meeting for input at TRC. It's for TRC. Yeah. Um, so I I think you could do it, you
know, you could have, you know, one community meeting, collect feedback, bring that to the staff, whether they do a TRC or not. I mean, they're going to be having a conversation with the developer after the first meeting and say, "Hey, here's what here's here are the comments, questions, concerns that we have after the first round." and
developer gets a second stab at it, you know, 30, 45, 60 days later, whatever the process is, they come back and say, "Hey, here's what we heard you say last time. Here's some of the adjustments that we've made and in in talking with the staff and then a second round in the
second meeting would provide for additional feedback opportunities and then it goes to TRC. I'm just giving a general idea. I'm not saying this is the way it has to happen. I'm just saying this is this is how it could happen for example. But the
whole purpose when you look at the land development code and comprehensive plan the whole purpose behind the community meeting as it as it's explained is that we are to collect as John Mr. Kersman would would tell you uh is to collect those common cards and to provide those
common cards to the staff um so that the staff can use that in you know establishing conditions looking at you know the scope and challenges of the project considering how many hoops we make some homeowners jump through just to get a permit for their house and the
review process I don't think that you know asking a developer to to have two meetings and you know review process of their project that will have a lasting you know eternal impact on the
city. Uh I don't know I don't think it's a lot to ask. Yeah. But that's something that city attorney could look into and see if you get together with Brandon and bring something back to you in a memo.
Sure. Just just an idea of what could be done. Some alternatives. Okay. Yep. Okay. Interesting. All right. Uh, next we have staff reports. City clerk. I don't have
anything. Thank you, city manager. Thank you, city mayor and city commission. I just wanted to remind you all um that our new city clerk is beginning her first day on May 5th. So, we're tracking close to an
onboarding and um wanted to thank Jenny and continue to thank her um for all of her assistance and help to the team. It's been seamless. So, we really appreciate it. You are welcome. Uh second, I wanted to acknowledge that um
staff is aware that uh permitting and any sort of uh repair to residential and commercial has continued to be challenging. Um many of the challenges that we're facing now, we
went into the storms with which included lack of staff, lack of um uh just really bandwidth to train uh any sort of process improvement. There wasn't much time to invest in that uh
prior to the storm as well as technology had been a challenge. And so a few things um wanted to point out that despite the storms I think uh we are we have improved our turnaround on permit issuance. I think before the storm we
were tracking about 90 days to wait for a permit and we're averaging about two weeks on hurricane repair. is a little bit longer lead time on um the demo de demolitions and um raising of properties and of and and new construction of an
entire home. But those are areas that we are looking to improve as well. I say all this that on the on the um staffing side, you know, we have just onboarded um seven people with another one coming on. So trying to retain any sort of
training and knowledge we were able to capture during these last several months trying to hold on to it and give us the capacity to look at the process improvement on the human side. On the technology side, uh we have been working with our vendor I work, which if many of
the city now know that software program because they've had to use it. And we're looking at an upgrade and an interface with the community that we're hoping is going to improve uh digital intake process. So hopefully reducing the front desk traffic.
We're looking at an automated assignment of permits to the appropriate planners, inspectors, reviewers so that it'll increase status, tracking, accuracy, and visibility to the end user. We have heard from many that, you know, I try to contact the person, they don't contact
me, but now they'll see who it's actually assigned to and have the ability to communicate. We're looking at auto automated automated notifications to improve overall responsiveness and turnaround. So, we're not just a black
hole that you email city hall and you don't know if we ever got your email or your notes. So, looking at that improvement, this uh enhancement is also going to improve our document storage and retrieval, reducing paper handling, which is prone to errors, um if the more
paper you transfer and can't track, uh can cause challenges. And lastly, um adaptable to changing permitting requirements. So it allow city staff to modify systems as we figure out how things are moving through the work
process that the system will be able to be changed um quicker. So I just wanted to make that announcement. We are aware we're working on it and we finally have reached this point where um we are um actually actively implementing this enhanced technology that was planned for
months ago. So thank you. End of report. Just as a followup to that, um, when is the report from the recovery task force coming before the commission, please? Oh, thank you. So, we are preparing to track to you, I believe, May 13th, so
the next meeting. And then, um, I also forgot to report that you did not get a hurricane recovery report tonight. If you forgot or didn't notice, we're going to move to monthly now. And you're going to start to see a blend of recovery, but
also preparation for the upcoming hurricane season. And then um if all goes well through uh the end, we'll probably pace that um cadence through October towards the end of this hurricane season. And if all goes well,
then we will wrap up that report. Um, and you won't hear from us and till hopefully ever again on a hurricane recovery report. Thank you, city attorney. Uh, nothing this evening. Thank you. Thank you, sir.
District 4. Couple things, Mr. Mayor. Uh, I want to thank uh Mr. to Camden Mills uh for having a comprehensive meeting with the Pasagro Community Association yesterday. Um he took a lot of time. He answered a
lot of questions for the association and uh I think it was well received. So uh I want to thank him again. He's getting a lot of kudos tonight. Just don't get too bigheaded back there, Camden. Um and then uh there'll be a party under the
lights on May 3rd, uh 8th Avenue. Um, uh, pass a rail. And that's all I have. Mr. Thank you, sir. District two. Um, just, uh, wanted to say I've started my library hours again. Um, trying to go
for Tuesdays when the library, um, uh, with its new hours from 5:00 p.m. to 5:45. Uh, they want us out of there promptly at 6. So, um, but, uh, that'll be starting, uh, Tuesday, April 29th, and then it'll be May 6th and May 20th.
So, it's the odd weeks that we don't have commission meetings until we get to June, and then it gets all messed up, but I'll announce those when we get closer. All right, District One. Uh, nothing really to report, but I did want to, um, thank the city staff and the
city manager. I know everybody's been working really hard, and I've gotten a number of comments from residents lately. um who have said things like, "Wow, I've finally realized that like we're doing way better out here than a lot of the other towns around us." And you know, I was really mad for a while,
but but things seem really good now, and I feel like I'm really starting to notice a difference. So, um so I just wanted to pass on the gratitude and express mine as well. I think uh I think staff is doing a great job. Thank you. Um, tomorrow morning we're having
um a a breakfast for all of our city volunteers. Um, as many of you know, uh, we've had 30 plus individuals helping out with the pering department uh for the last uh almost 6 months. Um, you know, many of them are are residents.
should all of them are residents here, but um just donating their time and resources to help uh help their neighbors recover. And so tomorrow we're just doing a Thursday, right? Is that Thursday? Thursday. Thursday. Scared me. I know. You mean looking at my phone?
Just as a just as a thank you to all of them, as a small token of appreciation, just to say thank you. We're we're hosting a uh a a thank you breakfast for them. Um I hope to see most of you there. Um and then the only other
uh item I have uh this is one of the odd months of the year where the big C does not coincide with the PSTA. Uh so I serve on the uh PSTA board as well. Uh they are meeting tomorrow. Big C is next
Thursday. And I just want to see if Commissioner uh Mary had any objections. if I attend that meeting. Absolutely not. Okay. Um, great. So, with that, thank you everyone and we are adjourned.