ready to go. Okay, I will open this special commission meeting of the Steuart City Commission and we will do roll call first. >> Mayor Collins >> here >> and Commissioner Gobi >> here >> and then we'll do the pledge of allegiance.
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Okay.
And then I guess we really can't approve the agenda because we wouldn't have a motion in a second. So, are there any comments from the public? >> Well, here's your here's your opportunity.
>> Absolutely. Just make sure you get in a green card when you're done. >> Yes, you're still going to need to fill out the green card. >> Um, thank you for doing this. I just noticed you, Mary, you're going to do this like for four hours. That's very nice and I
we appreciate it. I speak for a lot of residents. We appreciate you guys. We appreciate your service. Um I just got to say I watched the meeting and I was very disturbed last night. Disturbed that Nicoleti
was asking for four and that his name is still in the running. Like why is he just I think he's done a couple of things. I think it's obvious. I think there's been a lot of evidence and and nothing against Paul, but
the hubris to ask for 400 when you're a bad batty to begin with, I just I wish him well and Paul, they're beautiful. But um that disturbs me. And I saw Troy McDonald mulling around over at the Martin County Commission like who knows
what he's going to get back into. And he never had to have any accountability here. And just like Nicoleti, you let these people continue in their things with no accountability. You don't think they're going to do it or you think, "Oh, they did that one thing, maybe
they'll be nice now." No. Snakes are snakes. And I'm not saying personally they are, but I'm saying the behavior. There's a rule of law. There's a good way to walk and a not so good way to walk. our commissioners, I believe you
too, um walk in a uh respectful way. It seems like you're good people, you know, and you you stand up for us. So, I'm just asking that we don't just keep not making people accountable. They're going to go
on somewhere else and do another bad thing. Unless God answers my prayer that they turn their turn from their wicked ways. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> Any other public comments, >> mayor? I have none.
>> Yep. Just make sure you get a green card in. >> Get two. >> Well, good afternoon. First of all, I would like to thank you guys for actually doing this. It's about time. Um, the only suggestion I would make was to put it later on in the
evening after people get off work so we could have more attended. Um, this is important that you people stand up here and state what your goals are. I think the people of the city need to be more involved in that process. That's why I would ask that it be done at a later
time during the day. I'm also up here to address accountability. I remember last year at last year's commission meeting and I asked you guys to investigate certain allegations that have been made and I came to ask you today what
progress has been made with that investigation if any and uh what's going forward going to be done about that investigation. These are some serious allegations that have been made about people and individuals and entities in
the city behaving in a manner that is inappropriate to both the Constitution of Florida and the Constitution of the United States. Now, that really should be looked into. And I'm just wondering how far along are we with that. >> So, that's my question to kind of build.
Thank you. >> Thank you. All right. Any other public comments? >> I have none, mayor. >> Okay. You want to make a public comment about that? >> No, just non-aggenda items. >> Non-aggenda items.
>> Up for comments if you have >> three minutes. >> You can think of something, Frank. >> Set the tone. Set. Try it. >> It is streaming so people can at least see what's happen.
>> They might be on their lunch hour. They might be able to watch. >> Yeah. >> So, is this it? It's three minutes and I'm done for the day or or what? I thought there was supposed to be like meet and greet with each individual.
>> We're going to be discussing items >> for policy. >> All right. Uh I guess I'll skip the big one which is uh the airport in general and I'll just go right to uh the new uh training
center that the firefighters are going to use on the at Womfield. Uh the burn the burn building is like due east of me and I went through a uh campy uh heard wind of me going to raise hell
about it about four or five years ago and he he he said come on Frank just go talk with the chief blah blah blah. Anyways, after negotiating with the chief like four or five years ago, we came up with u they would only burn like 35 days out of the year, number one. And
they always use the cleanest uh burn stuff they that is available. And uh but since then uh you know there's talk of uh opening up the burn building or as a regional facility
and I would hope that we could uh just put a squash on that. I was gonna and I'm gonna try to email the all the history on the airport to you guys, but to this point right now it's gone like 5 years ago 36% of the
airport proper did not put jets in the sky. Now it's down to 32%. And what's going on is uh there are people that are pushing to get all non-avviation related things off the airport which doesn't have to be done. And I would hope that
the commission here would recognize that the way the runway was illegally extended, number one, and the way it turned our town into something totally different in 1998. I'm I think
the people deserve to be thrown a bone at least and at least cap it and still keep I don't know 34% of the airport proper just for manufacturing and county operation but you can tell what they're trying All right. Thank
>> Frankie. Did you see my You sent the email but it didn't load. It just >> did you see that? Okay. Because I didn't see anything of what you were saying. That's why I made notes. Any other public comments? >> I have none. Mayor, >> seeing none, we'll get into it. So, in
terms of discussion and deliberation, my goal was to review you what your policy goals were. um what you'd be willing to support, what you would be vehemently against, and just uh
basically get a sense, you know, from the constituents that you talk to and the people that you talk to what you think we should be focusing on this year while I'm there mayor and even including like the CRA, you know, what sort of projects or goals you would have for the
CRA and then sort of how you would rank that so I can collectively you know, get us doing the will of the people. >> Yes. >> Yes. So, I I I would like to hear your ideas and then maybe we you know, I can
share some of mine. We can go back and forth. I have a whole variety of topics. >> I do too. >> Good. So, let let me if you don't mind going for it. >> Yes. Actually, first I want to thank the mayor. Um this is um not as far as I know has not happened before. I think it's a great opportunity. We are trying
to really engage the community and being more involved. I know it's difficult during the middle of the day, but you know, our times are limited, too. So, uh, we try the best we can and I think that the word will get out. More people might arrange to attend when we do these things. Um, so I want to thank the mayor
for starting this. I think it's great. I think it's great for the people to know where we come from. Okay. So, my first thing on the agenda was the best way to utilize that half cents sales tax. you know, locate and purchase properties to secure green space, things that would,
you know, be for the people who live here. Um, I want to identify properties that be designated as historical sites and then proceed with the process. Um, creating a limit on what could be developed out of those historic properties
under development issues. Um, and and it came up last night, but it was it's always been on my agenda. Even before I was a commissioner, I would constantly be at meetings saying, "Where did you get that traffic flow report? What what month of the year did they do it? What time of the day?" You know, so traffic
flow reports to me should be conducted within the year of application, not utilizing ones that are two and three years old. And even with that, you know, they should be done during peak traffic seasons. We are a seasonal town. So there is a point between the middle of December to April where we have maximum.
