--------- of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> All right. Who's up first? Mr. Poier, if you wouldn't mind closing
the door in the back. Ah, never mind. Good afternoon, Mayor. I'm Deon Smith, finance director for the city of St. Pete Beach. Phone isn't working. One second. >> See, is that better?
>> No. >> Any there? There we go. Okay. I guess it's just positioning. So, um, today we are here for our proposed, uh, preliminary budget workshop number four. Um, so to kick things off, um, we're going to talk about and take the
commission through, um, what we're calling sort of the story of Adalorum taxes. And so, where does where does that funding come from, who pays for it? Um, I think it's important to note that we'll be including this in every one of our budget cycles moving forward. Um, I think it's also important for us to note
that our current budget is balanced on our current military. And then we'll also spend some time this afternoon looking at any of the changes that we've incorporated since the last time we met, as well as the recommendation that we received on Friday from the finance budget review committee.
So to kick things off um we're going to as I mentioned kind of start with a global picture and then drill down into this detail of this presentation looking at our advalorum taxes. But to start we thought it might be nice to provide an example of how much property taxes stays
local within our St. Pete Beach community. So, if the taxable value of this home is $500,000, the commission can see here that 20% of that or 20 cents on every dollar uh stays within St. Pete Beach. Concurrently, on the other side of that,
80% of that goes to or $6,200 goes to schools, county, EMS, and other districts. Um at the last meeting, we did get a question from the finance budget review committee about what those other districts are. So, um, those are the planning Panelis County Planning
Council, the juvenile welfare board, and the Southwest Florida Water Management District. And when we're looking at those different areas, the largest piece of that 80% goes out to our schools at a
5.8 mil and then the county at 5.6 and then our EMS and our other districts uh, together is about 1.8 of that millillage. So, just wanted to clarify that um when we're looking at how the advalorum taxes um come into our city
and what that looks like. So, looking at this at kind of the highest level, if we zoomed out and looked at what makes up our advalorum taxes, so 30% are homestead or 4.7
million. 11 million of that is 70% are considered non-homestead. if we're looking at what the types of properties are utilized. So, in order for a property to be considered homestead, um it would have to be that you lived at that property on January 1st and that
you um if you were to claim that exemption, you could not have rented it for more than 30 days. So, that's by definition what we're looking at when we're looking at homestead. So if we were to take and look at this percentage of tax distribution for residents versus commercial um you can
see that 72% or 11.3 million is our residential. 3.7 million or 24% is our commercial and then we have an area that's considered this both residential and mix. So that could be something as simple as it's a vertical mixed use
where on the bottom you might have some residential units and on the top you have some family uh uh residents living in that area. So then when we're looking at our homesteaded properties um you can see here that when we're looking at our
population of St. Pete Beach the people who live here year round live in single family homes. That's the largest portion at 70%. Then in our condominiums, we have our 20%. And then you can see those other uh portions when we're looking at the duplex, triplex, planned unit
development, or single family, more than one unit parcel. Looking at our non-h homestead, um you can see here that there's 25% is family uh single family homes, condominiums is 26% and then we have hotel motel at 19%
and other. So in other there's over a dozen categories when you're looking at those different parcel types, but that could be anything from time shares to hotels and motel that are 49 units or less, apartments from 5 to nine units, vacant residential um that are all in
that nonhomestead. So when we're looking at this on a another kind of view and we're looking at just simply those assessed valuations um you can see that commercial. So in those different categories we have the property use type and then we have
whether or not it's homestead yes or no and then what that assessed uh value is for each one of those. So you can see the largest there is condo no and then we have residential no, residential, yes, and commercial um are kind of those top bigger buckets.
And then this is just another way to look at that by way of a a pie chart. So you can see those percentages of the numbers we just looked at. Um we know that the city commission um would like to see, you know, how do we compare to our other communities? So
these are all of the cities within our uh Penllis County. So you can see um from total millillage all the way down to the lowest. So we filtered this by largest total millillage down to the least amount there. And you can see
where St. Pete Beach um fits within the mix of each one of those different uh cities and taxing districts within Penllis County. So when we're looking at the options um from Penllis County about what we're able to do as a cities um they provide
the county provides a calculate a maximum millage levy for the city to consider every year. And so um you can see here um I think it was Colonel Greger mentioned that that roll back rate you know you go to Walmart and you see a roll back rate and you expect it
to be less. Well, the reason why ours is not lower is that this has really happened since the first time since 2008. And the reason for that has to do with that diminished value of our building structure for all the properties that were damaged by the hurricane. So, our roll back rate is actually higher than what our current
millage rate is today. So, I just want to take a moment to explain that. Okay. So, then we looked at um or wanted to provide the commission some property analysis. So if we're looking at what our current rate is versus our other rates and our average annual impact by
parcel type um first you can see those total numbers is looking at both. So homestead yes and no and then what those current millages that's listed in the yellow column there and what it would be if we looked at the roll back rate on an
annual basis. if we looked at the majority vote max on an annual basis and if we looked at our twothirds vote max on an annual basis and what the difference is between what's currently being paid versus what would be paid on an annual basis. So I think the biggest
piece to highlight here on this slide that if you're non-homestead you're going to pay more um in property taxes. That's just the um that's just what it looks like. But if we were to look at a residential homesteaded property, you can see here
that it would be um $16 for the current versus rolled back rate on an annual basis, $98 for the current versus majority, and then $287 for the current versus the max. So, another way to look at this as well is when you're looking at all of the
property data that exists within St. Pete Beach. We looked at each one of these different categories. What would be the lowest that somebody would pay versus what would be the highest that somebody would pay based on what their homestead status is? But then also um what their property type is. So is it
commercial, is it condo, is it residential, non-homestead, and is a residential homestead. So you can see um different variations between literally the lowest amount and the highest amount that could happen. So then when we're looking at how does
that how does the millillage articulate and calculate into a revenue for the city of St. Pete Beach. So when we're looking at these different areas that you can see the total delta between the current rate and the rolled back rate
would accumulate approximately $140,000 more for the city of St. Pete Beach. If you look at the majority vote max rate between what our current rate is, it would equate to about 860,000 annually for the city of St. Pete Beach.
And then if you look at the 2/3 vote max millage rate, that would equate to about 2.5 million on an annual basis in revenues for the city of St. Pete Beach. >> Deon, I'm sorry if you go back one slide. >> Sure.
So, I appreciate this is your first year doing our budget. Um, and I hate to compare one person versus how the last person did it. Um, and what I notice here is that you have what it's currently at. What it looks like if we
increase it a little bit, a medium bit and a large bit. What is missing from this slide is going the other direction, right? What happens if we lower the rate? because that is also an option that the commission has. >> Sure. And so when we looked at that
rolled back rate, um that is the information that we received back from Penllis County that was saying because of where we're at today as a municipality and because of the loss that we had. That would be that roll back rate. So staying with our current rate is
actually the the cheapest. I mean, we could certainly look and see if we could reduce that further. Um, but that's uh kind of the interesting piece about that rolled back rate for this year. >> Okay. Thanks.
>> Absolutely. So then um as we've been continuing to try to look at the long-term forecasts in our financial picture, we wanted to provide the commission and the community what 10 years could look like if we were to put 50% into a resiliency fund and if
we were to put 50% into CIP looking at the majority vote max as well as the twothirds vote max millillage. So those were two areas um that you can see after 10 years we'd have 8.5 million um between those two funds at the uh
majority vote max and we would have um 25.2 million at the 2/3 vote max millillage. So then we were working with our public services director, Camden Mills, to determine what additional projects could we accomplish if we had an additional $
8.5 million in revenues. So you can see here that we have uh three projects under that majority vote max. So storm system cleaning and inspection, shoreline protection improvements, and the Don Cesar boat ramp project.
And then what would it look like if it was 2/3 vote max millillage or that 25.2 2 million over the next 10 years. Um so that includes three additional projects as the Donses Basin 3 resiliency adaptation, the Bella Vista Basin one
resiliency adaptation and the Bella Vista Basin 2 resiliency adaptation for a total of 24.5. So with the discussion uh with the finance budget review committee um we wanted to show the recommendation that
they looked at a rolled back rate of 3.1189 which would generate 70,000 into the resiliency fund and 70,000 into the CIP. Um again I think it's important to note that staff has presented a balance budget with the operations. Um, so what
we're looking for is that we have a deadline of July 29th to receive um what this commission would like for us to provide as our uh millage for the fiscal year. So with that, I can pause or I can continue through the changes of the
budget. Um it's certainly up to the body of how you'd like me to proceed. >> Well, let's have a pause here and have a conversation about our options. >> Okay. before we look at how we spend the money, before we decide how much money we have. >> Okay.
>> So, um just help us help me understand this one more time >> because maybe I'm missing something. our current millage rate.
The three options that we have above the current all seem like increases to me. Okay. So, our options are stay where we are at 3.09. Correct. >> Correct. >> Raise it a little bit
>> to 3.11. Raise it to 3.25. or raise it to 3.58. >> Correct. >> Okay. >> So, mayor, let me just clarify. I just conferred with the city attorney. So,
according to Florida statute, you can reduce your taxes any amount. What it does is it creates a new baseline >> for any future um roll back or majority vote max, 2/3 max. So you create a new ceiling that you could raise taxes if
you roll back lower than the roll well I mean I guess lower than the current mill this this year. >> It is it is an anomaly that's happening on the roll back that we would normally get reported from the county. The county does not do calculations for us that
show additional reductions. But we could do the math if that's the pleasure of the commission and we would need to come back to you with a new operating budget proposal because the operating budget that we have in front of you is assuming option A right now.
>> Okay. So the the current budget as it's drafted is a balanced budget under option A which is to maintain the millage rate where it is at today. >> Correct. >> Okay. Thank you. questions, comments, >> commissioner Nikki.
>> Um, just a couple a couple of questions besides the millillage. What else are we are we looking at as a city, whether bonds, special assessments for projects, you know, because I know that the assessments would have to be specific or bonds. H is this being entertained and
has it been proposed anywhere? um on how we can complete some of the CIP projects or anything specific to a district let's say on to complete I know we've kind of talked about it for the Donsesar in our resiliency meetings but you know I don't know if any of you have
thought about that like that would be another way um of improving our budget. So, we've had very preliminary discussions and calculations on an assessment specific to the Donsesar
neighborhood that we are introducing those conversations with that neighborhood. You're >> you've been um at those meetings. It's in it's it's in its infancy stages. It would involve an assessment of only those property owners um around the
specific resiliency projects that are impacting that neighborhood. Um those projects are also included in the citywide resiliency plan. So we're looking at sort of peeling that onion back and if there's any appetite for neighborhoods to take on those
resiliency projects on their own. We also are doing rate studies right now on storm water and wastewater which are supposed to be self-sufficient enterprise funds that are being um
funded or I'll say subsidized by the adorum general fund tax at the moment. Those would generate revenue but again those are fee based and so the users are residents and commercial users so it
doesn't result in a reduction in costs let me say to the end user. Uh that's sort of where we're at as as well as looking for grants and trying to leverage as much money as we can to see where we can put ourselves in a matching situation, especially in the hazard
mitigation space. And um there are larger concept ideas that would take a lot of vetting, but there are some cities that have created special assessment districts around um shoreline
preservation. So, you take seaw wall uh protection as a city, >> not as sort of individual property owners. Those are multi-year projects because they involve easement um challenges and agreement by
essentially everyone who lives with a seaw wall as well as um the city seaw wall. So, >> we're having those conversations, but some of those are just multi-year, >> right? um strategies that that take you know quite a bit of time to put in place
>> right and I mean I I mention it because I mean you look at the projections that you have you know just saying one of them I think it was 12 million for resiliency and I think it was another let's just say another 12 for CIP in 10 years right is that what the slide was so and we see some of the cost of part
one project which in a lot of cases is 12 million right so you raising it um a little bit even a lot right even if we did max wouldn't wouldn't cover a lot of projects you know the if you look at your projections
right and I think it was the twoth3 max right that you had it with the 12 um no it wasn't that that one so 25 million basically for the twothirds mo you know max and so in 10
years we would accumulate that money Um, and I don't know if you have a number of total CIPs out there that that we're trying to accomplish. Um, but it would basically mean nothing can get done. >> I mean, we we're I we've shown you this um a few months back. I mean, we're in
the hundreds of millions of dollars in need, >> right? >> However, there's no silver bullet here. >> So, we're looking at um this is one avenue. There's grants, there's um
impact fees, there are uh and when you have matching dollars, you leverage grant money much more effectively than when you don't have matching dollars. So this >> we're not going to solve our way out of this with Avalor. We're not going to
solve our way out of this with grants, >> but we can solve our way out of it by taking it >> I I'll say smaller chunks and you just keep working at it and it is going to you know it it's essentially a multi-deade >> right >> solution that you're just working your way through it
>> right >> and >> do we know much as you can >> definitely do we know what the highest millage rate for the city was ever like historically does anybody know >> I do not I don't but I could find out >> because I I think it'd be interesting to
know that if we had been reducing it when there's so many costs, you know, so many things that we haven't been upkeeping that we've noticed more so now because of the hurricanes um you know, storm water, sewer, um reclaimed water, a lot of things that are kind of falling apart. Um and we
kind of tooted our horn horn saying, "Okay, we reduced the millage rate. Oh, well that's great, but now we don't have any money, you know, to to continue repairing." So, um, you know, I wonder, you know, because that you saw the history of all the other municipalities,
um, and I think one was 3.5 or sorry, not one. Some of them are way higher. Um, I don't know if it was, uh, Treasure Island, I think, was closest in size, but yet smaller than us.
um you know, we're we're not budgeting what we truly need for this city to run is is kind of like what I see, you know, that we we're barely making it through. Um so anyways,
oh, and one other thing for the in the one of the assessed values, you had a a one of um showing different assessed values like how much it would cost. You might I wish I can move it. I can. Yeah, that that one right there on the average taxable value.
Um because it's hard to see the comparison. I don't know if I'm seeing this correctly or not because we're let's say look at the residential. You have the ones that are the no 938 548 and then the yes 581 365. And when you're as you're saying the
presentation, you could you mentioned how definitely the we know that the the non-h homestead it would be more um but they're not the same value. So we're not it's like we're we're looking at that number 464 and 287 and it's a big
difference in that um average taxable value. But when you look at the current and the max like the difference in what someone's going to pay on a year-to-year basis, it's not that much different. if if you see it that way because we're not comparing the same average taxable value, you know, like they're not both
581 to know that the true difference between a homestead and nonhomestead property at that same value. It would just be the same then, right? Because it's the same number, I'm assuming. >> So, I guess my to my point is that it's just that the non-exempt is going to pay
more regardless. Is that what we're trying to say? >> Correct. >> Yes. that if you're non-exempt, if sorry, if you're nonhomesteaded or homesteaded and your home was both 581, then you're multiplying it with the same millillage, right? So, it should be the same 287.
Am I right on that or not? Because it in my mind that's what I'm thinking. >> Well, because when you're once a property becomes homestead, then there's an exemption to it. So, the total assessed value comes down. >> So, that's the difference there of the two. looking at a homestead versus
non-homestead, um you're going to have a higher rate because that exemption hasn't been applied to the taxable value of the property. >> Okay. >> And then I believe you get your 3% cap, too. Correct. >> Right. >> Correct. So, would it be >> So, then every year it stays down. So,
>> but it's not too far apart, >> would it be? Because I mean that one's 938 and that's 581 and you're talking 464 and 287. That's not a huge difference there for two different average taxable values.
Anyways, just I could when I looked at that slide, it's hard for me to if you're looking at whether you're, you know, um homesteaded or not, it's hard to see. >> Sure. And I the reason why those average taxable values is that is taking that total um taxable value, dividing it by
how many numbers of parcels just to come up with that average taxable value. So that's where the difference is. But I could see how it could be easier to look at it on an apples to apples comparison of the same dollar amount, >> right? I mean, if you just look at the roll back 25 versus 16, it's not
not a big difference. >> Commissioner Maldonado, >> thank you. So, if we kept the current uh millage, going back to the slide where it said what we could accomplish, how is that going to impact us? Is that adversely or is that just keeping with what we already have projected in the
CIP? That would be the budget that's been presented to you. Yes, correct. >> Thank you. >> So, we do need to make a decision on this, which means we'd have to hear from all of you today because our deadline is the 29th if we
want to make any changes. If we don't make any changes, I'm going to have to assume that your silence means we're keeping everything the same. So, uh, one way or the other, um, we need to hear from every commissioner at this point today. Well, I'd like to feel confident that in
regards to our budget that we have really got that pretty tight that we don't have any excess in that. Um because that would be my concern too. I mean, if we're going to be looking at doing it, you know, potentially doing an
increase, what cuts are we doing internally as well? Um it kind of goes both ways. I mean, I'm I'm concerned about that. I I want to feel confident that we have done our best at keeping
the priority projects priority and also back to which projects might be or which divisions or departments are supersede other departments in their needs. Um, I'm concerned about that. But
um as far as we have a big undertaking where we're not in the same financials we were you know a year ago obviously and we're not in the same financial situation we thought we were two years ago.