>> So what so for clarification it would be sort of a policy that would seek to have a time frame on uh the like the relevance of the data. So >> within within the development
department, we would be seeking traffic studies that are within a certain time frame to make sure that they're incorporating the latest data in development >> six months a year or something some some >> I think it should be >> I don't know what the current >> right I mean last night I think they reported one that was done in 2023
>> right >> um even at that but I think it should be our process that th those applications come in and then they proceed with getting a traffic report because at that point, you know, there's the process of submitting for permits and all that. You have time to do the traffic report. Of
course, it depends on time of year, but they I feel they should be done from like January into April. They certainly should be done when school is in session. >> I understand seasonally, too. >> Yeah. And I I think that they should also be done at peak times, not like, you know, 7 or 8:00 at night when
there's very little traffic. So they really to me they should reflect what the traffic is during the the height of a day because that's when people will be out and about going to school, going to work, coming home and and that's how traffic is affected.
>> Um so that for me is is an issue. It has been for a long time. I'd really like to see that and something that we would enforce. Um and and I don't know to be perfectly honest, sometimes I've seen a project take three years. So maybe we go back and have them do, you know, if they've reported something in 2026 and
they don't start breaking ground until 2029, then that year that they're planning to break ground, they have to do another traffic report. The reason I feel is that within two or three years, we've seen it happen, oops, sorry, we've seen it happen here in town where two or
three years later, apartments have been built, things have been built, and the flow of traffic changes. The broader conversation then is can you even not approve a project because of draft
and the answer is no. >> You can't you can't say no based on concurrency anymore. I'll uh 2011 Rick Scott I can't remember the exact time frame but that used to be we used to be able to do that. >> You really can't point to concurrency.
>> I know. >> Yes. >> The traffic studies almost a vestigial report in a way as I understand it. I could be wrong, but not to interrupt you on that thought process. I do think it's important to go back and make sure within development that they're looking
at um latest data including the the seasons um and including surrounding approvals, you know. So, if we don't have a policy within the development process that sets that, we should.
>> Yes, definitely. I don't know exactly if we do or not. So that's something to look at. I agree. >> Okay. All right. The other thing in in regarding underdevelopment I put to for us to re-evaluate impact fees. Number one, I think they're pretty outdated.
The other issue I have is that they are um levied or however you want to look at the when when the project is submitted. But again, construction sometimes doesn't take place till two or three years later. >> Lee, when do we review impact again? And I know we did it that maybe that second
year I was here. Is it every five years? >> Um I don't know off hand that >> that's something that'll come back to you periodically. It's every 3 years or five years is you'll review residential >> impact fees. >> I can get an answer for you. But >> that's when you'll raise them. I just
don't know when that cycle is. And we could always potentially bring it up and review it. Is there any reason why not Lee? Like even if we did it a year before if we decided that we wanted to review it this year. Is that something we could do? >> Yeah, I I don't I don't know the answer to that off hand. I'll have to get back to you on that one.
>> Okay. Well, I'm thinking if if the the market reflects it. I mean, last year probably was a good time to look at them again because lumber was so high. All of those things were, you know, to to um >> it might be nice to review and see if we can't bring it up again, >> right?
>> Yeah. And the the other thing is that the timing um to assess that impact fee when they're starting to do construction because I'm assuming it would be based on I'm actually don't know how the impact fee works. Not it's not a set
fee. It's based on other project other things within the development project. >> There's a lot of ingredients to it, >> right? A lot of ingredients. So that would be the time as you know coming up >> when we review it. That would be when you >> So that would be great. >> Okay.
All right. Find and this is just I I have in my heart for homeless women and children which does exist here and finding a way to assist that. Not via grants because via a grant then controls we'd have to take everyone from out of state in state really to provide for our
local population. That would be my um that would be my wish I should say. Um I understand that the Salvation Army and I haven't bothered to reach out to them but I do understand that they have a project that they want to develop. They have property and they want to develop I
guess sections and they are talking about having a facility for homeless women with children and it would be based on a scale I think of uh rent like I said I haven't really met with the people I've just know people who know them. It would also be training for them
so that they can then not be locked in this cycle of being homeless and dependent uh and providing you know child care school um sometimes these children they go to school and other kids know they're homeless and it's brutal I mean bullying takes place no matter what but this is even over and
above >> so I'd like to know if there's something we could do as a city >> I'd like to well I think that would be in the CRA and I know we don't we're not able to use CRA funds but it's my understanding that we could request to rewrite or add something into the CRA. I
don't know how. >> What? Give me specific of what you're talking about. What do you mean? >> Um, >> what would you like to >> Well, I don't think that we could afford to actually build something, but could we could we be in a position to um donate money to the Salvation Army for
that particular facility? Wouldn't cover all the cost, but it would certainly be helpful. or maybe offer um some sort of I don't know training or whatever. I I didn't go any further because I didn't know what we were limited in and I know we're limited but um I'd like to see if
there is something we could do some way we could help. >> I don't know that they have an application in for something like that as yet. So it's more >> No, I think it's really in the talking stage, you know, and it's under I understand it's in projects like there would be a shelter for for men, a separate shelter for women with
children. >> If that's something the commission overall would be interested in, it would be um as far as I can see that you would change potentially land use and zoning around that parcel to include it would be multif family or
some kind of institutional mixeduse component like that. And that's in the CRA. >> Yes, it is in the CRA. That's what I thought. That's why I thought of the CRA funds because we wouldn't have to reach out to any other grants in the state or federal which would then control
>> who utilizes the facility. >> That may be a good avenue if that's the direction you wanted to go because there's probably even state funds. You know, you could ask for an appropriation. And it seems like the state's very uh open to giving money to those kinds of things where there's blight or
that's something to consider. So it's not just coming out of taxpayer money, >> right? But then wouldn't the state control like anyone from the state could use that facility? I'm trying to do it for the local people who live here. Does that >> Oh, no. It it could it could be I I don't know for sure. There's always different
>> We have to look into a good thing to check out. >> Mhm. Okay. >> But I I you know along your thinking I I would be more supportive of that than having the city obviously try to open something up and manage that.
>> Oh no. We I I don't think we have the ability to do that. But I'm not adverse to helping someone like the Salvation Army to get that done. Mhm. >> So, um >> the next is and I had asked this and it never really came back to me that we were going to do it or not, but um and I
don't think we have any developments, but should there be a development that comes in for the 40% affordable housing? Um >> Laura, the uh agreement. >> Yeah. >> Lee, we have one that we would be notified. I you and I have discussed it in the past that and you have asked for
certain things to be involved in it and and I remember meeting with you and discussing that and >> um we have a potential applicant. You know, the um apartments behind the car dealerships. Uh we do not have we're not at the stage or at the position where we
have to have a lure agreement. They're still working out pre-application type stuff. Uh but that will probably be our first live local um and and lure agreement. I have a working draft that I pulled up when you and I met. >> Yes. >> Um and and so um I was in a meeting on
Friday with other city attorneys in Orlando and it came up and I had a friend of mine on the west coast who had to do some lure agreements already and uh he sent me a draft in particular for certain reasons things that he put into
it. Uh I've asked for other cities for their lure agreements. So, I'm, you know, again, this is brand new. City attorneys around the state are learning as we go through this. And in fact, even talking to reaching out to the county attorney, she had her first
one, um, that she's doing now. So, uh, there it's un, you know, this is uncharted territory territory. >> And, and, you know, hindsight's always going to be 2020, but we're trying to anticipate everything we can because
some of this stuff is going to be decades down the road that our successors are going to have to deal with. So, we want to make sure we've got an agreement in place that will help them enforce uh, our intentions. >> Right. And I know you and I spoke about it. I just didn't want to have a
misstep. Um and uh I just wanted to make sure that >> But again um >> and is it project oriented? It's not like having a a mandate or you know a ruling within our development department. Does the agreement is signed per project? Is that I may have missed that when we were talking.
>> It's it's just as if it came before the board and there was a development order like a CPU. I mean it's going to be drafted just like a development order except it has to be done administratively. But your Laura is going to be consistent across development. It's not one off for each one.
>> Uh there's going to be variations, I think. And and I'll be honest, if it >> I'm still doing this 10 years from now 10 years from now, there's probably going to be a lot of stuff I've learned that's going to be added to the agreements. Wish I had that in there. >> The ability to update it as we go along,
as we learn, right? Um >> you know, especially as far as um reporting and and so forth. Um, you know, that's what I'm trying to cap capture in in the current draft of the agreement. >> Again, this is administrative course if
it's not met. >> What's that >> mechanism for kind of recourse? >> I mean, again, it's just like a development order when you see our development. We had two last night uh in first readings and you know there are conditions and and there are if there's a breach of a condition, what's the
ramification? That's all in those development orders we had before the board last night. And likewise, it'll be a similar. It's just done administratively. >> So, because it's tied to the the particular project and PUD, that's really something that just comes up in
that presentation for that PUD for approval. But it's a the local potentially administrative project. So, is it something that we ever really see or have feedback? No. Right. >> Right. And that was what my that's the whole point to know that it is coming down the pipe. You know, the
commissioner should be advised. You know, this is >> so general terms of Allora appropriate um out before you get to that specific project to bring forward to us or that needs to be something that's done entirely outside of >> Yeah, I think it's it's >> purely administrative.
>> Administratively, right? and and and again I've met with you on the Laura agreement that I had at the time and um I think that was a couple months ago that we met but um I I have not finalized one with you know the Edenar Apartments yet so because we're not
there yet. >> Do we even get a chance to review it? >> I mean you can review it but I mean it's it's not coming before the board. It's supposed to be bypassed >> it may not come before us. We may not have an option to be able to talk about it in public, but we all get emails and
we get calls. I don't want to get a call from somebody. Did you know they're building such and such and I'm blinded? >> You could ask Lee for a copy of it. >> But I'm just saying when when it does happen, if there's a mechanism that they could just shoot out an email saying we've been a a live local application has been >> Would it be inappropriate for you to
present to us um once you have that crafted not for approval or or discussion, but as a presentation? I I think it'd be better to be one-on- ones with the city manager, be honest. Okay. And I'd be happy to do that with >> Right. No, you were happy to sit down
with me and explain, you know. >> Okay. >> But as we keep going through this, it's a new process for all of us. We just want to be ahead of it and not catching up. >> Well, I whoever the city manager is, I I that person something big like a lure agreement with
Edenar over a few hundred. I'm sure >> they're going to be alerted. So, but I'm not in your one-on- ones with city manager. Occasionally I am, but so I don't know what >> you guys discuss, but I I assume that would be a topic of discussion.
>> That one probably whoever >> probably for that one it would be beneficial for you to be in on that conversation, >> right? I and and you know that especially as we have the interim city managers because they they're not up to speed a lot on the development stuff and you know you're also free to discuss
with the development director on some of this stuff as well >> in like you know in connection with this is the um and I was originally told when I asked about it that we we don't do that but I found out through my being on the Martin County Business Development
and I happened to say it and I was corrected immediately by the county saying, "Oh, no. County does that, so we can do it, too." Which is to monitor somehow keep track of the fact you built this on administrative approval. You said you would give 40% of affordable
housing, but who knows that who who's in charge of that? Who's keeping track of it? You know, they could not they could say, "Well, you know, we haven't rented any affordable housing or we have rented 10%." We have no idea in the city in the county there's a mechanism they
have in place to track that's the law >> right they they I've spoken to the county attorney she's doing her first lure agreement so they're doing it now >> well their city man or the assistant city manager seemed to think they had that process all in place which what I was told so
>> maybe not on live local but you know other um >> no it was based on that 40 it was basically the 40% affordable housing which does is live local that's how they're doing the administrative Well, my understanding is county attorney was we had discussed within the last month or so she's doing her first lure
agreement. So I I don't think they've been doing it and and she and I were discussing because we were discussing you know things terms you want to put in the agreement. >> Okay. >> Uh we obviously want to be consistent being that we're in the county. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. But like I said, I I've spoken I
was meeting not on this issue with city attorneys because I'm on a committee with other city attorneys uh throughout Florida and and it came up. Hey, how you guys doing the lure agreement? >> Well, I'm glad everybody's talking about it. Doesn't you know that we're blindsided when it starts to happen
>> and and >> thank you. >> Sure. >> Okay. So, um I want to continue to find ways to engage the public. Um I think um we have seen more participation. And I think that's great. I don't know how many people watch online. Of course, middle
of the days are a little difficult, but I think last night when we discussed doing that and, you know, putting that up there, I think that'll just have people realize um who that person is. I mean, I know the guy who picks up my garbage, you know, I know Jose who comes
around and take fixes the gate, you know. So, it's really nice to get those personal feelings toward the people who work for you in the city and it makes you realize where your tax dollars are going. And last night there was a leak uh and our engineering and utilities team was up till 4 in the morning fixing
it along with our interim manager. So, I mean those are the things that people really don't see. We see them internally, but I think it's nice for people to realize how our city does work. And uh so I think that's great. And I'd like to continue more of that is
reaching out to the public. Just as an issue today, I've gotten calls from people that um and this is in regards to the road closing for boats, the boat show. And so what has happened is people are because of traffic are blocking people being able to exit their
apartments or homes or maiden roadways onto one. Okay. So maybe the the maybe if we speak to the chief, there's something that he could do like in the rush hour mornings toward the night, the late evenings or late afternoons when people are leaving work and then schools
and whatnot in those times have police presence so that they can't be road blockage. You can't block a passage for someone to try and get onto one, you know. So maybe there's something we can do. And I mean, we're in the height of the boat show now, but maybe we should really look at that a little better next
year. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> And that's all I have. >> That's all your things. >> That's my things. >> I'll go through mine. So, items I was I was interested in uh
talking about from talking to people. One would be referendum items. So, would you be against would you be supportive of having that two acres north of the bridge be put into conservation?