So we have some um big items to accomplish and take care of especially in the capital improvement with infrastructure and there's big concerns there and I think every penny that we can save internally as well
helps the overall picture. Now this is just for capital and resiliency right whatever goes over >> so the way we've presented it because I do believe if there were ever to be an avalorum increase that this commission I would recommend create some guard rails
and to the extent we can keep operations as flat as possible going forward or um tracking inflation because I think I heard from this commission when I was hired that you know the organization needed to be rebuilt. um there was a
desire to pay at market rate and you spent a lot of effort investing in that and I think we've arrived at a baseline that we can work from and and generally still skinny but whole and every day
working on efficiencies to find ways to use technology and innovation to to uh keep us at personnel levels that we are at. With that being said, the guard rails we're proposing here are that you have a comp plan that provides a policy
that 50% of any millage rate increase goes into the resiliency fund. That fund balance is currently zero. We have created that fund in our new financial system. And so the goal would be to that's the first guard rail. The second
guard rail we're building in the new system is that every project will have a capital program number. And once that money is allocated, if you choose to put it in CIP, so you could choose to put all of it in resiliency. It's just your minimum by policy right now in the comp plan is 50%. But we're creating project
numbers so that you don't lose sight of when you do start to fund a project, even if it doesn't get started, that that fund balance stays the same until the project's able to be funded or able to be started. And then the funds are drawn down by that project number. And
if that money were be moved into a different project or into different operations, that would take an action by the commission. So that's the that's what I'm trying to set up internally so that even I would not have the authority to say, "Oh, move 50,000 out of that
project over here to finish it. I would have to come back to you and tell you, right, >> this project's over budget. I need money. We're going to have to cut this project now to do it." so that there's more transparency so you all know exactly where your money is sitting and when you can expect those projects to be
fully funded. Another question on on the millillage just so that not only myself but for people listening we are only talking about the millillage of the city right. So if Penllis County
or the school board or any of those other entities could be talking right now just like we are to raise millillage then you know because people will think oh it's only $19 but it could possibly be more depending on what everybody else
does correct and and do we have a feel for that? Does anybody know what's going on? like because I'm sure I mean countywise they they were hit too. I mean I'm sure they had infrastructure issues and um projects CIPs and god knows what other
things on the list that will impact every homeowner as well. >> I'm not aware of the schools. I my last meeting um regional meeting I was I was under the impression the county was not raising their millillage but they got hit $9 million last week. So we don't
know, right? I mean it could happen. >> It could there's still time. $9 million just for Penllis County is what I'm saying. Not statewide. >> Sorry, I was gonna say something. >> Commissioner Robinson, had you finished your thoughts? >> Yes. Okay.
>> Um, so I I I feel two ways about this, right? So on the one hand um you know as much as the city's expenses have increased because of the hurricanes so have so many of the residents. Um you know there's I know that we've all heard
a lot of stories about people who can't retire had to come out of retirement are pushing retirement off another 10 years because of the financial position they've personally been put in because of the hurricane. And so, um, it it seems punitive or or or kind of like the
what what I would call call the the typical bad rap that government gets that, you know, I don't care what your situation is. We we want to do more stuff, so we want more of your money, right? And I and I think we need to be very cognizant of that. And um
you know I I think it is it is our job to keep things reigned in and as efficient as possible and as streamlined as possible and you know really manage costs like Commissioner Robinson said. You know I think we need to be very
aware of what's being spent in what departments how is it being spent. Are we spending money on things that we really need? Um I also see the argument that you know it's not that much money per person. We have a lot of projects. We have a lot of infrastructure needs.
And so um for me personally between our options that we are faced with today, I'm in favor of either our current millillage or the rolled back rate. I'm not in favor of going above the rolled back rate. Um, I think that,
you know, historically over the last five to 15 years of of the city of St. Pete Beach, um, there's been, you know, not the same level of transparency with the budget that we have right now and not the same amount
of, um, assurance that things will get spent the way they're supposed to get spent. Uh, but I think we'd all like to see that performance happen over the course of a year before we give away a bunch of all of our neighbors money to promises that we have not yet seen
delivered. I'm completely confident that they will be delivered, but I think we'd all like to see it before we uh before we all throw a bunch of more money into the kitty. So, um so I I would be in favor of either the current mill or the roll back rate.
>> Thank you, Commissioner Deon. I have a question. So on your slide going one or two back here. One more. One more. Okay. So looking at that, let's say that
very last option, the 2/3. Um so that's 2.5 million above our current amount to the city budget. >> Correct. >> What is the total? So does does that rep is that 20% of the whole?
So if the city gets 20% of the adalarm taxes, property taxes. So does that mean that the actual contribution is 12.5 million with the county getting 10 million or is it that's just the total? >> That's just the total millage for the
city. And do you have any data on what the homestead versus nonhomestead numbers look like before the previous year? >> I don't. I could certainly get that information. >> Okay. I have a hunch based on data
um that the seven or 800 homes that have been sold in the last year after the hurricane were sold to people that did not homestead or haven't homesteaded yet, which might skew those numbers because we have roughly 7,500 registered
voters in the city. And if only 3,000 homes out of the 8,000 9,000 homes were actually homesteaded that those numbers wouldn't add up. And so there's a very good chance that those number looked significantly different a year ago versus today.
And so I just want to make sure that we're looking at, you know, apples to apples because if there was something like a hurricane that caused 8 n00 homes to be sold, um that all had a homestead reset or a property tax reset,
uh which is what we've seen in about 75 80% of cases, uh that the actual tax basis was significantly reset, some of them as high as two and 300%. So, I think, you know, and I received I think we all received an email from one of our
residents uh earlier today about all the amazing things we could do if we increase taxes. Um, and I think that there's more than one way to skin a cat, right? So, we've talked about raising
taxes. We talked about keeping taxes the same. Are those great projects? Should we look at those projects? Are they urgent projects? Yes, on all accounts. But I think there's more than one way to go about this when and that's not to, you know, kick our residents while
they're down after already been hit by two hurricanes a by increasing taxes, but rather we could also look at, you know, are there opportunities for us to save one, two, 2.5 million somewhere? or are there other avenues for revenues to
increase revenues where it doesn't actually impact our residents? So, just off the top of my head, for example, I know we're doing a parking study, right? What is our annual parking revenue currently? >> It's approximately 6 million.
>> Okay, $6 million at roughly $5 an hour for parking. If we increase parking to $6 per hour, that would give us $1.5 more million. And that is without raising the taxes on any of our residents. And we could do the same thing with those funds, which is to put
750,000 of that into those emergency projects, those worthwhile projects, and then the other 50% into a reserve fund. And now we've essentially shifted the burden of the cost onto those who actually create some
of the infrastructure issues that we have rather than punishing our residents with a tax increase. Now again, I realize we don't have those numbers back yet from the from the parking study. I'm sure they're coming, but I'm saying that there's more than one way to get that million million and
a half$2 million, you know, without increasing taxes. So for me, I would prefer, well, my vote would be to keep it where we are at today and look at are there any opportunities for
us to reduce some of the expenses and are there opportunities to generate additional revenue that doesn't impact the residents. Now, we clearly also have to do the fee studies and make sure that we're at
least breaking even on, you know, storm water and, you know, reclaimed water, sewer, and all the other ones because that's where some of our deficiencies have come from in the past. Um, but I think there's an opportunity there to to generate those much needed funds without
literally taxing the residents. And that might come about in the fee study itself that we have to increase the storm water or the wastewater. So those will come about naturally, but then that'll offset by the fact that if we're not pulling out of our general
fund to cover it, it will help that too. So I would be in agreement on that. I'm totally about let's see what we can cut and really look at this budget because I just I don't want to throw out the dreaded um wage and hiring freeze or some of the
other things that private enterprises do. But um we are in a critical situation here and so are our residents and so are our businesses. So, we have to be mindful of that in every aspect. And I would challenge the city manager
to find ways that where we can save stuff and really put a sharp pencil and basically, hate to say it, but do more with less if we have to to be able to save some money to get some of these uh projects that we need to get done done.
and as well creatively if we can find ways to you know um increase fees. I was proponent on the $6 an hour a long time ago for parking um that impact fees and whatever else we can do. I really think
we need to look hard at that and we'll be doing this millage test again next year, won't we? So we can get through one year and do this millage test again and see how well we did. So, I I agree with the comments of uh
both the mayor and the commissioner. I just want to clarify one point to make sure that we're not hindering ourselves or somehow limiting our abilities. I believe one of you ladies said that there is a cap if we go back or reduce it.
Can you just reab elaborate a little bit more on that please? Thank you. So, um, what the city manager was saying is that if we went back in a in the millillage rate, then it resets what our
total max could be. So, if you're looking at that 2/3 max vote, for example, that's taking it up to 110%. Um, so that would reset or bring that number down or back um to that pe to that place essentially is what it would
do. But to Commissioner Robinson's point, if we were to keep option A, current millillage, how is that going to affect us moving forward next year if we have to come back and make a significant adjustment to recoup what we expect to
get but may not get? So what it would likely potentially look like um depending on how the assessed value looks for next year um it would likely look like similar numbers to what we're seeing today based off of that
this is our current rate and that rate not changing essentially. So what happens? Oh, you want to >> Well, I think there's two components to it, which is the the first one is whatever your current base millage rate is, right? So, let's easy number. Let's
say it's it's three, right? We can keep it at three. We can raise it a small percentage with a simple majority vote. A 32 would pass it. And we could raise a lot with a supermajority vote of 41 or greater. >> Okay? If we went to 2.5, for example, we
decided we've got massive surplus. We'll go down to 2.5 next year, we won't we're limited to a 10% increase or a 25%. What's I forget what the numbers are. But it's but it's again, you you wouldn't be able to go back to three. You'd be able to go to
from 2.5 to 2.7 and maybe 2.9. If you go to 2.9 in the following year, you'd be back close to where the three was. >> Thank you. Yeah. I mean, my concern obviously is to make sure that we're not somehow hurting ourselves in this. >> We would have essentially the same
options next year as this year if we keep it at the same rate because the percentages would be the same unless the state of Florida passes a law that changes that. >> Let's hope. >> Thank you. >> So with with that, just so that we can
move forward to the next step, >> there is one more thing. You could go in excess of 110% if you have a unanimous vote. >> Yeah. >> So, just so we can move on to next, do we have consensus on whether we want to keep it, whether we want to go with the
roll back rate or a different number. >> This is just a budget workshop at this point. >> Yeah, we're not no public comments. >> I'm just saying just so we can have consensus and move forward. I know there's there'll be a vote. We need to know how to move forward. So there's no vote, but
>> the has to match the budget and you have to >> Exactly. >> So in order for them to prepare their budget, they need to know what number you guys want to work with. >> For me, the current the current makes sense as long as we're doing something else. You know, it's why I brought up
about the bonds or special assessments, other ways to get these projects done because like that's why I said even if you went all the way to twothirds, it's not enough, right? So, because it's a 10-year, >> you know, window only good enough, I
think from what the city manager was saying is you have money you can use to leverage like matching grants, right? like I hate to call it it's our fluff, but it's the something that we have that we can use when writing. Um but also we've
been waiting for and I agree with the fee study because it's not just parking. I know we're looking at leases um cost of buildings and what you know we're using or you know shelters all the other stuff that's going on um in the city um
that we haven't charged or looked at again. So, um, which I think we would get the money quicker if if you could say it that way, it would be faster. >> Mhm. >> Yeah, I'm absolutely in favor of current millage. So,
>> okay. So, it seems like we have unanimous. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Let me get caught up to where we were. Okay. So um these next slides are just going to be discussion about a summary
of changes since the last workshop and since the last time we met. Um so starting off um our summary of changes as we are looking at our um operating revenue and capital. So first off we have our EMS Panelis County contribution
updated. Um so that reflects the most accurate number that we expect to receive from Penllis County um for our EMS services. So that went from 2.9 million um up to 3.7 million um this year. And then we have an additional
700,000 to replace rescue vehicles 22 and 23. Um previously in your budget, you saw that miscellaneous revenue was inclusive of our parking transfer over of about 3.2 million. And so that has been broken out to a separate line item
that says transfer for parking or transfer from parking, excuse me, into the general fund. And then um based on our last meeting when we're looking at what that discounted um or the amount of residents and businesses that take advantage of the discounted property tax
applying that 4% um so that was updated as well as part of the the budget figure on uh multimmodal revenue. Um this is updated to reflect that 5 to 10year scenario and that's uh subject to change with the discussions we're having with the county currently. So, um, hopefully
we'll have that, uh, in a in a better place when we bring the budget back to you in, uh, August. And then, um, we have an updated description around our security and safety project. Uh, and then we also have an additional $3 million of revenue for fire station 22. So, you'll see that paired expense with
that additional 3 million as well. And then for our Penllis County Sheriff's Office contract, um we're looking at adding in clarifications of what the responsibility of those officers are doing and looking at reducing that from 3 to two and then reducing that offduty
max from 250,000 to 100,000 for that contract. >> Just quick question on the off duty. That is a discretionary fund, correct? Okay. So even if we kept it at 250, it
would not be used unless it's used. >> That's correct. And actually there's a typo. We're saying 250 to 150. So we looked at the last two years and we've been tracking between 90 and 150. So we just thought we would recommend our
actual utilization to free up funds for other things. But we it is discretionary. So it it would just sit there if we didn't use it. >> Okay. But it takes up space in a different column somewhere else. >> Correct. >> Yep. And so your actual proposal is from
250 to 150, not two. >> Correct. >> 100. Okay. >> Sorry about that. Sorry. >> Do we make any money off of any of the fines? Did we find that out? We don't. We make zero. >> We do in parking enforcement, though.
>> No. No. But anything the sheriff collects, eating >> Yeah. Yeah. citations that are crim criminal in nature. They collect they collect and keep >> or what about citations on the beach? Would we get those or would those go to the county?
>> Those would go to the county. >> If there were citations if there were >> there were if there were there was the one so far this year. Yeah. >> Okay. So this is looking at our summary of changes as it relates to personnel. Um so the first item there is a phase two
reorg organization of our leadership team with no net budget impact. Uh just new classification. So that um is looking at our city library director to city librarian, recreation director to resident services director, and IT director to IT innovation and strategy.
Um, also based off of the last storm season, uh, there's a need to have an emergency preparedness specialist. So, this is looking at having, um, an upgrade of an admin position to recognize the need of our centralized coordination for emergency preparedness
and also with the new Senate Bill 180. And then in our benefits, um, I had talked about this at a prior workshop, but, um, you'll see that we're looking at doing a per employee per month. um and that is created to better mitigate our budgetary plans um as we're looking at our budget. So instead of budgeting
off whether or not an employee selects a single plan versus a family, it's a one rate um just based on the fact that uh we have a headcount there. Um so with that we were looking at our our employee plus change um to implement in the
budget without an increase to the budget um looking at that cost share and that is pursuant to the personnel rules and regulations um allowance of subsidies for employee plus plans. um our employees did have a flat benefit renewal, so they're taking care of
themselves and so we thought this was a good opportunity to create a test pilot of this uh per employee per month and try it for this budget cycle. This also of course acts as a good employee retention and recruitment tool as we're looking at um those areas of bringing
skilled talent into our city to work for those residents. Um we're still tracking the CPI and the regional market conditions. Um so this is still sitting with the 2.6 cost of living adjustment for employees. Um we're waiting for June to come out just to see if that's going
to continue. And then the finance budget review committee had made a recommendation for an increase in compensation for elected officials and so um that has been earmarked in this budget as well. So when we're looking at um this is our
very summary level of revenues by fund. Um I'll take you through a little bit deeper dive of what those looks looks like. Um this is based on a request of one of our finance budget review committee members of what is our top 10 non-general fund uh revenue. So you can
see um grants and that is really looking at what we expect to receive back from FEMA and then some of our other grant options that we're receiving our wastewater charges for services um those transfers from the general fund and then our parking facilities um that's looking
at just the ones that we have not inclusive of any of our 50% county share cost. So we that's another uh line item in the budget and then you can see there we have that p penny for penllis that we receive for capital projects our building permit fees our reclaim service
charges as well. So just wanted to provide a picture of what our uh non um general fund revenues look like. Moving on to looking at our expenditures of uh summary by fund. Um so you can see the general fund has the highest at
almost 40%. Um that does include any of those transfers out to uh the enterprise funds or any of our capital funds as well. Um capital fund is the next closest at 25.65 and then our wastewater fund at 19.6.
Looking at this slide, um you can see that we added in um what our total fund balance is. So this is looking at all of our governmental funds. Um, so you can see there that at the end we're projecting about a $14 million general
or governmental fund ending fund balance for all those funds combined in our proprietary. Um, you can see that we have in totality 1.187. Um, some of these reserves are a bit low
for for a comfort level um for running a city. Um our financial adviser is actually behind me and uh he's here for our next meeting but we will be working on bringing back reserve policies for the commission to um look at and consider. So moving on to our governmental funds
um you can see here any changes that we have in totality looking at the general fund in total. So again um it was recommended that we have about two to three months of operating expenditures on our fund which would look at about 6.4. We know that the last uh two storms
equated and cost um more than that. So that's the question that we'll be working with our financial uh budget review committee as well as our financial adviser to determine what is a comfortable should we plan for the worst case scenario or should we plan for something in between that or above that.
So just some considerations but right now we're projecting about an $ 8.7 million fund balance at the end of 2026. This is looking at um really where those revenues come from. So uh almost 50% is coming from our taxes. Uh 16.7 is our
next largest bucket um for miscellaneous revenue. And then we have our charges for services intergovernmental. And so that's just looking at at um where we receive those. So I'd mentioned earlier um about what has changed in here. So that's our our advalorum tax that is our
um EMS county contribution that we expect to receive on capital as well as uh operating for those areas. And so um you can see that that total revenue we expect to receive is about $37.5 million
in our general fund. Looking at our expenditures, so what makes up the overall general fund? Um personnel is about 27% operating expenditures is 29 and then that other uses at 27.93
um is inclusive of those transfers out uh for our uh enterprise or proprietary funds and any capital projects. This is looking at the general fund and um what we are what what our biggest uh services that exist within the general
fund. So our public safety makes up the largest portion of that um aside from non-EP departmental which is where all those transfers out are occurring and then followed by public services. So again, I had mentioned um that there
is funding earmarked um for uh elected official uh salaries, community development. Um I have this slide listed on here as we had a building clerk um that was listed as part of our community development and
planning but actually needed to be in the building fund. So that was a a shift there and why you're seeing it going from 5.1 down to 4.1. So that was a change I'd already discussed about the leadership changes for it, but just
wanted to uh show that here. When we're looking at law enforcement, >> can I have a I have a question on it? It is budgeted. It's currently at 189 183 actual, but it Okay. And the budget is
460. Are we missing people in the department or is that That was actual we beefed up in 2025 personnel salaries and wages went from the actual in 2024 from 183 to 460.
Am I reading that wrong? >> You're you're not reading that wrong. So the 2024 actual yes has 183,000 and then the 2025 budget has 460,000 >> and our actual for this year is 132.
>> Yes. as as of the last time that we >> so were we missing people and that we're just budgeting for them or >> um historically it was part of finance and so you'll see that with IT and HR where we have some areas where the
numbers look different >> and it looks >> um but we can certainly take a deeper dive and I can follow up with you on that specifically. um law enforcement. I had talked about the changes um in that budgetary figure here
and fire and EMS. Um just wanted to reflect and show uh that total charges for services and revenues that we're expecting to receive again from the county. So I'll kind of breeze through some of these slides there. in public services. Um that is where we
would be looking to house the emergency um preparedness coordinator. And so just wanted to show um that position uh reclassification on here. And then library department um that was
an area where we had uh a change from uh library director to city librarian. Recreation and aquatics. Again, um this is looking at the resident services director um from recreation director.