>> Yes. I This is the one by um over the bridge the right on the corner. >> Yeah. That current two acres, >> right? and and we've talked about this and I I thought that we >> there was some there was some yeah there's some back and forth about should
the agreement reads that it should >> I guess how you'd ever take that legally but it it doesn't seem to be mandated that we have to >> the >> that's that's the whole issue >> I'm happy to interject on this so we have to amend the interlocal agreement with the county
um which there was an interlocal agreement that we would set aside these two acres and develop it commercially to help pay for the rest of the the conservation area. And we have that interlocal agreement that requires us to do that in order to fund it. Now, since
then, we've not had any projects that have been approved by the board in 10 years. Plus, there's been no projects proposed that's been satisfactory to the board. and and and there might be a cost associated with certain commercial activities because my understanding that
has spent close to a million dollars just on prepping a um a turning lane >> off of US1 which has been prohibited from people wanting to develop it and then the limited ones that have proposed were not acceptable I guess to the board or >> I I wasn't here but that's my
understanding. >> Yes. Uh, but we need to amend that. And so I did some proposed amendments to the interlocal agreement and I sent it to the county attorney last week. I Okay. And she was going to speak with administrative staff on it and get back to me. But we would have to have both
boards approve the interlocal >> um amendment agree agreement amendment. And my proposal was that we just take that portion out and and the two acres is just combined with the rest. The city still has a requirement to m to fund the
maintenance of the entire um um conservation area which we've been doing with general funds. Um and I I confirmed with Jolie that we've been doing it for 10 plus years anyway and it's not been a significant cost. >> And it it doesn't appear after 10 years
that anyone is going to step up, purchase that property, invest a million dollars to put in a turn lane, right? So, we might as well utilize it as part of our um secured area, recreation area. I mean, it doesn't make any sense to have it just sit there.
>> And when it came up before you and Sean came on, uh there was the desire to put apartments there and that entire North River Shores community was not happy about that. So, I know from the residents over there, having that just
stay, you know, part of Haney Creek overall would be preferable. Um, other referendum item would be Selfish Ball Fields. So there's, you know, there's going to be, assuming Bright Line comes, and maybe even if it doesn't, a lot of
pressure, I think, over time, or it could be quickly, to have Sailfish ball fields be developed and become either transit oriented type development, or if there's no Bright Line, you know, that's that's a lot of land right there.
Uh, that could be developed into something. I don't think it's going to happen tomorrow, but something I would like to see as a legacy for my time here is that that that Sailfish ball fields basically would have to go to referendum and
voters would have to decide if that could be. I fear that if there was a change in the tone of the commission that that very well could happen very quickly and we could have that uh park space and that public space be lost
or you know >> considering the historic parts of East Stewart I'm wondering if there were way that we could somehow secure that ballpark as a historic piece of property have >> the park be historic I mean, East Stewart has so much
historical presence that maybe that might be a way to do that. And if we couldn't do all of it, we could at least maybe secure part of it. >> But if you just had to go to referendum to be developed, I don't think anybody votes for that. >> No, I don't think so either. I think that hedge and even if you made it
historic, there could probably be some kind of workaround, >> you know, >> having something go to referendum is the strongest hedge >> to protect from off the rails politicians. >> Okay.
>> Would you be supportive of that? >> Yes, absolutely. The thing and I don't know if it pertains to our local referendums. I know statewide we cannot really either pro or con an amendment to the state constitution
or anything. Is that also Lee? Would you know if that's we're restricted here in the city for that? >> Like we'd like to be able to promote the referendum, >> you know, you know, give I mean it has to be worded correctly and let people know what that referendum will do going forward in
>> so I mean will would we have the ability from the dis from the city to be able to promote that referendum? >> Well, the referendum language would have to be approved by the board, >> right? >> Okay. And and so there would be language that they vote on and then there's an explanation. You know how when you get
some when you vote on something there's the actual question and then there's an explanation. >> Um and so there would be two components that would come before the commission. >> Okay. >> But you cannot um >> but that's what I'm saying. >> Advocate for yes or no. >> We couldn't advocate for the amendment,
you know, before it goes onto the ballot and then you know a pro and a >> you can't lobby. You can't lobby or advertise. Right. Oh, okay. All right. So, >> we just have to word it properly. >> Yeah. And I agree with you. I I think that most people in Stewart would not want to see that developed into
>> Right. Selfish. >> But I worry I worry a Bright Line goes there and all of a sudden it changes because it's so valuable. >> Well, considering what happened to Fort Lauderdale, Bright Line might just sell it. With regard to Bright Line, one of the other concerns I I've brought it up a
couple times, but would you be supportive of reviewing that parcel and the parking implications um specifically the courthouse parking requirements
um and how that combines with Bright Line taking up that parking and you would be supportive of taking a look at that, right? Um okay. I'd like to do a deep dive on that before anything gets approved so it
doesn't look reactive. >> Well, I don't know considering that they're in litigation with FEC over the rails and all the other things that are happening. I don't know that um but I I believe we should do a big, you know, a
deep dive and make sure we're prepared should they somehow find funding to be able to go forward. Um, it was brought up last night by Luke Laam, but the Willoughby extension. >> Are you supportive of bringing that up for conversation potentially for a no
build letter to the MO or FOT? >> I would like to do that. Uh, as I mentioned last night, I had become uh I had been keeping in touch with two of the main people on that FOT program that have been dealing with it for a couple of years. They have since been removed. Mhm.
>> So, and I shouldn't say removed, they've been replaced. You know, I don't know if it's part of the process of FDOT, they're just moving them on, but whatever it is, those people who know the history have worked with the community. Um, they are no longer there. So, now it's starting a whole new relationship and I'm going to reach out
to the two people that I do know and ask them who replaced them and what is the contact information and start to do that. But I do believe that the no build is the way to go. >> Okay. >> In terms of uh spraying and pond
management, we had had Joe Gillio, there was a pilot program at the Pleton Creek Pond. Joe Gillio did a whole, you know, different sections with different types of management uh in terms of mechanical weed removal, spraying, interplanting,
and he he provided those results and made recommendations and then kind of died. So I I don't know if internally there was a lot of support, maybe not from the board, but in management. >> Yes. So, what I wanted to see is if you
would be supportive of um looking at next steps to avoid spraying, whether it be a real look at what the cost of mechanical removal and interplanting might be. >> Right. And I think that he has also um he has have he has new avenues to
review. He's he's did a presentation here in in this room and people attended. I attended. I don't know if I don't remember if you were there or not, >> but um you know he's just keeps coming up with new ways to address the problem. I think what happened the last time is I don't know where it died. I think
several of us were in support of having a forward he g made a recommendation to leave some things and see how they went and then the next thing I knew the office gave a contract to someone. >> So you would be supportive of taking a look at that and his recommendations and
looking at >> right looking at them again having Yeah. having him see what might be upgraded at this point because he has some new um >> avenues he's exploring. >> So, this was something that that uh
I wanted to discuss too is the rate increases for staff. So, one of those u really dramatic changes that can happen in our budget comes with the cola increases.
It it is pretty it's not def it's not anchored to anything tangible whether it's truly cost of living based on CPI. It really is at the discretion of the city manager what the overall staff
including us the rate increase is for that step each year. Uh I did not I was not fully aware of this but over that last two years we went we had seven and 10% increases
respectively each year. So I I think something that we should consider and you can tell me if you agree is that that really comes forward with transparency in a public hearing as a separate agenda item that we can review
and um make sure that it's it's anchored to some rational reason, you know, beyond what just the and again I trust staff, I trust managers, but I think it's something for fiscal oversight and then for public review,
you know, so people are aware uh that the city has a clear presentation on and then ultimately votes to approve on its own because it is it is a again it's how we talked about the manager rates last night. That is how you go from 225 to
285 when you get 7% then you get 10% the next year, >> you know. So if the if there is a rational reason to do that and there may be having that clearly presented to us and to the public um and why that's not something to my
awareness that has happened in the past and for fiscal oversight I do think that that's a really big deal and it can't just be you know in the back um at the discretion of the manager is my is my opinion. How do you feel? >> Well two things. Number one, I've never
been in a municipality. I've never been in that pay system. That's number one. You know, I I've lived in the corporate world where it's based on merit. It's based on an annual review. Now, this particular increase is over and above an annual review and a raise. I mean, I'm I'm kind of >> So, the what what happens is the manager
will look at cost of living >> and maybe it's 3%, 4%, 5%. you each year if it's possible if you're you know there's been times where there's been no percent you know increase but as it's appropriate and based on what's
happening in the economy you will see each year an increase with staff >> across the board so it's not it's just across the board >> and I'm not saying that we need to anchor it to a particular thing it doesn't need because CPI could be 9%. Maybe that's not appropriate because it's so high and you know but but if
that if that's going to happen I do think there should be more transparency we should be discussing it there should be a rationale for why and ultimately I think the stat the commission should be approving that as an individual item since it does have such a broad impact
across staff you know in the budget. >> Yes. Yeah. I think it's certainly should be transparent. I think everyone should be aware. >> I was not aware of that. I know. Yeah. because I was not aware. In fact, I did make mention when we were doing the mil the millage rate. Um I can't speak for the other commissioners, but I wanted to
forego any raise that might be standard within the system. Um because I personally don't feel that you can sit and cut budgets and do those things and then take a raise for yourself. I mean, that to me is just not acceptable. So, I did make a mention uh to Mike personally
and uh said to him if I didn't know if there was anywhere where it's just an automatic or whatever that I did not want it. I can't speak for the other commissioners, but I personally would forego that to me that that's not um >> So, you would be supportive of of bringing that up and potentially having that be each budget cycle and agenda
item. That's, you know, unique. Okay. So >> to include in the budget, >> yeah, as a separate item if there's going to be a rate increase, you know, >> presentation on it in a separate vote >> versus just the city manager doing that at their discretion.
So how do you feel about backyard hens? This is the the contentious item, but I wanted to talk to everybody about it. >> Okay. So I I'm a little prejudice. My sister-in-law has chickens and I love
those eggs. Of course, she has like two acres of land. I think a lot of it if if you're in a you know, if you're next door neighbor is I don't know what the footage would be, but I I think there needs to be some criteria as to what
amount of property you have to have, >> you know, a chicken coupe. There was a previous ordinance that was all set up and it laid out having it in single family home designation. I don't remember the exact number, but it would be
four hens or five hens or something like this and that the the run had to be so many feet off the fence. It was all organized and laid out. Um what do you think? Is it something you would be against? Are you for if if you're >> I'm for it in limited ways because
honestly uh and and I had a home up in Connecticut. I miss my garden. I miss having fresh vegetables and all of that. Um so I think that in this day and age where there's so many chemicals in everything we eat and and I don't know you must have had I mean I have them when I go home fresh eggs. I mean
there's a difference. You don't even need to refrigerate them. I mean they just sit on the counter for a week or two if they last that long. So, I think for a homeowner to have the ability to have space to have chickens, have um grow their own gardens, grow their own food, I think that that is important. Um
so again within limitations of um where they are in relation to their neighbors. You know the other thing you have to be very careful of when you get chickens is you could wind up with a rooster in the group which then becomes a different issue for your neighbors because
>> believe that excluded no rooster. >> Yes. Yeah. But you know my sister-in-law has bought them you you get them actually as chicks in the mail from FedEx. >> Yes. you know, and you really don't know that you have a rooster till a little bit later. And so you then have to try to get Well, she has enough land it
doesn't matter. But >> I wouldn't want to be living next to a rooster. So that would be important to have that in there that no roosters. They make noise early in the morning. >> Got it. >> Um in terms of next next item would be half cent sales tax priorities.