And then in our non-EP departmental um these are all of our revenues that aren't tied specifically to a department or um to a division within the general fund. So these are what we would consider sort of our non-EP departmental or the areas that are shared throughout
our general fund budget. And then in our building fund, I had mentioned um that classification with the building clerk position. So that is what is being reflected here in our multimodal fund. Um in previous
workshops, we had shown kind of a full cost of what that impact fee would look like. Um this is uh very much a placeholder right now of what could potentially be um what we're looking at for 2026. It's very similar to 2025 and
we'll come back once those discussions with the county have been more finalized. >> Could I ask a question because I see it comes up a lot the miscellaneous revenue and then there's other revenues like what's the difference between a miscellaneous revenue and other revenue
or what are they because they're not small amounts. >> So miscellaneous revenue is let me I'll give you the example right here. So you can see on miscellaneous revenue, there's actually a way to see what object codes are tied to what when
you're looking at that last part, the six-digit number. So you have your first ones. I think you had one there on your prior slide. >> So this one actually um will show you.
Let me show you. So, if we're looking here and you see how 36 starts with miscellaneous revenue, you can follow that on the next slide by looking at that last piece of the object code under investment income that has the 3611 0 at
the end. So, those are pairing together, okay? If that makes sense. So, if you ever want to see how are these rolling up, then you can just look at what that beginning number is as part of that account string. Okay. So, like in the you don't have to go all the way back,
but like on page 12 where had the whole summary because it was it was like um $3.5 million in miscellaneous revenues. Then I would I know it would be hard, but it's basically everything forward
under there split up. Like if I were to add it, I would see. Okay. Yeah. So if you look at um these slides that have the detailed information, not the rolledup information, then you can see exactly what is flowing up through that number based on that two digits within that revenue.
>> Is it miscellaneous just because it changes all the time? Like why not just call it with the last? >> So this year we switched to the unified accounting standards that the state of Florida um utilizes and that is uh for audit purposes. So when our a anytime we
have a new auditor or auditors are working with us, they're able to look at that unified accounting system um because it's something that the state of Florida utilizes. And so for them, they're able to say and they actually dictate based off of the um governmental accounting standards board what that
should look like. So they're able to tie and say we should be able to see this Gazby pronouncement within this account code. So it's it's a bit of an accounting mechanism that we're utilizing. I understand sometimes it doesn't feel the most transparent. Um, but we are we did make that switch this
year to be a more unified city by following that. >> So, the more general description is is the one that we're following. >> We're following the unified accounting system for the state of Florida. >> Okay. >> Okay. So then looking at our capital
fund, um this is where you can see the um additional $3 million that uh under other sources from um our revenue that we expect to have for the fire station 22.
And again under our buildings, you can see um that that increased by that same $3 million amount. So this is our funded um department division or funded positions by department um that you had previously
seen and so the total that we were looking at there was 159.6 total positions for the uh St. Pete Beach >> and where did we start 25 at or 24? >> I have this
>> because we added a few people. >> What do we start 24 at? >> Mhm. or 25 or >> I can I can you I have in here what we um have either added to or adopted for 2025. >> Um I would have to go back and get you
what was adopted for 25 last year >> because we did not have 16 people in the building department last year. >> Correct. Yes. And some of those are limited duration >> Sure. >> positions. Um but yes, absolutely. >> Okay. And and so if I can point that out that the reason I'm pointing it out is
because we actually based on what we what our budget was versus what we actually are projecting to receive by the end of the year were short $1.5 million because of the decrease in the property values because of the hurricane. But we also added
at least 15 people in the building department. And so we are actually doing significantly more with significantly less. I'm not sure that we could have done that a year or two ago. So thank you.
>> So then looking at our capital improvement plan, I had highlighted um the the changes so to the citywide safety and security system. The description for that has been updated. Um, and then the fire station 22, uh, demolition and construction has also
been updated. Um, previously it was at that $1.5 million. Now it has an additional $3 million in it. So there is our updated description for that citywide camera and security system. And then um, you can see here what we're
showing for fire station 22 demolition and construction. Okay, here's the slide that I was looking for. I had this in here twice and I thought I had corrected that from the finance budget review committee, so my apologies, but um that is showing uh where we were coming from um any
positions that we added in 2025. To the mayor's point, um we did add at least seven limited durations positions in 2025. And then this at our next meeting um we'll be looking at the tenative budget book and summary of changes. So we'll
take um that current millage rate and uh which is already what's in here. We but what the commission will see at that next meeting is any of our 2025 capital projects that need to be reappropriated um for completion. So any of those projects that are straddling two fiscal
years will be added into that capital improvement plan. That'll be one of the larger changes. And then we're still waiting um with our work comps and property casualty partners to determine how much and what our percentage renewal is going to be on that. Right now we still have it in here at the worst case
scenario of 27%. Um we expect to have that go down and we are working with them to determine can we increase the deductible? What are our options here so that um we don't have to absorb such a large increase. But those are um just kind of a spoiler alert of what we're looking for in our next uh budget
workshop meeting. So with that, any questions? >> Commissioner Maria. >> Um, so I it's it's been mentioned in the last couple of budget workshops and and we've never really addressed it, which is the um the recommendation from the
budget and finance committee to raise the um wages for the commission. Um, and I just wanted to say I'm not in favor of that. Um, none of us are being paid what we're worth. Doubling it is still not going to pay us what we're worth. None of us do it for the money. We're asking
the city to do a lot with not much. And uh um I personally wouldn't feel right um being paid more money. I mean the the the small amount that it is, I'm sure that money can be spent better somewhere else. >> And I echo those comments. I was actually going to ask and and just make sure that we stay within bounds. I know
we can't vote on it once it moves forward. So I do think it is important to address it now and I understand the noble intent in that. But I have to say that this is not the year to be increasing commissioner salaries or pay. So thank you.
>> Is it showing right now as an increase on that or just is that coming >> because I >> it would require a vote in a discussion just like anything else >> would be by the public. Correct. I mean we're not >> it would it would it's an ordinance. >> We can vote on ourselves.
>> It would have to be a vote of the people. It would be a referendum on the next ballot. Thank you. >> So, it's not reflective right now, right? We're just saying that it's been in discussion, but it's not on our budget >> in in the ear. >> In the event that this commission or
that it was placed on the ballot, um there are there is a earmarked hold over within the budget currently. Gota >> and also wouldn't take effect until the next election cycle. >> So, you couldn't really vote on it for yourself?
>> No, no, no. But it it's it's absolutely up to the people. It's not within the commission and you would you would have to comment on that. But >> yeah, I think the referendum is required and um sometimes they vote for them, sometimes they don't. >> And what's the vote of the commission to
put it on the ballot? >> Uh we would do um an ordinance placing u a referendum on the ballot. It says with ballot question there are 15 words the ballot measure 75 words should this be
adopted yes or no and that would be also um picking the election date specifying the date that they would be voted upon >> and I'm sorry it wouldn't be on the next election for the special election it would have to probably wait until the March 2027 election or 2026 election >> you have to coordinate with the
supervisor of elections Speaking of voting, um I think today we identified a potential just real shortfall in this process, right? Because we made a decision on whether to keep the millage rate without having
public comment and without an actual vote. And I realized that and so the problem is we have to make a decision so that you can work on the budget and then all of this will come back for a vote in September but in September it'll be too
late to undo the decision from today. And so maybe what would be great for next year is that we add a step in here where the commission actually has we we we could have that meeting right now just like this today and then at the
next meeting at 6 p.m. We could have the com we can have the discussion, the public comment and then the vote well in advance of the budget that comes out so that we can act so that the commission actually has it on the record what the vote was and so the public has
an opportunity to bring forth public comment. I will work with >> we have a tenative budget hearing and then a final budget hearing and we'll look at the dates uh that they uh fall within. >> I'm talking just about the millage rate
just just for the mill rate. >> I want to yeah definitely check into it. We followed the process from last year but that might have just been flawed and >> might be an improvement. So, let me look and see how >> certainly it it it just really brings up a big flaw to me because it we should be
able to hear from people >> and and once we make this decision if we you know we don't have an opportunity to change it we well we can't go up we can go down but we couldn't go up in the future. >> Correct. If if we don't have direction soon enough you would be locked into
current or reduction for September. >> Yep. Okay, noted. And we will make that modification to the process next year. >> Right. >> Okay. Any other questions for Deon or
the city manager? If there's nothing else, we are adjourned. We'll see you at six o'clock. Thank you. >> Thank you. Part: 2
One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. City clerk, if you please do a roll call. Vice Mayor Marriott here. Commissioner Robinson here. Commissioner is Nikki here. Commissioner Maldonado here.
And Mayor Patulla here. We have a quorum. Thank you. Are there any amendments to the agenda as proposed? Yes. I'd like to pull item for D2 and action
for discussion and then I have a discussion item. Just a reminder to the commission, we changed the process that consent items would be pulled during the consent calendar and discussed um as part of the consent calendar
approval. Thank you. I do have two amendment requests. Okay. If we could uh move item f 6B to be the first presentation and ahead
of sorry the first ordinance ahead of the presentations and then move item 5A after 6B before presentations as as well as an
action item. Okay. So, we would have the 6B, 6A, then the two presentations, and then everything else. All right. Any other amendments? It would be 6B and then 5A. Yes. 5B. Yep.
Item for discussion. Go ahead. um that was going to be uh regarding the beach ordinance and um as far as the staging of that. I've had some community um okay
folks ask about that. Commissioner Wniki just to get a clarifier and you can make you can help me with this mayor because maybe I was on vacation I didn't hear it I didn't catch it. What is it that we do with the consent? We have to do it before the meeting. Is that what you meant? So when the consent calendar
comes up for consideration, the mayor will call if any of the consent for a motion on the consent. Then you can pull the item then. Oh, at that moment then there's a motion for the rest. I thought when you said calendar like with our emails that we were Okay.
Thank you. Is there a motion to approve the amended agenda? I move to approve the agenda as amended. I second. City clerk, if you please do a roll call. Vice Mayor Marriott, yes. Commissioner Robinson,
yes. Commissioner Rzniki, yes. Commissioner Maldonado, yes. Mayor Patula, yes. Motion carries. Okay. Next, we have the first item is 6A. First reading of ordinance 2025-15, emergency bridge loan.
Good evening, mayor and commission. I'm Devon Schmidt, finance director for the city of St. Pete Beach. Um before you this evening, we do have a presentation. Supposed to read the uh header. I'm sorry. Go ahead. We moved it up. An ordinance of the city of St. Pete Beach authorizing a loan from the state
of Florida Department of Commerce and the principal amount of not exceeding $16 million in order to finance or reimburse operating costs incurred or to be incurred by the city in connection with hurricanes Helen and Milton. Authorizing the execution and delivery
of a loan agreement in connection with such loan. Authorizing the issuance of a promisary note to evidence such loan. Delegating certain authority to the mayor, the city manager and other officials to accomplish the foregoing, providing for severability, codification
and scriveners errors, and providing for an effective date. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. So, previously this commission has um gone through the application process and
completed steps for this emergency bridge loan. Um where we are at to date is looking at the application process and the ordinance process. Um the staff team and the advisory team that worked on this project as was myself, our city
attorney, our city manager, and we also worked with our bond council and financial adviser. Um, for our bond council, we worked with Steve Miller and Jeffrey Larson, our financial adviser, who is here today if the commission has any questions. So, our initial estimates when we were
when we were originally looking at this emergency bridge loan application, um, this is showing any revenue shortfalls that were projected as a result of Helen and Milton. Um, this was right after the storm. And so, the total amount in each one of those different funds is just
under $16 million. today. Our current plan with our bond council and financial advisor recommendation is that this borrowing would really serve as a cushion for the city to work through our effects um in the general fund and our wastewater utility that draws on the account would
be done in a rears following any evidence from the finance director that a shortfall exists and that is either impeding our city's ability to meet our operating cash flow obligations or have our fund balances to fall below an acceptable level. typically two to three
months of operating expenses. So, what we're looking at today and um as you saw at our budget workshop meeting um we would be looking to utilize this as a cushion if we were to have another event or two events like we'd experienced last fall. So, that would be the intent of
our plan. So, following our fiscal year 2026, we will work to determine how much of the funds have been used, if any. will utilize any of the unused portions of the loan proceeds to pay uh prepay the state loan and then lay out a rep repayment plan for a final maturity date
and for any annual repayments of the loan that the city can meet. So the purpose of this ordinance is authorization of the loan um from the state of Florida to support the city's operating cost. This is specifically for operating costs, not for capital. Um the
loan is set to a principal amount not to exceed 16 million and that's to cover any of those costs that we previously incurred with Helen and Milton or um if we were to have another um storm disaster. The ordinance delegates our authority um to various cities city
officials and it handles the execution and delivery of the loan agreement. Um we had previously discussed this but a little bit about what the loan program helps to manage um the government operations. So this is any cost associated with continuing expanding or
modifying the local government's operations to meet any disaster related need and includes costs such as but not limited to staff salaries and payroll or operations. Um it's meant for the um this is the reason for this is because of the impacts of hurricane Helen and
Milton um and any operations if we were to have another event and then that obtaining the loan ensures that the city can continue to provide our essential services to our citizens the repayment terms. So the loan will be repaid from any legally available
non-advalorum revenues ensuring our financial responsibility. Um for the legislative findings, the recital have been adopted um that outline the city's commission's purpose and intent and exception of advalorum power. So the city's advalorum taxing power will not
be needed to authorize the loan repayment. So again, um the loan amount is looking at an amount not to exceed $16 million from the state. The city manager is responsible for determining any specific principal amount um with the financial
advice and the financial adviser will provide advice to help us determine the loan's principal amount. The promisary note approval. So um the execution of the promisary note is essential to the evidence of the loan under this agreement. The mayor is authorized to execute and deliver the promisary note and approved
modifications and the note maturity and interest rate would be 120 months and an interest rate of 0% until maturity. Uh limited obligation. Um so the city's obligation to replace the note is limited under special delivery defined in the loan agreement. Repayment has to
be sourced from available non-advalorum revenues and the obligation does not create a lean on any properties for the city ensuring no claim on assets for the debt service um on the note that's managed within the budget and authorized by the commission. The state requirements are that the city
must maintain the loan proceeds in a separate bank account to ensure um proper management and compliance. Any interest on unearned expected loan proceeds must remain at the state funds and they must be outlined um in the loan agreement. The city can invest amounts
in the debt service fund in accordance with the investment policies and regulations. So with that um is there any questions that we can answer for you? Thank you. Comments, questions. So, this is a 10-year loan
at zero interest. Correct. I hate to say this, but it sounded like there was no recourse. This is a non-reourse loan. Is that My name is Jeff Marson Consulting Services. I'm the financial
adviser to the city. Good to see everybody. Hello. Nonreourse loan. I'm trying to understand what you're I'm saying it's It didn't. It's not attached to any property. No, it's not. There's no there are no penalties that I saw.
If you don't pay them back, if something were to happen if something No, I'm I'm thinking in terms of it's a 10-year loan, no interest. It costs us nothing to take this money. We put the money in the bank account. We don't use it. Great. We give it back, right? If something happens, we have
catastrophic something, right? Let's say nine and a half years from now something catastrophic happens and we're not able to repay the loan at that point. What happens at that point? What are Well, as your financial advisor, the memo I gave staff really assumes that
after 2025 and 2026, we will know within a month or so, the end of those fiscal years, how much you've actually needed to replenish additional expenses or reduced revenues. Okay. So, let's say it's a million5.
Okay. If you borrow a million5, then I'm going to strongly recommend uh that that I'll come back here with staff and say, "Okay, we now have eight years to repay this without putting an undue burden. It's not free. There's no interest, but
you got to repay the principal in a bullet amount or over time. You can we we we confirm with the state you can pay it back over time. You can prepay it. So, we would come to you and recommend as part of your budgeting process that we have eight years to pay back $1.5
million and that would become part of your budget process. So, at the end of 10 years, if not sooner, you would owe them zero. There is there is no penalty. Uh what is being pledged are your legally available non-adorm revenues. That excludes
uh property taxes. It excludes grants and things that are not legally available. So all the other non-adform revenues would be used as a source to pay you back. It does limit your ability to do other things. They have approval to
approve other loans. Um the good news is at 0% interest rate. Okay. Um I can't do better than that if I went and got you a bank loan for the city or a bond issue. What we've recommended to your finance director is on a regular basis that
money can be invested say at 4%. Uh $15 million at 4% or 16 million is is is a good bit of money. So I would recommend the interest earnings be taken out of there, swept out of there on a monthly basis to be used to shore up any
revenue. Uh you have had revenue decreases. you just went through your uh situation there uh both in the general fund as well as water wastewater fund. So I would I would not let interest earnings stay there. I would I would draw those out on a monthly basis. So
you utilize those as the intent is there. Then when you go back to pay them all you're looking at is what is the principal amount that you've used. It isn't a separate fund. It is it will be monitored and and we'll work closely with Devon in terms of the plan. So, um,
I'd love it if you didn't need any of it. I think you'll need some of it. Uh, your general fund balance of $8 million is, you know, two to three months of operating expenses. That's real tight. So, I This is also kind of a sleep at
night cushion for you. I wouldn't want that fund to go less than that. I'd I'd wish it to be higher because if there's a storm, what are you going to do? you don't want to have to run out to a bank on emergency basis and borrow money. So, I would watch both what you
could use it for for interest earnings. We'll get together in a month or so and it'll close after your second hearing. We've already reviewed the documents with the attorneys and the state and bond council. We'll try to close it sometime in the month of August with your city attorney's help. Um, and
you'll fully borrow it. It'll sit in an account. We'll sweep out interest. We'll figure out with the city manager and the finance director how much you really need. Um, and I'm I'm not close enough to know what that number might be. Thank you, sir.
Hope that helps. Thank you. It's great the state has for sure. Lets you sleep at night, too. So, yep. Thank you, city clerk. Do we have any uh public comments? The item up for me because I fly to New
York tomorrow morning early with another Of course, I have no public comment on this topic. Okay. Any further discussion? Is there a motion? Motion to approve first reading of
ordinance 2025. Second. City clerk. Commissioner Robinson. Yes. Commissioner Rzniki. Yes. Commissioner Maldonado. Yes. Vice Mayor Marriott. Yes. And Mayor Petrillo. Yes. The motion carries.
Thank you. Next we have item 5A. Authorize an agreement with Santech for community redevelopment area CRA study. Good evening mayor and commissioners. Laura Canary, community development director. So this evening we're going to
have a presentation from Gil Martinez who's going to give an overview of the CRA and kind of the process and then the purpose of the finding of necessity. We also have with us this evening representatives from Fiber, which is the Florida Institute for Built Environmental Resilience. We're so
appreciative to be partnering with them um and hope to continue partnering with them on the creation and establishment of the CRA as this would really be the first CRA on one of the barrier islands here in Penllis County and it would be again very resiliency and infrastructure
centric. Um and we also have Matt Lewis from Stantech available as well. So I'm going to hand it over to Gil to give the overview and then Fiber is going to go into a brief presentation on about what they do and then again we'll all be available for questions. Thank you.
Good afternoon Mr. Mayor, commissioners. Pleasure to see you all. Gil Martinez, senior planner with community development, sorry, with community development. I already cut it myself. Um before I start I just want to address that when we are considering a community
redevelopment agency we are really see really looking at resiliency elements things that we learned from the past storms um things that we want to avoid um securities that we'd like to have in place for tools to continue to harden our infrastructure system which is
currently overloaded as we well know. So the primary purpose of of tonight's discussion is to get your approval to move forward with a finding of necessity to assess whether we even come close to, you know, being um considered for a CRA
designation. So what is a CRA? Established under Florida Chapter 163 part two, a community redevelopment agency, CRA, is a public agency created by a local government to revitalize areas facing economic issues, declines, blight or
infrastructure challenges. Its mission is to improve physical conditions, attract private investment, and enhance the quality of life in designated redevelopment zones. St. P Beach why a CRA what we are considering here is a
resiliencybased CRA where its primary purpose is to find resources to address our infrastructure system. So what we're looking at is a resiliency based CRA designation so that we can strengthen
and modernize Asian infrastructure and vulnerable and vulnerable to sea level rise and climate change. Proactively harden critical systems to ensure long-term community resilience and public safety. Address blight through strategic improvements that enhance
environmental sustainability of quality of life. Attract and coordinate investments supporting sustainable economic growth within the CRA. Improve infrastructure performance while reducing environmental risks like flooding. and leverage
and leverage funding. How is a CRA established? Well, the first step in in establishing a CRA is to identify there are shown that there are signs of blight as defined in Florida statute. In our instance, you know, we're looking at infrastructure.
We're looking at inadequate roadways and utilities, environmental contaminations perhaps, and unsafe and unhealthy conditions. A documentation of a finding of necessity is a report that must be prepared to document these conditions.
We have um in community development, we've been working very closely with um public works with Camden and we've identified an area that is potential, you know, this is not written in stone, is a potential area for a CRA because it
aligns with over 22 capital improvement projects. Um to the north the area is bound at 87th A. To the south it is bound on 37th Dav. Um it is contiguous along G Boulevard as well as Blind Pass
Road. It is it is a designated zone created by the local government to address blight infrastructure deficiencies and long-term resiliency. Oh, this is a a map of the CRA
infrastructure map. Um, I think there's been a glitch here in this presentation. There there was more information here. There are over 22 projects associated with this map. It's an interactive map that we will hope to unfold as we move forward.
A finding of necessity must clearly demonstrate the presence of blight and justify the creation of a CRA under the law. The report is presented to the local government, the city commission, and the board of county commissioners.
Adoption of a resolution declaring the need for a CRA. The governing body, i.e. the city and the county, votes to adopt a resolution confirming the area meets the criteria for a CRA need. The action is establishes the intent to create a
CRA and move forward with planning. So once we've established the finding of necessity and and you agree that you know the area is is blighted enough to move forward with the CRA, the next step is to develop the community redevelopment plan. And within this plan, we need to be able to display what
the proposed infrastructure improvements are going to be, what public facilities will be addressed, what is the funding mechanism that we're going to employ. We usually um you see predominantly that most CRAAS employment financing.
There's a great deal of community engagement that goes on and and um input defines timelines, goals and performance metrices and must align with local comprehensive plans. Plan adoption once you know we've
established these we move on to the plan adoption phase and this establishes the CRA in its boundaries. It creates the trust the trust fund revenue for the tiff and establishes the CRA governing board. It also requires coordination with um
other agencies. In this instance, um if we are working with the county, it would require enter local agreement with the county so that we can move forward with the use of of tiff revenues. Once the CRA is established, the formal notification must be provided to the Florida Department of Economic
Opportunity and all relevant taxing authorities. So the question here is tax increment financing. Why is what is it and why would we want to um explore it? Well, primarily it's because
as I will show you in the following slide um it gives us an opportunities to capture county revenues that otherwise we would not be have access to for the purpose of addressing our infrastructure and to promote long-term resiliency of
the barrier island. TIFF captures the increase in property tax revenue within the CRA above the base year. So if you look at the graph here, you start at CRA starts on the left hand side and there's the base year. So I will show you in the
following slide how this works out. As the property values rise due to redevelopment, the increment i.e. The difference is reinvested into the area to fund improvements while taxes on the base year value continue going to the original taxing authorities.
Here is an example of a five-year projection with a 50% county participation. These are example numbers. They're not based on any reality whatsoever. um we picked $200 million as the base year at a 3%
um increase. So you have a incremental value of $6 million in your first year. So you project those figures out over five years and you have a district which
with a 200 $200 million base year um starting point can now generate tiff up to $466,000 over five years the county contribution on that is $210 $210,000
currently we cannot access those monies because we are not a a CR RA. Um, otherwise we're not, you know, we can't address our capital projects within the district. So, we implement the CRA and begin redevelopment activities should you all
approve this. Um, this would allow the CRA to do the following things. would be able to enter into contracts, acquire and dispose of property, apply for grants, issue bonds, and use the TIFF funds for capital improvements and
public private partnerships. That concludes my portion of the presentation as it relates to a finding of necessity, why we need it, what tiff is, and the primary focus of why we're considering this is because we want to introduce resiliency and be able to
address our infrastructure issues. With that, we um we are um we have Jeff Jeff Carney with the University of Florida who is here with us today. um graciously came out to um speak to us about resiliency measures that are being taken
throughout the state and some examples and how we can partner with them. Thank you. Good evening. Good to see you all. Thank you very much. Um so I'm going to talk particularly about the CRA but really
also generally about Fiverr's work. Um we were um very happy to have uh uh your mayor and your city manager join us uh for a workshop, a city a a a city resilience workshop at the University of Florida a few months ago and um so
hopefully have the opportunity to carry some of this work forward in in the future. So a little bit I'll talk about Cedar Key as an example but the first the first slide I'll I'll show you is our general uh overview slide for the
institute. Um we are six faculty members across the college of design construction planning plus an affiliate faculty from across all of University of Florida from health to engineering to sort of a broad range of people. Um the mission is to see is to build knowledge
at the intersection of research, application and lived experience around ideas and innovations that foster built environment resilience. As you can see from the map um we have research projects uh really across the state. Uh right now um the focus of the institute
is really on research. So we work with the National Science Foundation and large family foundations to to generate uh research that research is applied in communities. And that's a real hallmark of our work is that we're really working
to get that work out of out of the lab and into the hands of our communities. And then third, of course, we're the University of Florida. So we're training the next generation of professionals, whether that's planners, landscape architects, architects, city managers, interior designers. Those are our fields
um at in the College of Design, Construction, Planning. Um and so we have a a series of labs from the Florida Resilient Cities Lab, which is really our arm that that gets projects into into communities. Uh we're funded through the Florida Department of Environmental Protection and others
really trying to apply the work. Uh the Urban Agility Lab is looking at big data and smart city technologies. uh disaster trust and social change lab works with a lot of communities across the state that oftentimes are are cut out of of these processes. A lot of communities that
have have had a hard time having a voice. So really really reaching communities where they are. Uh the adaptive built environments lab looks at um energy conservation, building technologies, everything from HVAC to solar systems. Uh the dynamic design
dynamics lab is health in the built environment. Uh Gator is a is an Americanore program uh that actually places student volunteers for six months up to a year in communities across the state uh to do service work. And then
the Gulf South Studio is our our studio where we teach uh around different communities. And so it's the real overview of what fiber does. Um, but what I was going to talk about u specifically was the work we've done in
Cedar Key. Um, and and I think uh hopefully everybody's familiar with Cedar Key. Small community uh in the Big Ben region has been hit pretty hard over the last couple years um by storms. you know, when you see Jim Kent um in the picture that that you've you've had a
couple storms. Um and so without I gave Gil way too many slides, so he's paired it down to like one. Um but but I I'll I'll tell you um what we've done there over the course of the last couple years. We had an FTE
um Resilient Florida grant to do a vulnerability assessment. this really the assess and the map part of this where we did uh which I I know uh Ben Penllis County has a has a vulnerability assessment same process um where we built the GIS layers of all of the
different assets we brought those to the community did a series of of engagements to get the reaction and the input from the community all of that was done in a three-dimensional uh tool one of the advances that we brought to this was to
build um a three-dimensional visualization of those vulnerabilities. Um, and and in in doing that really for I'd say for the intention of taking action. Um, from the beginning it was
about taking action. And so having your vulnerabilities in a three-dimensional form allowed people to kind of really engage the the vulnerabilities and really understand their own risks. And um and so when we got to the taking action part, that led to the resilience plans. So a series of projects emerged
out of out of the um out of the effort. Um but even at that point and when we finished the project um the community wanted to know how we were going to implement this work and at that point they said well we have our CRA which is
20some years old and needs to be redone and so they had to to to reinitiate the CRA process. So they hired us to in our law clinic to redo the CRA and incorporate the resilience projects into that. So we took our vulnerability
assessment, we took our adaptation action area plan projects about 85 projects and brought those directly into the CRA. So, I think that what the city's doing is a really is a really interesting and and uh an appropriate way to
move resilience-based work um towards implementation and really start to to to I think economically see the benefits of resilience. Um and so here just a couple of the the things that we've done. There was everything from the vulnerability uh
design projects that led into the the adaptation plan which now has has uh resulted in the um the CRA uh for the city of Cedar Key. So, thank you very much. Thank you, sir. And thank you for the
invitation to come out to UF. Um what I one of the things that I sincerely appreciate about uh what your program does is is really that that connection between not just the theoretical intellectual but rather putting into
practice and so thank you for that very much. Yeah. Well, thank you for for joining us. We really we really enjoyed the process and hope to do it again and and think about um opportunities that come up. We'd love to talk more about futures. So, thank you. Thank you.
All right, questions, comments, discussion. Thank you very much. So, I just wanted to kind of tie it up with um from this point on. So, what we're asking for is um approval to move forward with the finding of necessity study. um once the
study is conducted that'll basically give us again we assume based on everything that we know that the need that we can show that need but really what the F is doing is documenting current conditions of course you always do risk that you can document the conditions we can get so far and then
once we get working with the county you know things could change so the question becomes well what does that F then do for you at that point again it's still really documenting the conditions and the needs here and it would give us that tool that whether we were looking for other grant opportunities or whatever
that may be, we don't lose that information in research, I think it gets used moving forward regardless. Um, should we move forward and decide that okay, the next step is going to be to actually develop and establish the CRA, um, step one would be a very robust
community engagement process. Hence, it's in the name community redevelopment. But um from start to finish, we would start with just really even at the FO step um just informing and engaging the community and letting them know what the F is and what exactly it's going to be looking at. But um the
real meat and potatoes would be coming for community engagement would be as we develop the redevelopment plan. Thank you. Thank you. City clerk, are there on the audience comments? Yes, Deb Sheckner.
You all weren't fast enough with your lights. Uh, good evening. Deborah Sheisle Drive in St. Pete Beach. Uh, we did try to get a CRA many, many years ago. I think maybe Lisa remembers all of that. Um,
he did mention something about acquiring properties. Now, I do believe eminent domain has been taken out of this new CRA, but I'm not sure. So that is a question I have that I think is very important for our community. We are blighting
a huge part of our community and if somebody has a house or a building there if it's being sold I do believe they have to say it's blighted. So you know that that's another issue that we have. Um residents need to buy in maybe even
before we spend this money. Do they want a CRA? What are the benefits? We know what that is, but what are the cons? And the last time around, there were so many cons that it just fell on deaf ears and we
did not go forward with it. So, I kind of would like to look at some of that. I understand resiliency, infrastructure, all those things are important, but not if we're going to force people to sell their property and that would be
at current value, which is of course lower now than it has been in a very, very long time. And you know, we have to realize our real estate taxes for the next upcoming year are not going to be what they are in the past year. not only because residents will go before the tax
assessor and get their um assessment lowered, but also the tax assessor will come around and take a look at what we look at like right now and and possibly change some things. So, I I wonder if we could have a buyin perhaps before we
spend the money, a little workshop, something so that people really understand what they're getting into. Thank you. Thank you. Laura, Commissioner Marriott, thanks. Um, so my questions were going to be very much the same as Miss
Shuckner's. The the it it all sounds fantastic, right? It's like the answer to a lot of our problems. But but what is the downside and and what is the what is the consequence of having that finding of necessity and declaring an area blighted and then the inter local
agreement falls through or you know what what what what does what is the consequence for people who own property in in those areas if they're if it's if the finding of necessity finds it as blighted but then we can't move forward on the next steps. So there's a there's
a few things to unpack with the comments and questions. So first and foremost when we talk about blighted and again that's per the statutory definition. Um I really like to use the example of St. Augustine the historic area that CRA because it's one that I've personally worked in and I think it's a perfect
example of what you don't consider as being slum and blighted when you think of an area. Um however that CRA was founded on transportation and parking blight very specifically and because hence the roadways down in St. Augustine and parking which they didn't have they
were able to create the redevelopment agency and then they built the parking garage and then obviously the revenue from that now goes back into that area. Um, so number one is I think that you always Yes. I wish the term blighted could be changed just like brownfield
because with with all the positive that that can come with remediation to a brownfield, you still have that negative connotation of, oh, you're on a brownfield. So I've tried to flip the script of when any homeowner or property owner has been, you know, interested or
wanting to know more about what that means if a property is in a CRA. I say that it's that you know that it's a targeted investment area and that you know that a portion of the taxes that you pay are absolutely going to be cycle you know recycled back into that area. You can't really guarantee that for
those outside of the area always. So that's how I kind of try and you know flip the script a little bit. um as far as the downside and what you hear is that um the concern of well if you put the funds in the CRA now you're directing them away from the general
fund and you lose that flexibility of being able to expend them on whatever that may be. um you know I'll use a very simplified example but uh when we talk about what tiff can be expended on you know there's the state there's the
statute criteria but then in addition to that panelis county being a charter county has put their own policy in place of what they'd like to see county tiff exp spended on and the county tiff expenditure that they're that they want to see is again those buckets of
transportation mobility housing infrastructure So it's very specific and really they did that in essence because as some of the CRAAS got more and more successful and had more funding available they kind of deviated away unfortunately from what they were intended for. So maybe you saw more
banners going up. Not saying that banners are a bad thing but again deviating away from the purpose. So about five years ago the the county created their own criteria of what they would like to see county tiffic spended on. So, I like to use the really simplified example of um my kid's going
to the store and has $10 to, you know, spend at the at the convenience store. I'm gonna give him $10, too. But I tell him, I'm going to give you $10, but you can't spend it on gum. Does he turn down the $10? You know, does he not want the 20 because now he can't buy gum or does
he want the 20? And again, here's the caveat. $10, his original 10 can still be spent on the gum. like in this in this case the the money that we have can still be expended on anything within that area outside of the the county tiff's allowance. Now when it comes down
to okay well what about that it can't be expended outside of that area. Well, that's where we really need to strategize and as we're developing the redevelopment plan, identify projects such as the lift station that we know, yes, it's in the CRA, but we know that the benefit is for the entire city. And
that's how we'd kind of and so it becomes a little bit of a shuffling game because, you know, that maybe you have some restrictions on the tiff over here. Okay. Well, then let's plan accordingly to know that over here is the need and we have it in the general fund and this is an allowable expenditure because
there's no, you know, restrictions on that. So let's pay for this over here with general fund and CRA, you know, for for what is allowed. And and that's also why a lot of times moving forward as as if we were to be um you know, creating more of a a trust fund balance and we
had, you know, really we needed to road map out what that looks like, you would see some s probably significant pro um projects having a cost share. you would see a CRA contribution and a city contribution for certain projects as it's captured in the CIP.
Okay. And then I I think the only thing that that because there was a lot in my question. Yeah, there's something I missed. I know I missed something. Yeah. So the part the part I left that got left out is what happens if we have a finding of necessity but then it but then nothing happens after that. Is there a disadvantage for any property
owners in the area if a finding of necessity has has has happened but then the CRA for whatever reason doesn't move forward. Is there a disadvantage for any of those property owners? No, there is not. No, there is not. And it's and one other important note to um
that's worth mentioning is the CRA boundary is not parcel specific. So when you look at that boundary, you're not necessarily saying that every property in there is slum and blighted because I've worked in many CRAAS where you'll have, you know, a million-doll property and next to it that slum and blighted
property that maybe was used for the imagery for the finding of necessity. But and so we're very careful in saying that an F is not parcel specific. We're looking at the overall area and acknowledging that these conditions exist and that's why this area needs
some extra attention. Um the the one other thing that I forgot um to touch on was as far as the acquisition of property and you know I think that sometimes that gets confused with like eminent domain. What the statute is
saying is that a CRA has the flexibility to acquire property and dispose of property as a separate entity from the city. The nice thing of where I've seen it really be it's been used well as an economic development tool is that often if a if the city or municipality owns a
property and they're disposing of it, it's in the best interest of the constituents right to usually get highest and best use or whatever that may look like, right? So you want whoever wherever is going to give you the most revenue. the CRA has a little bit more flexibility in that they can really capture and consider the public
benefit of what that you know project is bringing to the community. So, what I mean by that is you could potentially purchase a property for say a million dollars that the CRA could and then through an RFP process put that put that
property out to the public and say here's the property that we're making available, but we want parking, you know, whatever. Name your criteria of what you want in that project. And then you could potentially, you know, you could let that property go for a lot of times maybe it's 500,000 rather than the
million because you're getting that public benefit in turn for that investment. So that's the that's why they put so much emphasis on the acquisition part is just that it allows the C the CRA just has a little bit more flexibility in how it can um evaluate
those proposals. Thank you. And to just to add to that um the CRAS can no longer use eminent domain. It has to be voluntary acquisition. That changed after the Supreme Court case in Kilo and there was a legislative
response. So in Florida, we could no longer do that. It's very important. Thank you, Commissioner Robinson. Um, in St. Augustine, was that the historic district? Yes. Okay. Did it had a have a lot of residential to it?