I'm with you in terms of acquiring land particularly. So, I don't know if you've had a chance to talk to Ruth about the Florida statutes relative to how we can spend the money. >> Um, I have not. >> You should. Okay. And and she should
probably do a presentation for all of us. >> Oh, that would be great. >> Because there were a lot of, you know, a lot of different ideas including storm water drainage. Things were being thrown around that aren't actually appropriate per Florida statute. But from my recollection, Lee, do you remember off the top of your head?
>> Uh, no. But she had given me the print out. I >> I'll try to summarize it as I remember it. >> It's more lenient for us than the county. The county is more restricted on what can be used. >> Yes, I remember that we had a little more leeway than the county did. >> It was, you know, acquiring land for the
purpose of conservation, >> recreation. Uh you could also use it towards environmental type projects, which is what Ruth was really interested in, uh relative to water quality, you know, these kinds of things. Um,
but I was going to say I was I'm very much with you specifically with acquiring land for the purpose of green space and parks because I feel like over time, you know, it there's going to be so much demand for land to be able to have carved out pocket parks like we do
now. >> Yes. >> Where there's any opportunity >> more of that. >> So, the first part is to investigate where those properties are. But I like the fact that we could utilize some of that money for environmental and water quality. I think that's great. And if Ruth is amendable, I think that
certainly if she can put together I mean she you obviously talked about it. We've been talking about other subjects her and I >> I think she might be planning on doing a presentation for us. It just didn't come up last time. Okay. Maybe next time. >> Yeah. Whenever I think it would be good for her to include what options we have to uh utilize that money for, you know,
water quality, environmental, that that would be great. My other my other um interest for that along those lines was that u Baker Creek Haney Creek um trail head >> that had been discussed. Uh Tim Vulkers
who was the utilities head few years ago. >> I can't remember the name. >> He created all of the layout for Have you ever been over to Kiplinger Park? It's like a natural trail. It's very passive. I've read about it. I've seen
pictures, but I've not been there. >> Very little management. There's a few boardwalks, but it's basically trail through this uh at the base of Veterans Memorial Bridge. >> Um but something to this effect where there's there is a parking lot there. There's a trail head, but it makes it
accessible for families. The ability to, you know, take the kids and walk passively through um trail and boardwalk where it gets a little wet, you know, and then come loop back kind of a thing >> would would be a goal of mine. And I would be in favor of that. That's a
great idea for, you know, utilizing property. >> Food or or I got the language. >> There he is. >> Fantastic. >> Thank you. >> What do you got, Lee? >> Uh, municipalities may only spend their share of the sir tax revenues to
finance, plan, and construct infrastructure and to acquire land for public recreation, >> conservation, or protection of natural resources in accordance with section 212.055 055 of Florida statutes. >> So some of those discussions around investing millions into storm water,
it's a great idea, but it's not appropriate per statute >> and we don't have enough even with the there's not enough >> there's not a ton of >> the whole storm water problem. So >> but having that having conservation land for recreation is very consistent, you
know, with that statute. So that was I'm glad you're supportive of that. >> Thank you, Lee. Y >> if you have a chance, can I just have a copy of that? >> Sure. >> Thanks. Or is it on the website or No. >> Uh I don't uh Miss Holmes gave me a copy of this. So in it. So
>> Okay. >> We have something. All right. >> I can make a copy of what I have. >> Okay. >> So um >> yeah, I haven't attended Sean's class yet on how to navigate the the website. So >> you're not allowed to. >> Sean Reed. >> Yeah. >> The town hall. >> Yeah, I know.
>> Can't be there. >> I know. I heard and I'm like I really need instruction. >> So, future city hall site, so the Wells Fargo site. >> Mhm. >> What uh have you thought about Do you know the history of the site and what they were planning on doing? >> A little bit. Not much. I can't say that
I'm very informed on that. I >> It It had from my understanding a few different proposals uh of wildly different scale and density of thing. The most intensive included a parking garage and um like wrapping
around apartments and things all around Wells Fargo, you know, fourstory max. It sort of augmented into uh fourstory apartments but less dense for each one of the commissioners getting, you know, different
pet project components of it. and and right now as it sits, you have wells, a parking lot, and then that green space. I was curious what your thoughts were for that space. If it does become
apartments or something similar to this, we would already be locked in because we had what what is the technical >> Lee had Lee's gone. We we put out I believe it's an RFP uh relative to that apartment project in the past which was
responded to and all of those plans came in. From my understanding if we did something other than that we wouldn't be bound to that direction. >> Okay. We're not we're not locked into that I >> but if we were going to build apartments there we would have to do you know what was recommended.
>> I don't really envision apartments there. I I know this building this building has a lot of structural problems but we are a small town. We are a small city, so I don't even like the look of the Wells Fargo building, but we're not in a position to rebuild a building. So, the best that we could
work and make it aesthetically appealing. >> Um, I I I would be in favor of looking at that apartments. No, I have no and I don't know why they would give commissioners little pet projects within
that. Yeah, that to me is >> because he wanted the RFP, so he was trying to make everybody happy. >> No. No. Would you be how would you feel about preserving that green space that is there currently as park? So you have the Wells Fargo site, you have the
parking lot, you know, the surface parking having that existing green space where we knock that building down sort of be an extension of Memorial Park. >> What do you think? >> Um, >> obviously developed with um I don't know, gazeos or woodwork or something,
>> right? where employees could also benefit from going outside sitting there under the gazebo having lunch or whatever. I I think yeah multi-use for that >> but also to hedge it from becoming >> right an apartment >> because and and because you you know
right now the you have three slower growth people up here but that's not set to happen really until like 28 you know so very well you could have a batch of humans come in here that wants to build apartment >> right >> so if you if you >> how do we stop it from being an apartment I I'm all in favor
>> you would you would have to decide what it's going to be >> okay So >> you you would put if you wanted it to be a park, you would designate it as a park. If you wanted it to be town houses or a commercial, you would put out an RFP for that and you would move forward with it before.