No, they actually have a second CRA, the Lincolnville CRA, which is outside of that that is primarily the residential one. And then now they just have created a third CRA, the West City, which is I think a combination of residential and and commercial, but the historic area is predominantly commercial.
Um, and what did that do to its property values? I I can't I don't I can't answer that. But what I can tell you, and if you look, it's it's uh I think at the appropriate time, we'll definitely introduce this um if should we move forward. But so right now if you go and
look at the pro if you go to the property appraisers site and then pull up the VAB you can look at you know historically over the years of what you know what kind of valuation increase you've seen in any of the municipalities and if you scroll down a little bit further you can see the tiff districts
within the county and you can see how I'm just throwing this out as an example maybe traditionally like in say I'll use Penelis Park as an example you may see the um you know the average valuation at 7% increase, but then in the CRA you'll
see like a 12 or 13. And again, that's the whole purpose is the intent of putting some that shot of the AR shot in the arm of investment, just extra attention to that area to increase the valuations to increase the tiff to then be able to reinvest more in that area.
Well, I just know that back when we had the real estate bust here, it took it was about five years for the that it was the drop continual drop. It was uh 2008 to 12 that it just continually dropped
down. Why are we doing this now right after a hurricane when all the property values are low? So you you want to create when it's lower essentially, but to your point, Commissioner Robinson, there have been instances where a CRA is established and
they don't realize a tiff maybe, you know, for the first five years, 10 years. Um, in Clear Water, they they actually reset the base year because in their second CRA, they had their main CRA in the downtown area. their second CRA area in the East Gateway area was
not generating any tiff because it was created right around the time of the recession. So then they ended up going back resetting the base year to move it up to because they had you know even going up a little it hadn't met that threshold of what it was at in the base for the base year. So they worked with the county reset it to get that base.
But you're absolutely right they are loan out. So all the more reason why um if we were in a situation where we continue to see them decline then we would want to talk about a base year. you know, looking at what that base year set would be. But as of right now, I would say that now is the time to try and capture those valuations.
Why is there's nothing on pass on this? Why is pass not included and on the map? So, this is again just the study area boundary and this is what was pulled um in talking with public services and looking at some of the infrastructure
improvements projects that we already knew were online or coming online. um we are limited to it cannot be more than 80% of the total geographical area of the city. I don't believe that we're near that threshold quite yet. I confirm
yes we're we're under that. Um but again if if it was you know the if the commission's direction was to as we're looking at that boundary the nice thing is um and moving forward we start with that area but it's subject to change whether it's that there's additional
parcels one or two that we should capture on the north end or the south end or if it makes sense per the direction that you all give us to say hey don't exceed the 80 or don't even get to 50 but you know look at this area too that's something that can absolutely be considered and Again, the nice thing
is is as long as it's contiguous and you can document those conditions in that area, doesn't have to be on every parcel within that area. My concern would be I I understand the tool that it is and the potential it has. It can be used very well and it can
be used very poorly and my concern is just like Miss Sheckner's is the fact that I think there needs to be community buyin before we go spending money on stuff. My concern is people need to understand that right now they're looking at low values on their homes and
what is it going to do to them to now be called blighted or be in a blighted area. Maybe their home isn't blighted but they're in a blighted area. Um I would like to see community buy in before we go spending $21,000. On top of that, I I know that it does
take away from the general fund. And I believe here on this uh which I got two different versions of this, the one presentation had a uh $466 thou uh,000 and this one has a uh 301, but regardless that difference, that delta
is what we do not see at all into the general fund. So that that is my concern. We have so many capital projects that need to get done. And again, another concern is you have somebody that lives on Boga Isles Drive that gets flooded and they're not even
part of this. And they're going to see monies being spent over on other areas that that they've been begging for stuff to, you know, for for work done and and their capital improvement projects done. I I just have a lot of concern. I I
think people need to know and buy into this before we go any further and before we spend $21,000. That would be my concern. I would be reluctant to want to do too much um you know heavy community engagement and outreach at this point simply because at this point with the F
it is pretty matterof fact. It isn't it's an objective process. They're looking at documenting the conditions. Yes, you know they can look at things and from a you know maybe get a little creative in the report. I mean, Tarpon Springs just put it together, a great one, but it really is pretty objective.
And then so I I would say I the last thing that I would I would hate to engage the community, get them excited or, you know, thinking that something's going to go in this direction and then the finding of necessity comes back and the criteria is maybe met, but it's not enough for the county, you know,
participation. So that would be my only reluctance. But one of the things that we did talk about with um with Stantech was if we did move forward with the F could we as like a first step um have that kind of educational presentation and to hear feedback because sometimes
you do even hear at that stage in the process it may be a member of the community that's saying I know that there's tons more calls for service over here and it maybe isn't ref you know you you get some intel right from the community at that point. So, I would definitely want to do that, but the only
thing I would be reluctant to do too much just in case it doesn't end up panning out and we don't go in that direction, you know, of actually creating and establishing the CRA. Well, I'd rather save the $21,000 if that, you know, and have the community
buy in on it and and and you know, go for it that way and have backing on the on the community. Is is this something that we can handle? Do we have the bandwidth to do internally? No, we we don't. I mean, it could take
some months and reassigning of responsibilities and and do we know what the county we're saying the county's a 50% participant, but are they really? I mean, they're going to they're going to experience a lot of the same value uh property value decreases that we have. So, are they
going to do 50% or or are they going to do more like 25 or 10? They can't go less than 50, which is why we use the conservative 50. It can go up to 95%. In a lot of other places, you start with the county contribution at 95% and that's what the county contributes
whether it's in a charter county or not. In Penllis, when they made those changes five years ago, that's when they created this new criteria and they said that nope, instead we're going to start at a 50% tiff contribution and work our way up. So at a 50% year, what's considered
economic development, you know, you need some attention and then you can cheer up to community renewal or urban revitalization is that max threshold that you really need you really need, you know, extra attention and the county will contribute the 95. So it's partly
to do with that why I don't want to get too ahead of things or don't want us to you know get too far ahead of even assuming a higher tiff contribution or any because at that point you know what the city could do too and cities have done this is say the county says nope we're not participating we wanted to see
this in our general fund even though again it would be for the purpose of our CRA we want it to be a model CRA that's looking at shared goals and objectives with the county that are very aligned with the overall needs again this isn't just St. Pete res St. Pete Beach residents. This is Penllis County
residents. So they it's okay for them to put some of that money back into St. Pete Beach. Um but there have been instances where the county has not contributed and the city has went ahead and still created that CRA just to allow the redevelopment authority and to do certain things that they can't otherwise
do separate from the general fund and to allow them that redevelopment um ability. Largo is a good example. They've got one area that's a tiff district and one that is not at this time. So there's more restrictions on what they can do in the one that's that they're getting county tiff funding. Um
the other thing I would say is as far as you know it is an investment for sure and that's why when we talked about it at length as far as you know just given the sensitivities of funding right now across the board and the county obviously these policy changes came from somewhere and we know that there's new
commissioners and you know and probably maybe even other CRAAS that maybe are popping up especially in the aftermath of the storms. So when we talked about okay what is this you know would what would the purpose of the F serve that's where it it seems like it would again be
beneficial regardless because it was 20 plus 20 so years ago when the last F was conducted unfortunately some of those same conditions exist you can actually take that F and modify it and update it probably quite quite a bit we've talked
to um you know the team about that um but so we want to document those that those conditions still exist. And then not only would it give us a tool whether we were applying for additional funding or or looking at that alternatives, but there are other avenues like even say
you know we could still enter into some other type of maybe it's a it's a resiliency area that we do through an interlocal with the county. But again just documenting it whether and making it an objective report versus we just need it. We need it our infrastructure. Yeah, it's just going to give us that
tool moving forward. And one last thing, a lot of times you will see um for example, I think uh forward panelis is maybe one of them that as you're going through grant funding through them, you know, there'll be an opportunity to say
if the project is in a CRA or not. So at that point, you know, knowing that the if okay, if it's in a CRA, then it's kind of been vetted already for that extra need. And so again, can just potentially get us additional points depending on what we're looking to do.
And if I'm look, it's everything in red on the map. Correct. Um, all of the colors on the map. Sorry, that was just all of the colors or not the colors in red? Um, all all of the colors, including the red. Okay, Commissioner Maldonado.
No. Uh, thank you, Lara. You, uh, explained and did a great job with that. I like the flexibility and the framework. Um, I like that it's a tool that we can use as a platform to launch from in the future and that we are able to adjust it to suit the needs, individual needs of the various
districts and not just a carb blanc. Uh, so thank you for answering those questions very thoroughly. Thank you. Just piggybacking on something Commissioner Robinson mentioned. Um, if at some point, let's say we decided to have a a pass a girl CRA, is that an
option? as you mentioned for St. Augustine where they have one next to another and next to another. So we wouldn't necessarily have to do it at the same time if there was a finding that there's a need and pass a grill as well. Absolutely. It's something that we could look at explore further. Again, it
starts with that finding of necessity um and and documenting the need. But I again I don't want to just based on the what's come like there was legislation this year that was you know looking to do away with CRAAS you know. So it they are a great economic development tool,
but I think it's becoming more and more important what you're hearing, whether it's from the legislation or the county, that they want these areas to be very intentional and specific and that the redevelopment, even if it's a, you know, a five a five-page plan, but it's specifically saying that this is the re
this is the infrastructure project that we're going to do with the funds, that's really the direction that I think CRAs are going moving forward. And so to to to look at an area and or an additional area or two um absolutely I think that that we're going to have some um
hopefully not only lessons that we're going to learn throughout this process, but it's going to give us a really good opportunity to sit down with the county and identify those shared goals and objectives and then show again at the end of the at the end of the day how this is not a handout for them. This is an investment.
So just going back to what you just said about a handout. So part of the part of the benefit to the city is so in the previous budget meeting we looked at when you pay your property tax bill let's say it's you know $10,000
80% of that goes to the county and 20% comes back to the city. So in a CRA situation the county takes some of their 80% portion and contributes it back to us. Right? So this is tax revenue that would have gone to the county but
instead it comes back to the city to that district and has to be reinvested in that district for those infrastructure projects. Okay. So if we had for example a CRA in district one and we received money for that we could
use that for pump station one. We could use that for the pipeline that goes out to Treasure Island. I mean they said the Camden way works. I'm just saying that these are the types of projects and so this would be tax revenue that the county would generally
capture but it is now diverted to the city which is why it requires a buyin and a vote from the county commission to approve it. And it frees money to other areas. Yes. Of our city. Yes.
Okay. So, the other question I have is uh for the city manager maybe are there I in general with this particular one I don't have an issue spending $21,000 to do through the study to let us know whether we can whether we have anything
we can move forward with to present to the public and say here's why we would want to do this because now we have data. Are there any grants available? So I know when we did the study down and and dances are for the both ramp there were grants available for that. Is there
any way to offset this? That's better question for you actually. I don't know that there would be no at this stage I think that the potential grant opportunities would open up more as as we develop the redevelopment plan.
Okay. Not at this stage. Right. Okay. However, sorry, let me say one more thing, but the type of technical assistance that we've already received through our partner fiber and also we also and I'm sorry I didn't mention this earlier, but we've also tapped into the
Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council. We were able to use our GIS information and pull the taxable valuation for that area. So, I think that there is an opportunity to we're going to continue exploring that and just again um the goal is to to be able to when moving
forward to have a redevelopment plan that's got the fiber logo on it, our logo on it, Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council to really show that this is a uh a unified concentrated effort to, you know, rebuild and build better.
Thank you. Any further questions for Laura? Sorry. Thank you, Laura. Yes, sir. Um, once you have a CRA and you have the TIFF funding and you have the uh the TIFF U finance uh in place, you can use that for matching funds to get grants
from the D and other state agencies and federal agencies. So, it can be used for matching funds. Oh, also I was going to mention um to one of your questions, can you have more than one district? You can have more than one district. Usually you just have one CRA board and that board will sit
for both districts. Thank you. And the board's made up typically of some members of the council but also some um resident land owners, property owners, business owners. Yeah. I mean ultimately it would it
should require community involvement and buy in. Oh yeah. Yeah. So this is the first step to determine whether we even have something that we could bring back to the community and say here's what some of our options are. Okay. Any further comments, questions,
discussions? I just wanted to say express my thanks to Laura. you clearly this is something that you're a real expert in and I think we're really fortunate to have somebody here who's an expert on this subject because I think this could be tremendously valuable for us. So, thank
you. Any problem continuing this to the next meeting to maybe seek input from the community? I I'm ready to make a motion, but I mean we always have everything noticed with okay plenty of advanced time. I
think everybody's had opportunity. We've I have not received any emails on it and again I think the preliminary step is to find out whether we have something or not that we can work with and then that will actually be a complete different process. We'll have workshops and okay presentations and then we can if there's
something that we can that there's found Then I'll make a motion to authorize an agreement with Stantech for a community redevelopment area study and finding of necessity report in the amount of $21,720. Second. City clerk, if you please do a roll call.
Commissioner Rzniki, yes. Commissioner Maldonado, yes. Vice Mayor Marriott, yes. Commissioner Robinson, no. Mayor Petrill, yes. The motion carries. Thank you. Next move we move on to presentations.
A presentation on the impact of SP 190 by Calvin Donan Associates. Good evening again. Laura Canary, community development director. Um, tonight we have with us Jim Hickey from
CGA, who as you know it was um scheduled to come back once we put the comp plan update on hold and so he's here to provide an update and I'll be happy to answer any questions with him after the presentation. Thank you. Good evening, sir. Welcome back. Good evening, everyone. Thank you. Thank you for having me back. I will try to be
brief because I think a lot of what I'm going to say we talked about back in May. Um but just wanted to give you an update as you requested. Um just moving forward. So um and this is just an update and we've talked about this before. We've had two budget meetings. There's a memorandum in your backup. We
wanted to give you some analysis just to show what we've done um to date. And uh we haven't completed any additional work. We wanted to wait until we had this discussion to see whether or not you wanted to move forward or how you wanted to move forward with the process. So, as we stated, this was done and
between May 13th and uh July 1st, the mayor, the mayor, sorry, the governor actually um signed the bill into law. So, I do know that um Susan Devarthan there um Weiss Serotaa is working with other communities to file a lawsuit. Um,
as we know, lawsuits don't happen in quick timing, but I think there's some discussion among municipalities um, moving forward to try to do something to stop it from every single community in the in the state, which is what it's doing now.
Uh, became law and I think what we're here to talk to you tonight about is um, you know, restrictive and burdensome. I think what we talked about initially with uh the large resort district is trying to help restrict maybe help kind of lower the height and things like that
that would be something that we can't do right now and really to go forward and put let you know to draft legislation that may not happen until 2027 may not be the right course of action to move forward right now. Um, and this is just
looking at as as um I just wanted to mention we did um have a contract to do both the large resort and districts um TC1 and TC2. Um so of course there's a couple of different options.
Um I think what we're looking at or recommending for today is to look at us moving forward with just the uh town center and focus on that. um looking at what types of uses could be allowed. Look at maybe expanding those um through
public engagement, seeing to get some more flexibility. Um these areas because they're smaller parcels and you've got a lot of different uses take a little bit more time to do redevelopment where you have the large districts, it's one parcel, it's a huge number of acres. You know, these take a little more finessing
and trying to come up with um some implementation strategies for you moving forward. Um, I think the public engagement really should be targeted in this area. I think I talked about it in the May meeting. I found it really helpful to have that public engagement with the with the the business owners
and as well as the property owners in the area having a separate um public engagement with the public and then kind of bringing everyone together. So, we really get both sides. Sometimes the owners don't want to say something in front of the the uh residents and vice versa, right? sort of to get a full understanding of uh what each want to
see in the area and then move forward with that. And I think with the discussion today, you're talking about, excuse me, he's talking about potentially um a new CRA. Um we could dovetail the some of the proposed regulations and changes that we want at least into your town center district.
Um, and of course you have the option, one of the options is to not move forward at all and um, we will provide you with whatever information we have and and uh, entertain maybe something in the future. So with that, that's all I have for this evening. I'm here to answer questions. Um, and again, thank
you very much for the time this evening. Thank you, sir. Sure. Questions, comments? happy to hear about a lawsuit on 180 that um lawsuit driven but at least somebody's making a stand against it and we can provide it actually just came
in today. We can provide the the there's a there's a draft of a potential resolution that that they may want communities to sign on to. So interesting. Okay. But I would be interested in seeing that. I'll be talking with the firm on Thursday. Okay. Great.
Would you be able to provide us uh a summary or an update after that conversation? Send it around. Uh yep. Okay. Yeah. The challenge with SP 180 has been as with many things in the last few years that there seems to be a
um an erosion of home rule. You know, especially in in light of uh the two events that we had last year that the city would be prohibited from taking any steps to make the city more resilient. Uh I just don't see how that
how that math computed in the decision- making. Now, this is nothing new, right? Because this is This bill has come before us every event for the last at least five years that I remember. Correct. Yeah. So, this isn't anything new or unexpected. is just
um is there an option C where we put your work on hold for an indefinite amount of time maybe 6 months to a year to see if something shakes out with uh the lawsuit or any changes to SB
or whether something comes back on the CRA and then we have something more concrete we can work on course you all you're all the policy makers so you know I I do think we could provide some analysis and some information for you for the town center.
I really think the town center is more about incentivizing additional development and not restricting. Um, but your comment about resiliency, that's something I think that's something that the cities are, you know, it's every city in the the entire state and you
know, every coastal community has the same issues, right? So, putting the restrictions on that are is is very difficult. I mean, I think our our help with you would be looking at land use, looking at the comp plan, looking at the zoning regulations, and see if we could
provide some incentive to help um uh enhance this area. So, but your decision moving forward. Commissioner is Nikki. Um, and just a question for and maybe this is between district one and two because you're more familiar with the
town center, but in light of everything that has happened with um the hurricanes um and what it looks like right now. I mean, it does this help as an opportunity for the community to be able to discuss what we would like it to look like or
what could help that area? Um because there might be a lot of restrictions that I'm not aware of, you know, land development codes or whatever it may be that's not allowing them um to move forward, you know. So, are are we missing could we potentially be missing
a time where we can get like he said, you're you want to target the people or the the owners, right? The people who own those properties um and working with them um first and then the rest of the city. I mean, it kind of sounded like a a nice um idea or
plan to being able to talk with that community about what we want it to look like or what we need help with. So, I think that um the the specifically Town Center one and
Town Center 2 I think is definitely in a spot where a a a review of the comp plan um or or or or some or potentially some maybe maybe not necessarily even a review of the comp plan. I think there are potentially some
some zoning idiosyncrasies that have come up since the hurricane, right? Um and and I think those are things that need to be addressed. And I think um for some of them it's an opportunity to address some
issues where there are some vacant buildings. And then there are some others where it's not it's not that we would lose an opportunity to address them now because it's vacant, but it's it's spots where the storm has highlighted areas that maybe um you know
maybe the original zoning isn't accomp wouldn't wouldn't be accomplishing what you know what was intended or what we intend. you know, as as one example, on the um on the south side of 76th Avenue all the way west um the last block of
76th Avenue to the west. It's the only place in the city, I think, where there is residential where it's zoned residential on one side of the street and commercial on the other side of the street. And this the side of the street that's zoned commercial has no
commercial. It only has multifamily and one single family. But all of those people after the storm were like, "Oh my gosh, if I had been more damaged and wasn't able to fix my property that I have, I wouldn't be able to build back what I have. I would have no option
except to build mixeduse or commercial." And the people across the street are going, I I don't really want to sit on my front porch and have coffee looking at a dentist's office when I've been looking at a house. And so, um, you know, I think there are places like that
that that the the storms have highlighted a need to fix some some what I would call a zoning error. Um, and there may be other areas where we have some opportunities where, you know, we could get some better redevelopment than what we're getting where people wanted to do something different after the
storm, but the zoning doesn't let them. Now, I don't know that any of that requires a wholesale comp plan review. Um, I think, you know, these are probably small areas that can be handled you know, one at a one at a time by staff, you know, fixing some little problems that have come up. So, um I
don't know if that's helpful to you at all, but So, there wouldn't need to be a change in the comp plan, you think? I mean, it's like if you're changing the use the zone, I mean, it's it's a change to the land development code. I don't know that it's a change to the comp plan.
Commissioner Maldonado. Uh, thank you. So, I think we've taken this project as far as we can. Uh, nothing's been done since May. We've received potential input for changes to uh, city codes and I do think that if we needed to at
some point, we can come back and relook at it. But there's plenty here um, I think to just go over and digest. But my question to the city manager is, is this something that we can do internally? as previously on the other issue and looks
like the heavy lifting's been done. So, if we're looking at the town center and the land development code, we do have expertise in house on zoning and these particular idiosyncrasies you're talking about. We've talked about them before.
So those could be handled in a more narrow approach and and make those recommendation, not even recommendations, bring you options to consider and then provide staff any direction you'd like to make to that code. Thank you.
Okay. So it seems, if I'm reading correctly, the consensus is to put this project on hold. I think so. Prepare to make a motion. I don't know. Doesn't require vote. It's and we're good. Yeah. Thank you,
Jim. Thank you, sir. Thank you. Have a good evening. Thank you for having hopefully we can get you back, you know, after a 180. Well, I will send you I'll I'll send your attorney the information. I think I think the more cities that join this, I think the better off we're all going to
be. So, thank you. Thank you, sir. Next on presentations, we have a proposed amendment to the noise ordinance. Good evening, mayor and commissioners. Brandon Barry, planner with the city. So, this is a followup from the
community meeting we had a few months ago discussing the noise ordinance in part. Um up to this point the city has explored two options for revising its noise ordinance. The second was presented to the commission um at prior discussions. Uh the first was simply
lowering the decibel standards. As the commission knows we have a 65 decel receiving limit during the day. At night it drops down to 55 dB receiving. Um some of the challenges with lowering that standard is that um you know we
obviously have existing uses that a lower standard may not be compliant with or rather the uses would become non-compliant with a lower standard. They may have been established years decades previously and they've continued to operate. So it's really addressing those existing uses with a lower
absolute standard. Um, we also have many areas of the city that already have a high ambient, which I'll use intermittently with uh background decibel levels. So, if the background um receiving decibel level at a location at
8:00 p.m., for example, is is 60 dB, setting a standard lower than that is in effective. We can't measure that. There's really no way to identify a sound source if they're in violation of what uh you know, what is in below a a background rating. What was brought to
you earlier this year was a plainly audible standard. This is a standard that other communities in the state have adopted. This is what it sounds like. If it can be heard, it's a violation. Uh the challenge that we faced was um defining the distance that was appropriate, any kind of exemptions, if
there were to be any exemptions at all in the time frames for the plainly audible standard. Um staff's only request is that the city does not have a sound engineer on staff. I'm certainly not one. and our code enforcement staff have training but they're not engineers and um we just asked that a clearly
enforcable ordinance that uses commonly acceptable technology like we have our decibel readers um and then techniques which is the training that we've received through the Penllis County Sheriff's Office for the use of that technology. So, the issue that staff as staff
understands it um looking for for confirmation from the commission on this and and direction tonight is that we frequently receive noise complaints based on a relative, which is a receiving rather than an absolute, which is a total decel concern. Um, generally
speaking, a 60 decel sound source in a commercial area at 5:00 at um on a Friday is going to be heard. it's going to be um a different magnitude relative to a quiet residential area on a Tuesday night at 10 p.m. Um so it's not necessarily about whether the sound
source is in compliance with that absolute standard, the 65, the 55 that we have on the books currently, but what is the actual magnitude? What is the effect on the receiving property? Um that's that's what we understand the issue to be both uh based on the community meeting earlier this year as
well as some of the complaints that we've received. Uh we also receive complaints where the sound source may not be violating the noise ordinance as it's currently adopted, but the resident typically um it it is loud relative to
the background noise at their property. Um and as I mentioned before, the background decibel level may already be at the 65 or the 55 dBA limit depending on the time of the day. So if there is a lower absolute standard that's set, it's uninforceable with our current equipment. So, some cities, I'll give an
example in just a moment, set a relative in addition to an absolute decibel standard that prohibits a single sound source from exceeding a specified decibel level difference compared with the background ambient level. Um, it can help preserve the piece during
reasonable hours as as specified. So, Naples is an example. They have an adopted standard. They do have those absolute standards, the 65, the 55 that we have during the the various hours of the day. But they also state that in no case will the noise level on the premise
of any additional of any occupied property exceed the ambient noise level by more than five dB. So that's controlling that single source being significantly louder than a background reading. Brennan. So in that case, that
would require a reading at that property at a different date when, let's say, the music from the neighbor wasn't playing. Well, the way that and and we'll have to work through this in the ordinance, but the way that the uh code enforcement department typically operates is they ask for the source to be stopped for some period of time so they can get that
background rating and we would codify that as a as a basis for um for taking that reading. So in this case, they would go out to that somebody calls in. It's 11 o'clock at night. Code enforcement goes out.
They take a reading. They go to the source. They ask them to stop. They come back. They take a second reading. And if there's more than a five decel difference, that would constitute a violation in this instance. That That's correct. Okay.
So, that's the direction we're um that's the item that we're seeking direction on. Um, sometime sometimes also the bands when they're playing, they'll break between songs to adjust their music or instruments. So, you'll have a song, a
break, a song, and then maybe a set and then a longer break. So, typically, if it's a music thing, there will be some periods when there's just the ambient. Wouldn't it's not always. I mean, in a disco or a I guess one for a better word, a rave,
something like that where the music just keeps going continuously, then you may not have a break. Yeah. All those raves we have at Coachella. No, I'm thinking more in terms of again the the live music is it's always the live music has never really been the
issue. It's always been the issue. It's past 10 p.m., right? Almost all of those instances that we've had primarily, it's been, you know, past 10 p.m. with a few exceptions that you know we've had issues that are during the day
somebody's just excessive. Um but usually it's later at night and it's it's ambient music from what or amplified music from whatever establishment. Wouldn't you take the reading first without them turning it off just because
they they would take it first and then go and ask them to take it off and then do it. Okay. Yeah. First, they would go out to the resident's home. They would take a reading. Okay. Just then they would turn off the source afterwards and then take a read. Go back to the property, take a second reading.
Just want to make sure I got the Brandon is the five decel difference does does it have anything to do with the absolute decibel standard? In other words, if if the ambient sound if the ambient noise was incredibly quiet, it was 10 dB
and the noise coming from the source is 15 dB or is the person making that noise then in violation? Yes, it would it would be an absolute difference. We we tend to see even during quiet hours the ambient is usually around 45 to 50. So it would typically be where and that's that's
receiving at the complainant's property. That's not necessarily at the source. the source. It's it's out the receiving thing. Okay. The other thing is five dB isn't So if you're going from from 50 to 55, you're not going up 10%. You're going
up. So every three dB is double the sound volume. Yeah. So at five, you're almost So going from 50 to 55 is almost three times as loud as it is at 50 baseline. So, it's it's not it may look like a
small increment, but it's actually exponential. And with most of our complaints being received in what we would consider to be the windown hours, so 7:00 p.m. to 7 a.m., that aligns with our current noise ordinance from 10:00 p.m. to 7 a.m. It
adds three hours in the front uh for those potential windown hours. That's when this would be enforced. it would not be during the day unless we receive guidance from the commission otherwise. Um it exempts those approved uses that are subject to the conditional use permit criteria. Those are often
significantly stricter than this ordinance would limit them to. Um for example, we recently approved a conditional use permit where the noise source could not even be heard from the abuing property. So that would obviously be much much stricter than this. It would exempt things like commission approved special events, any kind of
emergency repair work, things like that that are currently in the ordinance. they would remain exempt. Uh this isn't directly related. This is an additional request from staff, but as we bring more conditional use permits to the commission, it's clear that there are certain conditions that are always going to be expected. We feel that we should
just standardize those because we want applicants when they come in to know that these are going to be a requirement from the commission. Obviously, the governor is one of them. Um it's something that we can maybe hash out a little bit better through code so we can make it clear this isn't an extensive or an expensive um investment. it can
really just be putting the volume controls in a lock box that only management can access. So, it gives us our ability to set those expectations before they come forward. Um, it would make any of those conditions standard for any outdoor music conditional use permit. So, the commission could focus more on the context specific conditions
that would apply to that use. Um, this is not a replacement to the conditional use permit process. They would still come forward. We want to be changing that use in any way. We just be standardizing those technical requirements. They're also I mean there's certain events that don't require CUP. So for
example, you know, if they're having a block party, right, or if we're doing the summer concert series in Haran Park. So would there be exemptions for that? Because I could see a situation where the neighbor across, you know, Bokei, it's going to be more than five decels
from and they start at seven, right? And so would there be a special? So, as as part of the issuing permit for that event, it would also have an exemption to this particular item. Yes, we and we we've written those into recent conditional use permits. That's
something we can look at at the code criteria that it exempts special events that are specifically approved for that property. I'm saying that some of these would not be a cup, right? So, say if Corey Avenue Business Association decides they want to have a block party, they get a permit
for street closure and live music until 10 p.m., right? You know, will that permit then include an exemption for particularly just this part, the the five? Yes. Yes, it would. Any special event approved by the commission or we could add in, you know, any kind of
administratively approved that that limitation is more for um just just general private operating sound sources. So with that, um, we are looking for your guidance tonight. We have not completed a draft of any language. This is something just conceptually is what
we believe might address the issue as we understand it. We're looking for the commission's guidance. If this is something you're accepting of, we'll bring back a um revised ordinance in the near future. Thank you. So, one of the the questions that came up the last time this came this was
brought before the commission was that there might be it might be difficult to enforce. Will this give you the tools necessary? Will this make it will this give code enforcement and the sheriff's office something concrete that they can go back out with and say, "Here are numbers.
This is what it was. This is what it is." Yes or no? It it will. This isn't inconsistent with how we already do the readings, which is we take the source present and the background reading. We write them down. We compare them. They have that's how they they fill out their forms and they
use that as justification. I think some of the initial concern with the plainly audible is, you know, getting up and presenting that well, we heard it. We need some kind of evidence that it was actually a violation. And this this um it doesn't add any additional work on staff. It's something we already track
when we do these ratings. So it doesn't really change the way that code enforcement would operate. It would simply give them one additional resource and tool in their bag. That's correct. Okay. Commissioner, how many DB readers do we have? I believe we have two.
Do we need to get more? Um, I can speak with our code enforcement manager. I I don't think the complaints are frequent enough that we would need more than that. We have one I believe that we share with the sheriff's office and then we have one that is for staff. So,
and who calibrates those? Um, we we calibrate that part of the training process is how to calibrate them for who provided the training? The sheriff's office. Okay. Because I asked that question because I was on the receiving end of a
com of a phone call where the sheriff said he hadn't received training on the decimal on the raiders. So, um, and then I guess city city manager, are we going to have code enforcement after hours or
weekends or are we just relying on the sheriff's office? I think it's going to be a mix of both. I've talked to the captain who's our representative and he's assured me that all sheriff deputies that serve this city are trained or should be trained and able to respond after hours. So,
we're working on accountability with the sheriff's office as well as uh looking at code enforcement right now on whether we change scheduling, especially when we're doing targeted enforcement if we've had several complaints that rises to the level where we may change
schedules to actually address those areas and events because we have knowledge that we've been having a problem. So, we're just going to change the deployment on that as well possibly. And there also seemed to be some sort of issue with the sheriff's department getting info to our code enforcement for
whatever needed to be done on that. I don't know what the process happens after you get a violation. I don't know what happens after that. Maybe somebody can tell me. The way I understand it right now is um I'm thinking in particular of a recent
case where uh the sheriff's deputy was because they're typically on site at city hall daily and they did communicate directly to the code enforcement officer about the case. So they're communicating back and forth. That's typically how they would interact. They
So is it written or is it just a verbal or do you know? I I don't I don't know that level of detail. And then after that it goes to a fine to special magistrate to whatever. It goes to their cup review. I
So I I believe and maybe um our manager over code enforcement would know this better than me on what the exact process is for a citation for a noise. He's shaking his head. No. So, okay, we'll get you an answer. Okay.
And then if it does go to a situation like that, what happens with the CUP process if they're in violation? How does that get notified? Does that get notified to planning? Does it get who who does it notified? So, in order for a CUP
to be reconsidered by the commission, we would have had taken the case all the way to special magistrate with Right. Is it a two times? I think it's two strikes or is it one? Um I don't think it's twice. If we have I mean by the time we
get to special magistrate we have we're seeking compliance. If we can't get compliance, we could bring it up to the commission to consider whether or not that cup would be retracted. Thank you.
Okay. Do we have consensus whether we want the staff to move forward with this or or not? I think it sounds pretty reasonable. I'm um I mean clearly we'll get we'll get
feedback as we go forward from the community. Um the 7 o'clock at night seems like it might be a touch early, but like I say, I'm sure we'll get feedback as it goes forward. It seems like a pretty reasonable method. I look at it as that if if it doesn't
work, we can add more to it, right? Um it's like anything that we do up here, we can add more to it. We can take step away from it. Um it's an absolute only from the time that we say it's an absolute till the time we say it's not. Um and I think it needs to have some
sort of teeth to it. So I'm okay with it going forward as is. Okay. Sounds like we have consensus. City Manager. Thank you. All right. Next, we have general audience comments.
City clerk, do we have any? Yes. Vincent Torminia. If you'll please state your name and address for the record. Vincent Torminia, 3514 Kazablanca Avenue, St. Pete Beach, Florida. I'm here for a couple of reasons tonight.
The first one is I want to thank you Francis and commission for keeping us dry on Kazablanca Avenue. That's my first thing. I had said it on the news but they cut it off. So I came
I wanted to come here in person and I want to thank you for doing everything possible to help us. So that's one. The second thing is I want to know about the state case against the
former commission if the state attorney was posted last time said he'll try and find out what's going on with the state investigation. I called last week and once again
they're not able to provide comment at this time. Okay. And the last thing is that in two weeks we'll have a post office again. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you, Vinnie. Kathy Garcho,
if you please state your name and address for the record. Kathy Garsha, um 3607 Casablanca Avenue. And um so I wanted to speak on the financial workshop discussion. Again, I
it is frustrating. We can't comment and uh I know a decision had to be made in the previous meeting. Um I don't know how many people are paying attention to what's happening in our community. Um,
so I'm going to and I'm not suggesting I'm anywhere close to having any expertise, but I'll spend definitely hours pouring through this and then I come in here and ask some more dumb questions. So, I'm going to assume you all have a much deeper set of insight
than me based on the decisions you have to make. But as far as I'm concerned, what I'm hearing is we need a $16 million emergency bridge loan because of the circumstance that we are running at
that level in this city and we're in the middle of hurricane season. Again, we are bare bones on our funds for from a general fund standpoint with just two to three months um available in terms of just having some cushion, which by the
way, we're using the general fund, 27% of it to help offset and subsidize our enterprise um funds that don't have enough to address. And I'm the last person to want to say, "Yeah, raise my
taxes." But when I looked at a $300 increase for a year when I'm thinking, "Well, right now we're all pouring money into our homes." And I know you all think you're being kind by saying, "Well, we want to give you a break." But the truth is, I want my infrastructure fixed. I want the city to look great
again. I don't want to just see you guys out there repairing and trying to recover. I want us building, you know, things that are going to be for the next 50, 60 years. So when you think about helping us be pennywise, like let's
please look at the big picture and help all the community and all the citizens understand that $300 more a year equated to something substantial rather than us kind of limping along with I think what
we all feel like is a break fix kind of city right now. So, I guess that's all I have to say. You've made your decision. Um, but I think we've got a long road ahead of us. And my favorite thing, which I'm going to just lay here, unless
I can't show, but we have zero dollars in our resiliency fund yet. It is our topic uh that we cover. It's not showing up.
Okay. We have se about 70 million in today's dollars in resiliency projects and there's no money. So I think y'all need to consider answering to us as citizens, how do we fund that? Thank you.