>> Okay. So I like that idea. Um, as far as the parking, it would also be parking available for people coming to downtown and there's always parking problems. So there would be parking that then benefits the community, a park that benefits the community, and making it so that the employees benefit from that.
>> I agree. >> Yeah, I I like that idea. So, you know, if we could move that forward to get, you know, in a sketch and what we'd have to put together to to do that, that would be great. >> So, less intensive development. >> Yes. Less intensive. >> And there was discussion about a parking
garage, but I think you have enough surface parking there that could serve Memorial Park, even the amphitheater. um especially if some of the parking is retained behind the courthouse, you know, for larger venues without having to have a garage there,
>> right? And maybe make the parking I mean, I've been to places where it's open parking, but there's um I don't know what you would call them. There's a little bit of a I'll have to take a picture the next time I go. There's a little bit of coverage. It isn't It's more aesthetically pleasing than looking at just an open parking lot with striped
um >> so beautifification. >> Yeah. Oh, thank you so much. >> Thank you, Lee. >> Thank you, Lee. I appreciate it. >> Right. So, something that aesthetically will look nice. >> Some shade trees and >> shade trees, you know, uh the next time
I'm The last time I saw something like that, I'll take a picture. I like that whole idea because it's not just you're walking into a blank area. It's all, you know, um spaces are marked out and it's just not appealing. We can make them much more attractive.
Uh, >> and then I'm on that line. I'm a little concerned about what happens to this building, >> but we're on that's going to be my next question. Okay. We're right on the river. This is a It would just almost be a continuation of what the community has now.
>> So, right now, I'm on the Main Street board. So, we had asked >> Oh, good. >> Yes. We had asked Candace to post a presentation in the near future as she gets some of the information about a you
know plans and and you know current and maybe past plans for what we're going to do here. And those plans have ranged in scale from very minimal all the way up >> I I've seen some of those plans. Yeah.
I'm not >> hotels here and fly bridges for Bright Line and things like this. So, so generally what what would be your vision for what happens here? Because that can help even Candace part part of me wanted to do this is so she can listen and and
have that, you know, >> and and I'd have to think about that because yeah, I think that there are things that we can do that when someone comes downtown and they take that little walk and they wind up walking behind us, it would all be incorporated into open space or maybe again gazeos, things like that where the the community benefits
from it. There there were discussions about extending Oyola Street, you know, and having sort of the commercial that's over here, extending this. So, more when it was Bright Line, like it was possible Bright Line would be over here. But I think short of anything other than park
space and you know >> woodwork infrastructure around here I think people are >> display of beautiful artwork. >> You need to have almost to your point over at Wells Fargo you know having the parking lot be beautified and nice but not losing your surface parking. Uh anything other than that people are
probably going to lose their minds you know. >> Right. Yeah. Yeah, I've seen some of those. I was like, what? You know, when I saw the one with the hotel and I'm like, no, no, no. I mean, we can't be I mean, just from the water level, we can't be adding, >> you know, hotels, bathrooms, flushing. You're right on the St. Lucy River, which is already
>> diminished and having problems. So, we don't want to add to that. >> I like that idea. >> Think we got through all my stuff with a minute to spare. >> Yeah, I see. Ule is here. She's waiting. All right.
Well, once again, I want to thank everybody for coming and I want to thank the mayor uh for >> Thank you for for doing this. >> And uh thank you, Lee. Thank you, Susay. Much appreciated. >> Procedurally, should I close a meeting and open a new one or
>> Okay, so we'll take a fivem minute recess here. Two-minute recess. Mayor Collins >> here >> and Commissioner Clark >> here. >> And let's see here. Are there any comments from the public?
>> I have none. Mayor. >> Okay. Okay. Let's get into discussion. >> Okay. Good. >> So, you've done these meetings in the past, so you're familiar with this. My purpose is to get a sense of your policy goals for the next year >> and
you know what your feedback is from residents and the people you're talking to for what priorities are CRA included you know whatever you think >> and and and how they should be ranked so we can get as much done as possible. >> So if you want to lead off if you've got
a list >> I'm going to go through mine too. Absolutely. You want me to go first? Yeah. >> Fantastic. Okay. Easy, easy peasy. So >> see where we >> yeah we'll see where we agree and disagree you know and um even in detail
you know if you if you like the idea of a thing but under what conditions I would love to get context from you in advance to try to help be efficient. Yeah. >> Okay. So, uh, referendum items. That's where I started off last time. I'll give you some. There's two things that I was
interested in. And then if you had some >> Okay, let me write that down. You could fire. >> I had an idea about trying to ask um, >> of course, uh, Jolie isn't here, but I was going to ask about um, >> where we are on the quote unquote fire tax and if that needs to be updated
>> probably. um that and of course we've always come up with um there was an issue on referendum item with regard to uh you know the leases for the um anything that has to do with the waterway and um there was some questions
but that's something that okay so go on with your referendum I >> yeah yeah it's good >> I hope to jar more more of these things out of you >> so something that came up. I didn't I actually I'm coming from somewhere else. I was left out by somewhere else. I
>> That's okay. >> You've been doing this long enough that I think if I start talking, you'll have a list. >> Okay. Okay. Cool. >> I'm not worried that you need a list here. >> So, um my two items were the two acres north of the bridge. >> Okay. >> I want to see that in conservation.
Would you support that? Are you against it? If you would, you know, are you okay having that go to referendum? If not, >> I I support conservation. I know the last time we talked about it whether or not we would have um uh a path couple of paths into it whether it's off of um which is it Baker
Road right those roads. >> Yep. Exactly. maybe US1 and how it works, whether or not there was and uh >> that that US1 parcel would be just sort of stuck in into the rest of the Haney Creek >> without being developed. And then on
Baker, which two separate things, but on Baker that would be a trail head into that park as as uh >> yeah, and that was the issue >> like Kiplinger more of a passive natural, you know, very little infrastructure and and uh management type. I know, you know, in the past I'
I've very much supported trying to do housing there. I know >> some housing there. Um if it if we work if if there's a consensus as to included in the park, um you know, I'm not against it in terms of the ingress and
egress and how developed it becomes in terms of you know, people whatever people are going to do there as an activity. Yeah. So either it's going to be very very um >> pro park where it's just
>> Yes. >> meditation walking nothing. >> Have you been at the Kipinger Park at the base of that? It's something like this. >> I've walked from Caner Highway all the way to the river. I do that through >> where you have that parking lot, but there's not there's not a bunch of infrastructure. It's it doesn't need to
be constantly updated, you know. It's very light. >> I don't think they have a bathroom at that parking lot. >> Correct. Very light. But somewhere where families can access that land where right now you sort of >> the the only thing and it probably doesn't have anything to do with that particular spot.