Thank you. And just so that we can catch everybody up so that for people that did not watch the budget meeting earlier. Um, so I'll just I want to just say two things, Kathy, to to what you mentioned. Uh, one, the bridge loan, and we
probably should have done a better job explaining the bridge loan. Um, so when we spent all of that money on emergency services, trash pickup, clean out, all of the things that we did right there. So we had reserve funds and emergency
fund, which is why it's at zero, and that was all drawn down, right? And now it can take city manager, please correct me, anywhere from one to two to three years from FEMA to finish the reimbursement process. Could be five to seven actually. Okay. So we've drawn down those funds.
And so one of the reasons we looked at the bridge loan is because it is a zero interest. You know, we're not making any payments is to have that there in case there is another event in the next 10 years while we wait for FEMA to reimburse us. So the reason why our
reserves are so low is because of that. And then this is here for an emergency situation should we need those funds again. Now we have them available. The second component of that is and I can't speak for the other commissioners. I'll simply reiterate my point that I made
during the budget meeting is that we can increase revenue to the city by increasing taxes or we can look at somewhere else and we are looking somewhere else because we do need those additional funds. And so one of the
things that the city manager has done for the last three or four months is looking at a fee study to make sure that the impact fees, the permitting fees, the rent fees, all those things that we charge are actually what we need to be charging. And the second part that I
point out, for example, is parking. We could just as easily raise the rate to residents by a couple of points and get $ 1.5 million in. Or we can raise parking by $1 and have the exact same effect without impacting our residents. So rather than charging our residents
for the money that we need, we'll pass it on pass. You can go down there any weekend. Everyone's circling. Why? Because there's too many cars and not enough parking. And so we could potentially raise that. and we're going to continue raising it and the fee study
and the parking study will tell us how far can we push it but there it's not that the commission is saying we don't need more money but do we charge it to our residents or do we charge it to our visitors and if we have the option of charging to the visitors and not raising on taxes on
people who are already doing plenty of things to their homes who've already got plenty other expenses right now that they weren't planning on my vote is going to be let's charge the visitors let's let's charge more for parking. You can't make million. We're not. You got resiliency.
That's my point. I'm not arguing. Yeah. You can incrementally get a million dollars and improve our site. Absolutely. Amen. Do it. So resiliency pro the resiliency projects are three times what you
mentioned. They're not 70 million. They're about 200 million. And so, and this that's not something we're going to fix today. I I all I can tell you is that there are things we're working on that hopefully in the next couple months we can bring to the commission say here are some ideas of
how we get $200 million because it has to happen one way or the other. It's not a matter of whether it gets done or not. It's just a matter of how and when. And the decision that was made today at the budget uh workshop was not to increase taxes on our residents,
but rather look at alternatives for generating that revenue to bring that in because we it's we need the money. Not having it is not an option. It's just where do we get it from? And it was just that the commission decided that was not the pot that we wanted to tap at this
point. We have other we have other resources and options and we should exhaust those first before we raise taxes. But your comments are 100% valid. Thank you. Deb Shakner.
If you'll please state your name and address for the record. Um Deborah Shaknner, Boka Isle Drive in St. Pete Beach. Um first, just there's something simple. I've been in touch with Publix, but they haven't gotten back to me yet. They have rebuilding
what they're going to do, and I'm not sure what's happening at the cash and carry. So, if you have that information, I'd like to have it. So, regarding the June 24th, 2025 commission meeting, during the discussion of appointing an interimm
district 4 commissioner, commissioners Marriott and Resniki had already decided that Mr. Shuros was their choice for district 4 interm commissioner. Interestingly, both commissioners stated that they had many phone calls we
received as well as many emails convincing them that Mr. Sheros was the best choice among the candidates. Their reasoning was that they were listening to residents. That rang very false to me and I'm going
to tell you why. Because when each commissioner received hundreds of emails as ask asking them to vote no on Tradewinds and Sarata Resort as well as hundreds of residents showing up at meetings. So many that overflow areas
were added. Residents comments in both cases did not sway Commissioner Marriott. She chose to vote yes on both those projects. Commissioner Rosenki voted for one of the projects. Clearly, an
overwhelming majority of residents who asked you to vote no on these projects voiced their opinion, presented facts and information. Unfortunately, they were completely marginalized and ignored. enter the June 24th meeting and
suddenly both commissioners stated they were listening to the residents as all of those phone calls came and those emails that you both said you received so many that you compelled yourself to vote for Mr. Heroes residents also
showed up at that June 24th meeting were not heard by either of you as your collective minds were made up. But those phone calls and those emails commanded an influence you could not resist. My
question is how many phone calls and how many emails did you receive? And I do plan to follow up with a public records request. So don't tell me you've Those residents really matter, but they only mattered this time. They didn't
matter when a city was experiencing the large resort. And you know that the crowds were here. You know, you received so many emails, but it didn't count then, but it counted this time. So, where is it? Thank you.
Thank you. Thank you, city clerk. Next we have the consent agenda. Is there a motion to approve the consent agenda? I was pulling um item D. Everything we're only voting on AB and amended C.
Okay. D was pulled. Thank you. Do I pull it now though? I wanted to talk about C. That's right. We did not pull it, but we there's nothing to say we cannot pull it. So,
we're going to we're going to isolate 4 C and D and the consent will just cover A and B. I'll make a motion to approve consent items A and B. I'll second. City clerk, if you'll please do a roll call.
Commissioner Maldonado, yes. Vice Mayor Marriott, yes. Commissioner Robinson, yes. Commissioner Rzniki, yes. And Mayor Petilla, yes. Motion carries. Okay. Next, we have item 4 C, authorize a work order with Roland,
Inc. So, I had I had um asked a couple of questions. I know I think um the city manager shared some of the responses to all of us, but I still had a couple more and maybe Kim then you could help with
this, but you know, we've been talking a lot about saving money here and, you know, looking at our budgets and everything and and this is an $84,000 ask for a temporary barrier. And this is where I get stuck. and I and I saw the drawings that you sent didn't show me
like where I I read the you know the address in the intersection. Um and I did and I walked over there and I went by and and and then I that's why I asked you know about failure and what we looked at because in that side of um
Gulf Way that wall has the space it's the wall it had the sidewalk and then the dune right so when you look at the south end sorry the north end from Paradise Grill on that side and if any of you have walked there and seen it the
wall is abuing the sand right so um to me just by observation not being an expert you know and I looked at what the report was it's because of all that pressure water and sand cutting across
could have impacted that wall greater than on the north side um because the north side already had the sand behind it right um and then if I remember too we had some impact because of the moving
of the sand and and this part I don't think was answered but I don't remember if it was one of the questions but when they were cleaning out the sand on Gulf way they being and I say they because I'm not sure which company was doing it and then I know we had people out there who were doing the cleaning of the sand so they're kind of sorting the sand
piling it up in you know heaping piles it was like a hill of sand out there um that some damage occurred during that time as well so besides the storm maybe there was a possibility of two two hits because of the cleaning efforts. Um, but
if this is something I think from my understanding that's coming in 2026 for a permanent fix, what is the concern of having to do this right now to have a temporary like is there a safety issue? Is, you know, at
first I thought, oh, it's to hold the sand, but without knowing where this wall is going, is it going to hold back the sand that's already been piled or is it being placed in the same location? Because if if we're in the same location, any wind or sand or storm is
going to do the same thing. You know, it's just going to topple it over like a domino, right? And just fall fall out. Um, so I know I hit you with a couple of questions, but that was my thought. And if we're going to be spending the money in 2026, why put an $84,000 investment
now and just go ahead and do it permanent? Thank you for those questions. Uh, for the record, Camden Mills, public services director. Um, so to your first point about the location, uh, we would propose to, um, put it on the west side of that sidewalk closer to to the sand,
similar to like what you see, um, on north of 9th Avenue. Um, and we would propose the permanent wall replacement, um, be that as well. Um, that we would place it as close to the dune as possible rather than on the eastern side of the sidewalk um, like it was
previously. Um due to uh the question about you know additional damages post storm during con or from contractor I can't speak to you know what damage was done during the sand placement but I will say there was some areas of the wall that had like exposed rebar um that
we saw and we did demo those that section of the wall as well um just because it posed a safety threat. So there was some additional wall removal um beyond what was just um completed because of the storm damage. Um the timing and and the need for um you know
why this temporary wall instead of just waiting waiting for the permanent wall. Um really I I'll I'll leave that that decision up to you guys to to decide on. We have um received a lot of community feedback of of just wanting something in place there. I do believe that, you
know, a temporary berry wall would serve better than than no wall at all. Um, but I do definitely think that the permanent solution is is what would be the fix against a major storm surge event. Um, the timing of that project, as you know, right now is planned for fiscal year 26.
Um, so what we would do solicit um a request for a proposal for engineering and contractor um design build team. And then once that um selection process goes through, which takes several months, um you know, then we'd bring it to commission to get that contract approved, we'd start the work and the
engineering design phase would start um before the construction obviously. So there would be there will be quite a big time gap um until that permanent wall does actually get installed. Um so this would just be a temporary basis to carry us through storm season.
Was the concern aesthetic? Like what was the community concerned about? because it's not going to look obviously like what it looked before. And and if you look at those pictures, we're talking about F dot barriers is basically the walls you see when you're going through the highway, right? Those concrete. Correct. Yep. It would be like those
those jersey barriers. Um I think protection from sand um was one concern, wind blown sand and also if we were to have another storm surge event. Um I think another concern was um just people over the dunes or walking through the dunes. Some of that orange fencing I know um you know people can cut through
it and go through. I think this would provide more of a permanent type barrier um for those people that that would be trying to trespass on onto the dunes. Um so those are some of the major type of concerns that I've heard from the community. So if it were in 2026, would it be um
like would the proposals be coming like June July for the next fiscal? Is that what you meant? I would hope we would get the um the request for proposal out in the first quarter of fiscal year 26. Um, so that that's something that request for proposal document has been drafted. Um,
so I'm hoping we can get that onto the streets soon so we can start implementing this project as close to October 1st as we can. Thank you. Is any of this eligible for FEMA or any other That's a great question. This this
temporary wall would not be eligible um for FEMA expense. The permanent wall replacement is a FEMA project that we're working through. Okay. And then um they're jersey barriers that you're using, correct? And they're just rebarbed in it looks like from the diagram.
I just want to make sure. Okay. Thank you. I I would just add that overwhelmingly uh especially last night that the community over in district 4 really wants this to happen. You know, the the biggest concern is that we're still 90 days into uh hurricane season and that
if something were to happen, this is a mitigation measure. The other thing is uh hopefully you can just comment for a second on the improvement even of these barriers with the toes and how that's going to work to help secure that better than what we had there previously. Thank you.
Sure. Yeah. So the the permanent wall that that we're proposing um would have a foundation to it um with a toe and and the purpose of that is to prevent um some overturning movement of that wall. I think what we saw from the sand movement and the storm surge that um
water was able to get underneath the existing wall and underneath the existing sidewalk which contributed to some of the the roadway damage um that was sustained. So a wall that has more of a deep footer um foundation would help prevent those overturning forces um
and help prevent um further upland um damage in a future event. Do you have a guesstimate on what the uh permanent wall is going to run? So the permanent wall just based on like an FDOT unit price for that type is about 225,000
total. Um but that's just for the wall material itself. Of course, you know, you'd have mobilization cost, overhead and profit added on top of that. Um in total, we're estimating about like $3 million for that that project. And that's going to FEMA potentially FEMA
reimbured FEMA for the wall section of it. The the roadway pavement portion is is not FEMA reimburseable. And does a 3 mil cover the road as well? Mhm. Okay. Okay. Is there a motion?
I make the motion to approve. I second. City clerk, if you please do a roll call. Vice Mayor Marriott? Yes. Commissioner Robinson? Yes. Commissioner Rzniki? Yes. Commissioner Maldonado? Yes. Mayor Petrilla? Yes.
Motion carries. Next, we have item 4 D, purchase of workstations. I just had a few questions on that. Um, I know probably everybody saw my questions, which were how many staff? I
understand we have seven limited person personnel that are uh looking to be in this 13 unit of uh workstations. I'm just wondering is there any other since they're limited personnel the
other staff person positions haven't even been staffed. Is there any other usage of space that we have? Um the conference room either one. I know the upstairs one doesn't look like it gets used too much. Is can we put
technical review up there and move everybody else into the, you know, other other uh conference room. I'm just trying to think of ways to save money and I'm looking at everything. So, anybody staff-wise, don't get too offended because I'm looking at everything. So,
I don't think it's a matter of having the physical space, the the rooms. This is speaks more to what we put in those rooms so that they're not sitting at a coffee table or a dining table or laptops, but rather so that they have
legitimate workstations that at least create some separation and some it's not going to be private because it's cubicles, but at least have there's not a lot of talking on the phone. It's not a it's not a sales force. Yeah. So,
did you want to expand on Well, just um I will say our conference rooms are so overloaded that I've created technology in my office now to create another conference room space so that I can meet with groups of six or less. And I mean I would not ask a staff
member to sit at a conference table for eight hours a day. It's not I I'll speak to ergonomics. I've have a lot of experience in that space and um it's just not a comfortable work environment to ask someone to sit like that all day.
We could start to reduce cubicle size possibly. Uh I mean there's probably some re engineering but you're talking about dimminimous savings if I tried to take one or two cubicles
away. Um, so I I support the project and put it forward. So I'll limit my comments to that. Thank you. I believe that you made uh efforts to look at other options, peacemailing it
and looking at uh cheaper, lower cost things. Uh but I think that the ergonomics piece uh plays a critical role as does just the health, welfare, and morale of your staff. We want to make sure that they're adequately uh prepared and equipped to do their job to the full set of capabilities and that they're not,
you know, forced to do it with inconveniences. Thank you. I'll make a motion to approve the purchase of workstations with the CI group in the amount of 285474 cents. Second. City clerk.
Commissioner Robinson. Yes. Commissioner Rzniki. Yes. Commissioner Maldonado. Yes. Vice Mayor Marriott. Yes. Mayor Petrilla. Yes. Motion carries. Thank you. Next we have ordinances 6A
final reading of ordinance 2025-10 amendments to the land development code division 26 sign ordinance. If I can read the header. This is the second and final reading of ordinance 2025-10, an ordinance of the city of St. Pete
Beach, Florida for the purpose of adopting amendments to the land development code division 26 sections 261 through 2642 entitled sign ordinance to ensure contentneutral sign definitions, standards, regulations, and requirements
and adopting amendments to the requirements for permitting, enforcement, and maintenance for new, existing, and non-conforming signs in all zoning districts. providing for codification, conflicts, severability, correction of scriveners, errors, construction,
publication, and effective date. And Brandon will walk you through the changes we made since the first second reading. Thank you. So, we received two comments um at the last meeting to make amendments. Um both of them were were great feedback. The
first is on page 162 of the packet, page eight of the ordinance pertaining to vehicle signs. Uh the current definition which was brought forward was a little unclear. Um the first sentence kind of preceded the second in in ways that it shouldn't have. So uh we modified that
based on that to make it more clear that um any vehicle parked in a way that's adverse to a commercial vehicle standard would be considered a vehicle sign. I'm assuming it has a sign on it. Um, there was some feedback from the commission regarding allowances for residential
vehicles, especially personal vehicles that are wrapped to not be subject to the 72-hour removal requirement that was drafted to apply to those in commercial or mixed use. I'm sorry to do this at the podium, but I do ask instead of the what was drafted by staff as commercial
or mixed use just be changed to non-residential. it was clear that the um the request from from the city commission was to allow those exceptions for residential property. So, if we could just make that change um if this is something the commission would like us to move forward with. And uh like I
said, it's for any commercial vehicle that's currently prohibited from overnight parking on a residential property, those that are longer than 20 feet, more than 10 feet tall. That standard is not changing. That's in our parking division. This applies only to those personal vehicles that are wrapped
with commercial um signage. And then moving on to page 183, which is page 29 out of 42 of the ordinance. That's where we're talking about transitional and emergency signage. We already have those standards in for state of emergency. Those are un
unchanged. There was direction from the commission at the last meeting to look at those more parcel specific catastrophic events. That's something we already define in our code. When there's a fire, when there's something that affects one specific property that maybe is not citywide that requires that
citywide declaration, this would allow for an additional banner during the time that it takes to restore the property. Um, one additional freestanding sandwich board sign or another sign type that would be deemed appropriate by the city manager. We didn't want to write something so prescriptive that it couldn't address those those business
specific um needs, but that would be specifically in the case of a catastrophic event and it would last for the duration of that event. Those are the two changes we made. I'm happy to receive any more feedback. If not, we would request your motion to adopt this
ordinance 202510. Questions, comments? I have two things. One is on uh the election signs on page 173. I was just curious because in the candidates book it's 45 days.
Here we now have it 30 days and prior we had zero in here. So we've gone 0 4530. I I don't know who whose intent was that from zero to 30. page of the ordinance 173. Uh no, no,
temporary ordinance page number. Um I'm uh page 19. 19. Okay. Thank you. 19 temporary signs. So 45 is the current adopted standard. Um, we're happy to change it back to 45 because I'm just pointing out that it's
changed dramatically and the the I believe the candidate book still still says 45, but eight months ago or what, six months ago that got Nixay to nothing because it's wasn't in our code as anything.
So, it's just it it's a big black hole. And so, just bringing that up that if that's what everybody wanted, 30 days. And then the other thing was on page 182. Um, did we take in consideration Beach Theater? It's our only theater for theater signs for the marquee because
they actually have two, right? And it says for one theater sign um they have a variance for it. I believe they went Brendan might remember, but I think I remember hearing they go for a variance for they did get a variance for the beach. Yes, they went
through that. I just wanted to make sure of that. I don't think we're doing any other theaters for a while. And I did just want to specify the signs in this section 26.18. These are additional signs that are based on the use. They're not limited to a commercial message or not, but they would be
allowed an additional sign as a theater use that would not be allowed to a non-theater use based based on this. So, okay. Yeah, I saw the free stamp and there's the mark. It looked like the marquee five feet. Yes. 3x5 and then a but it said per each theater.
So that was the that would be a bonus sign but in their case they would still have needed a variance that wouldn't have changed but they did go they were approved last year. They used to have the two marquee signs here and then the two up top. So okay
I'm not seeing the change from 30 to 45. Um I'm on page 19. It was zero originally. Which section? Um hang on. You got to try to strike through section E or K I.
Okay. So it was 45 days and 7 days following. Now it's 30 days and 2 days following and but everything else is two days like everything which kind of makes sense. That's the two days I didn't really think there was an issue. I was just concerned about
No, I'm just saying that's the change. I'm trying to understand where that change came from because I don't think it came from here. No, no, I don't think it did. Um, that's what have been drafted by our consult and we're happy to change it. I don't I don't have any particular preference. I don't I don't think that needs to be
changed in any way. Let's go with what the council wants to So, you want 40 back to 45 and seven or was that the original? I mean, I I don't If it's two everywhere else, then that's fine. It it I think it's two everywhere else that I read for
all temporary signs it's two and I think even special events are two or two days. So everything's two days. So the consistency I think would be good the 45 days I think it should go back to that or to zero. I mean because we didn't
follow any I mean there's no state statute as well. So it was just in the candidates's book at one point nowhere else. 45 and two seems to make good um common sense. 45
any rational basis will support the numbers. Well, we would be making any changes. It wouldn't be a change. The only thing is the two would change to conform with all the others. Okay. It's defensible. Let's go with the 45. Do we have any
audience comments? No comments. Okay. Any comments, questions from the commission? Is there a motion to I'll make a motion to adopt final reading of ordinance 2025-10
as amended. Would that be correct? as amended at from the um podium to incorporate the changes um described by staff and uh by the mayor. That second.
City clerk, if you'll please do a roll call. Commissioner is Nikki? Yes. Commissioner Maldonado? Yes. Vice Mayor Marriott? Yes. Commissioner Robinson? Yes. Mayor Petrilla? Yes. Motion carries. Next we have items for discussion. The
first one is 7A Brownsfield designation for 75 Corey Avenue. So this is a statutory requirement that we announce this prior to bringing it forward to you. This will be a resolution. It'll be on your next agenda. It's actually statutoily
required to be two readings. Um and we will have the attorney for the request at the next meeting. Um just to be clear, I know it was in the agenda report. This doesn't commit any kind of development. This is an expansion of a declaration that was performed back in 2022 for six parcels that made up the
Corey Landings property. The owner of the entire East End now um has acquired two additional properties. they're looking they are actively remediating them um and they are looking for the tax credits that are associated with that and some of the other benefits that come along with it. So we will bring that
resolution forward. Um it's been prepared by their council and um it'll it'll go through the two readings. It doesn't approve any specific development plan. It just a requirement that they have an end use of the property designated even as of right end
use that would return the property to use and create I think a minimal 26 jobs. Yes, which any of the as of right uses would do. Okay, questions, comments?
Great discussion. Thank you. Next we have the city manager's annual review. Thank you, mayor and city commissioners. If I can briefly address you um and kind of highlight some of the contents of
your packet that were published in the agenda. First, I just want to extend my heartfelt gratitude for having the opportunity to serve as your city manager. It has really been an honor this last year to work alongside such a dedicated team and um really this
wonderful community that my husband and I have been able to immerse ourselves in and your support and collaboration has been invaluable. Um, and I really do look forward to continuing to work together on our shared goals and implementing the commission's uh policy
direction and and helping um our community rebuild and and uh be better. For uh purposes of just going on the record for the process, um I as part of my contract, there's a 12-month performance evaluation process for uh
the city manager. And this process does include as approved in the December 2024 meeting a 360 evaluation which was conducted anonymously by various staff members at all levels in the organization. Since I
did complete an evaluation six months ago, I decided that because of the short time period, I essentially asked the same exact people or people in those positions to participate in the survey. So there wasn't a statistical variation um that would swing in that
short time period. Uh and also each one of the commissioners was asked um with the exception of Commissioner Maldonado who was appointed uh after that process had been completed. However, Commissioner Mahalland did participate
and all of your results are in the packet and have your name on them for public record uh based on Florida law. So just to highlight a few things. Um I do think the evaluation highlighted some themes that I heard from you to focus
more attention and um effort in the future. Some of those included continuous improvement and communication and followup from staff. um continuing to invest in community engagement, cross- departmental collaboration, and consistent customer service
excellence, as well as refining the organizational structure, which you're hoping hoping to see in this budget process. I continue to to address that and I think most importantly is addressing infrastructure needs for the community. On the positive side, what I heard from
you was that um the commission did note accomplishments such as increased collaboration even though we have some work to go um an authentic leadership style, sound staffing decisions, enhancing organizational effectiveness, very positive feedback on storm recovery
efforts, increased staff responses citywide, and improved transparency in and financial reporting. In the self-evaluation, I expressed my gratitude for the opportunity to lead the organization and highlighted the resiliency and teamwork as well as the
commitment distri demonstrated by the employees during my tenure. Despite the challenges posed by back-to-back hurricanes, I think we achieved many notable outcomes, including the implementation of a comp competitive pay
plan that the commission had approved um shortly be before my arrival. Um we did complete many key infrastructure projects just based on recovery and rebuilding. And I think and I've heard that the community is happy with the
improvements in transparency and communication which I'm committed to continuing. And to highlight this evaluation includes goals for the next evaluation cycle. Um, we're going to be working on continuous improvement and communications, decreasing the funding gap for critical
infrastructure, implementing major um, organizational changes, aligning the strategic plan with budget goals, and maintaining actions that promote morale and strong performance. Um so with that I did include a uh amendment request to my contract which
included um the commission approving which would be a contract amendment at a future meeting for a cost of living adjustment the same as that is to be approved in the upcoming budget. And um I would ask that that effective date also be the same date that the employees
receive their increase as well as um an additional one week of paid time off um in my contract amendment. And with that, I'm happy to answer any questions or um additional feedback, commissioners.
Go ahead. Well, I just wanted to um it's kind of nice to hear you you say it, you know, even though it's stuff that we should be saying. It's kind of reversed, but um but it's nice to hear because I I do commend you for a lot that you have done. It it's um been a real rough year,
I would say, for many people. Um but for those who are working and seeing everything that you're seeing everything from the whole city, sometimes we only see what's happening in our house. So, um it takes a toll. I know a lot of your staff work work and live here as well as
as as you do and I'm sure rebuilding is in is in hard. So I just wanted to commend you on that. Um because it's been my gosh I don't know it's three years I think I can't even remember that the year that everything kind of was very sour for a while and then we think
or at least I thought as on commission everything's going to get better last year and then we get hit with you know the unthinkable. So, um, you know, I do commend you on that. Um, it's not an easy job, I'm sure. Commissioner Marriott.
Um, yeah, I think, you know, there there's no doubt even for people who aren't paying attention that things are better in St. Pete Beach than they have been in the past. And uh um and I think you deserve the bulk of the credit for
that. And so, um, I know I I regularly hear from residents things like, you know, I don't know, she moved from California. We weren't sure about her, but but but but now that we see what's happened, everybody's pretty happy. So, uh um so thank you. And uh um it's been
it's been a pleasure. Thank you. You did a great job getting us through the hurricanes. I greatly appreciate that. and especially without having any processes in place. So, um that is uh definitely appreciative of of that.
So, we've only had brief uh three almost four weeks together and I will tell you that you know you have helped me hit the ground running. I think that your accountability with your staff and your leadership uh exudes the kind of confidence and direction that we
need here and that I am certainly very appreciative of even your tutelage over this uh brief period. But I do commend you for the feedback that I've gotten from folks in district 4 and just that quick turn at uh how responsive you are to their needs as well. So thank you
very much. I I will I will definitely say that's true. I mean, everyone says you respond. You know, sometimes you might take another day. So, I know people want it now, but it's because you're doing your due diligence and looking for the information. It's not that you're ignoring
their request, you know, and and I do want to add again that I know we've emphasized always on the storm, but we had an internal storm in the city that people don't realize there's a lot going on between all the departments. Um, so it's you were hit by two storms, you
know, it was it was we had to find another city manager, right? And there was a lot that was being investigated and looked at and then you come in and then there's a physical storm, you know, to top it off. So, I'm sure it wasn't easy. I would say I
wonder I thought to myself, oh my gosh, is she going to like walk away? This is too much, you know, being hit by multiple storms and all means. So that's so I I wanted to speak primarily to our residents
um because the subject of compensation and you know the entire package comes up quite frequently especially for the commission that generally gets to decide for the three charter officers city
clerk, city manager and city attorney. And I'm not going to say anything that you haven't heard already. Somebody else say it's like, well, how come we have the second or highest paid city manager in the county? We're only the 14th largest
city out of 23. And I think part of that part of those comments come because maybe you don't necessarily see everything that we get to see. And so I want to share some of those things that that we see that maybe the general
public doesn't see. But something that the general public would have seen is how some of our sister cities have weathered these storms. And it wasn't like us. I'm not saying that our process was perfect. I remember
those town halls where we were packed every single week for months on end, commission meetings full. It wasn't perfect. But to what Commissioner Rosniki said, the moment that Francis Roastelli
stepped in, that moment in time, she was a third city manager in nine months. The first one didn't leave necessarily in the most auspicious circumstances. We had a commission that resigned in
mass. So yeah, there was a lot of turmoil. And for anyone to so I don't know why you stepped into that. Um because at some point you have to ask yourself is the money worth the squeeze? I mean really the amount
would you do the job for any amount of money stepping into that situation? And that was a mountain to climb that was would have been a challenge and near insurmountable for most people. And so I do commend you for having done that. And that is before we got hit by two
historic storms. And then you throw that on top of it. You have turmoil in the staff and the departments complete reorganization from ground up. Tormal in the commission and stability in the city in every single aspect. Uh and to step into that and then have in your second
third month here two historic storms and then have to deal with everything on top of that. And so I want to draw just your attention to a couple things that you may not have seen. I don't remember the last city manager that lived in the city.
The last city manager that actually invested, you know, their livelihood and their time and energy by buying a house here, especially one that was, you know, hurricane damage. Um, we haven't seen that before. This to
me speaks as somebody that's committed to being a part of the community, not just working here, but actually being part of it. And you've heard that, you know, the response time act just actually having a response, you know, you would think that isn't
something to that would be part of the job, but we haven't had that experience certainly in the past. Uh Francis has subjected herself to three to two 360 evaluations since she started. I can tell you the previous city
managers I worked with refused. They didn't want it. They did not want to be evaluated by their peers. Now to me, the city manager works with the commission, right? But they also work with the directors, with the staff. We have, if you saw the budget meeting, we
have 1457 staff, right, that they're responsible for. So why would you not want to have feedback? We as a commission, you as the residents, why would you not want to have feedback from the people that daily interact with the city manager? I certainly want to and we asked for that
and we were refused. Francis said, "Hey, do it twice." Vinnie was here just a couple couple minutes ago and Commissioner Rzniki, you've been been here and here. Have you ever heard Vinnie say a positive thing
about the flooding in the donor neighborhood? And let's say response time there. I mean, how much does Vinnie and Vinnie sends a lot of emails and a lot of text messages and he specifically took the time just to come here and say thank you and the
thanks belongs to you and the staff. Just a couple of other things that you probably don't see. So, the city manager has a disc a discretionary fund that they're allowed to use. They can spend up to $25,000 pretty much for anything they want. They
don't have to come to the commission for for approval. We had two items today on the docket that city manager could have just pushed through, never asked us for it, and that's just two today. And I've seen one almost
every single commission meeting for the last year. And I can tell you that hasn't been the case in the past because in the past, you can just look at the public records requests, how many times we've had 2495,
24,500, right? Things that just got snuck in just under the radar. And that to me speaks to a level of transparency and respect for this, just respect and stewardship for what she's been entrusted with as far as the city resources and funds. I mean, that that
speaks to me to something that she does not have to do, yet she still does it. And so, I thought it'd be important to point out. And so, really, primarily to me, um, the fact that you've chosen to move your
family here and invest in this community uh, speaks louder than most other things. And so, for that, thank you. And I just wanted our residents to just hear and hear about some of those things that go on behind the scenes that you may not
necessarily see and to articulate why I for one I'm I don't have a problem with the request um that you've made. I would wholeheartedly endorse it and um I'd love to have you here for another year
and five years and 10 years. Thank you. and this is where you choose to retire. It's good by me. Thank you. So, um but with that, we do need consensus from the commission. If you're all right with the request and you want to move that forward or Absolutely.
Absolutely. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Next we have Commissioner Robinson. A discussion item on beach. Um I just want to bring up the fact that
uh did have a couple residents bring up the issue with the separating of the three elements with the beach ordinance. Um being that the last two are a bit intertwined and whether it would be better served
for you know uh for customary use and and what we have with what the hotels their beach use as well as the residents beach use and how those two can be shared con and be consistent and whether
you know separating out the wildlife made sense but whether or Not keeping the other two separate or doing them both together would be of more benefit. That way there's consistency. I mean we had talks about umbrellas. We're going to have in talks umbrellas on both
sides. We're going to have different talks on it. It kind of makes sense to put it both together so that there is consistency with whether it be, you know, um alcohol on the beach or umbrella size or whether they're 10 sore umbrellas, whatever. Um, it did make
sense in that regards to to put those both together instead of separating them out. At least we get consistency between both sides. Just so it was uh proposed to go into three. Which two do you want to put together or you uh well keep basically keep the wildlife
out? That really was a total separate put the other two together. I I'm not sure I agree. And I'm not sure either. Okay. That's why I wanted to bring it up for discussion. Yeah. So, one of the reasons was recommended
from our city attorney's office, which I'll let you elaborate, but because there was some consternation over certain particular parts of the ordinance. If the ordinance gets challenged, we lose the whole ordinance. in its
entirety, not just the portion being challenged. Okay? And so we were worried, we wanted to get as much through as we could that we knew would not be challenged and then leave the most complex part to discuss
separately to see if we could get some agreement with the stakeholders as we move that ordinance forward to minimize the potential of a challenge. So that was one of the primary reasons for doing so as well. Okay. I just I don't believe that was
stated as such during the conversation as to the you know the actual reason they were divided. Not at the Monday meeting but at the previous one. Yeah. Because you remember I was not for splitting it up at all.
We also have Senate Bill 180 now too. It's come up since then. So we're doing a review of the ordinance or impacts from Senate Bill 180 will not impact the behavioral type ordinances would only interfere with development. Uh so we're
making sure that uh the ordinance is is properly oriented. Thank you. With that we move on to uh staff reports. City clerk. Thank you, city manager. No further report. Thank you, city attorney.
Well, I just wanted to let you all know that Friday I'm going to the Florida Municipal Attorneys Association conference. One of the topics will be noise ordinances entitled the noise ordinances, good, the bad, and the ugly. And there's also
updates on federal contracting requirements, which have changed under the new administration, as well as the new state legislation. So, we'll be discussing Senate Bill 180 and getting ideas from other city attorneys at that conference Thursday, Friday, Saturday.
Thank you, sir. District 4. Yeah. Uh I just want to pass on that I'm keeping all of the uh District 4 boards and committee members. I've had the opportunity to meet with them. They're still excited about serving and uh look
forward to continuing serving. So, thank you. Thank you, sir. District three. Um, just to be an alert for district three, um, I have I mean I've had meetings with Bel Vista and the Donsesar, they've had summer meetings, but not everybody does summer meetings.
So um without getting the I so from Leo Bokea Marabella and one of the condos I instead of having them separate um I will announce maybe a park meet at the park kind of meet for people who might have something especially before budgets
are approved. So I will communicate that out what day would be best or time because I know it's hot and but we don't have the Don Vista to use unfortunately. So, but I'll put it out there when when we get a good date. Thank you. Thank you. District 2.
Um, just wanted to say that I went to the F DOT meeting um for Blinds Pass and I wish we had that $5.2 million for our infrastructure. Um, it was uh it was interesting to see what they're doing.
um and and just envious of wishing we had that money and was if there's any way we could reroute that to us and not to the to blinds pass would be great. Other than that, I've got um my St. Pete Beach uh library hours um August 5th
from 5 to 5:45. Thank you, District One. Um, so like Commissioner Robinson, I attended the F DOT meeting um about medians on Blind Pass and a additional crosswalk um that's actually in Treasure Island,
but will affect the will affect the folks that live on the north end of the beach. Um it's it's in at the end of the day, it's relatively inconsequential, but if anyone has any questions, um feel free to contact me. And uh um I also wanted to say that I have spoken to the
folks that um own the uh the the Old Wind Dixie grocery store building in District 1. They are actively looking for tenants. Nothing is currently in the works. So no rumors unfounded or otherwise. Um and uh and then um also
have heard that potential in district 1 that both Woodies and Willies um may be on their way back. Um Woody's under new ownership. Willies under the same ownership. Um and I'm sure it's going to be a little bit of a road for rebuilding, but I know those are both
big favorites for District 1. So, um that's exciting news. And that's all I got. That same location. Same location. Thank you. Um, so I'm actually just going to ask the city manager to help me out here.
So, um, we've got long overdue beach renourishment finally happening. if you wouldn't mind giving us some details on that, the situation with Publix, if you have any details to share, as well as
the Bayway butcher shop um looking at bringing in a grocery store. The Bayway Butcher Shop got their permits. They're uh in construction. I spoke to him last week. They're anticipating opening in November. Excellent. And that will be on Gulf
Boulevard at about what is that about 64th 60? Yeah, something like that. Just past Larry's, right? Yep. Yeah. Right next to Larry's Ice Cream. Looking for beach reourishment right now. I'm sorry I didn't give you an update. I do know that the county has
approved to move forward with beach reourishment for the entire barrier islands and the approximate value to St. P beach is about one two $1.2 million and I believe it's going to be in sometime in August. So I will get back to you and be able to
report. Um it's a very very quick turnaround time there. I think they're going to accomplish the entire barrier island in about 10 weeks. Yeah. I mean all the permits were ready to go. Carmy crew engineer had those. They just didn't pull the trigger. Yes. And then what was the third? Publix
or that entire shopping center. Do we know if Publix is doing anything? The last update we met with the property manager probably a little over a month ago and they were exploring whether or not they were going to just
remodel in the interim or they also had a project to rebuild the public similar to the TI um concept so it would be elevated with parking and that was the last we met with them and I've asked staff to follow
up both with their uh media and their prop the public's media and the property manager to find out if we can get any more information. A question on that. Did they mention whether they were going to address a storm? As I remember one time they they wanted to propose something there, but there was an issue with storm water, the
drainage. That's one of the reasons they met with us and we did talk about how they would need to address the storm water on the new project. Okay. Thank you very much. Yeah, if you wouldn't mind just sharing updates on those two items. Yes, next time that'd be great.
And with that, we are adjourned. Thank you. All right, good job.