>> But on the other side going into the entire Haney Creek >> where we had done the dedication when Commissioner Cross was on the commission >> the parking there's no parking there's no parking. So if we're going to do something, it has to work together in
concert and try to get it and and have the orientation be whether the focus and the parking is going to be there and we kind of create a whole new mapping for that park and awesome and have it where people know and are able to know that
this is like our little urban forest and we can do something there >> if that's what we we want to do. So, uh, >> you would not be opposed to looking at that? >> If, yeah, if it comes up, I'll Yes, I'll I'll be I'll consider it for conservation. Um, but like I said, I was
all into doing housing there. I know that there's um there was, you know, wanting to lease it because we need to have money in order to maintain the park. Those are questions that have come up. Um, >> yes. and more is going to happen in that area especially because of the some
potential issues with the with the county when it comes to police, fire, all that stuff and wind the mirror and all that when we have lots of activity in that area. Um, you know, who's where we getting the money from to pay and to cover this kind of stuff. And that was
one of the issues was to try to use a twoacre parcel to do something so that we can have some money to, you know, use some of that to maintain. But um uh when when if that comes up, what do we have
now like eight acres or something there? >> I don't know the exact >> but okay. All right. Because >> I know Tim Vulkers had it came in one of our presentations when we were talking about it. Tim had come up uh particularly using the ARPA money.
>> One of the options, you know, on our menu of how to spend that money was uh that trail head entrance off >> developing that, you know, and the expense associated. So that doing that would fall within the
scope as you'll see if you look at at the what Ruth >> I think that Ruth Okay, >> that falls within that scope of what's allowable with the half cent sales tax. So, recreation, light infrastructure, conservation, and and for for context philosophically,
there's different viewpoints on what to do with green space. Uh, not to turn it into a a right versus left thing, but it it seems like, you know, one side of the fence is having green space, having trees, you know, a space for gopher
tortoises for the sake of the turtles. Um, I I would say I'm more on the other side of the fence where I'm very much for conservation, but so that people can appreciate, you know, I want my kids to be able to have a trail to walk down to see the gopher tortoises. I don't want to just create
>> have it just completely wild, >> right? just just for the sake of trees, like if people can't appreciate old Florida, you know, does it even really exist from from conservation versus environmentalism? you know, I I want it to be conserved, but a passive park so
families and kids can. >> And this might be going into the weeds on that particular thing, but >> I haven't actually walked that particular area. So, other than it being swampy and so on, I have no idea if
there are any. You said old Florida. I was thinking there like no big oak trees with, >> you know, hanging whatever on it. So, I'm not sure. uh exactly what's in there that when it if a path is cut how nicely
things will be or if we'll actually have to plant some trees or whatever in there because I think a lot of it is wet. There's some of it >> from my understanding and I could be wrong. It's a lot of it's upland. >> Well, on the edges I guess where it goes into the wet.
>> Obviously, you wouldn't be going deep into the that >> waterhed water flow. >> Um >> Well, that's right because the upland area would have been where we would have wanted to put any housing or anything like that. >> But where there's the ability to have trail >> so you can access it would be nice. >> Okay.
>> Um other my second referendum item would be sailfish ball fields. So hear me out on this. I'm concerned that if Bright Line goes in that there very well could be a lot of pressure to have that become transit oriented development, mixed use.
I think it could put a lot of pressure on the ball fields to become archaic. And so what I would like to see and tell me what you think is I would like to see that it goes to referendum >> or just stay like that. for it if it's
going to be developed the basically the people if anything was to happen to Sailfish it would have to come through referendum. >> Okay. So we had Yeah. When we had tried that before to do a the hub or or or to get some some housing there was push back on a lot of people because of the
history of >> Selfish Ballpark but >> um we haven't said you know set it aside don't disturb it or do anything. So with the public input um at least you know the public that we have for the next 5 10 15 20 30 years
whatever because things have changed. So that might be something and I know that that is not a part of trying to maintain that uh East Stewart community so to speak because it's north of the original
East Stewart. So it was never a part of of that, you know, neighborhood thing. But that doesn't mean and it and it is a little nomad land, so to speak. you know, we have the county property there with the courthouse and then we have this property that's ours and it's
sacred in its history for a lot of people. And so if we put the the the only issue was that it wasn't being >> used fully and managed by the city fully as a recreation area and we just had the North County Little League that was
playing the lease to be there and it was very specialized use and very specialized times. So, if it's going to be a recreation area or some pit of whatever is there, um then it needs to
be done that way. And if we do put it out for referendum, we'd have to very much specify um what we want it so that we kind of limit it to a certain um plethora of
things, but not overlimited either. So that you can still be able if you had to rebuild something or build a better bunk house for the um ball fields or build better bathroom or do something whatever
is there that it won't be so limited that you end up because you have to stick with these you know things. So, I think that it would um it would be a good point. >> something that we we if if that's what's going to be there, we would need to make sure that we have
>> um the potential to to upgrade it, so to speak, uh without feeling like we're not being true to keeping the the terms of whatever the referendum was or the spirit of maintaining this quote unquote
historic ball field, so to speak. >> Yeah. My thought would be that it is maintained as a park, you know, stays park, not be developed. >> Um, >> so you would be supportive of that? You wouldn't, would you be against having
that be a referendum item with those details? some, you know, something around that or >> I'd like to see the language on that and definitely I'd like to hear what people have to say and especially what people
um if we had like uh even, you know, in the spirit of transparency without just sticking some up for referendum, if we had discussions with people, we said that we were going to be listening to people and talking. So if
we had some listening stations and had some time where people then if if you know if it's a will of the community I definitely will be um uh working with that. So I but I know from the last time when we tried to do something and it was
very very controversial. But at the same time people wanted to have some affordable housing on the only properties we we can do that on and we can control his city property and people had talked about the the the other side
where the the city garage is and um and then there are people who are saying you know we're opposed to doing certain things on Martin Luther King or across steward. So there's, you know, there's room to have some discussion, but definitely I'll be listen I would I would um
>> support taking something to the public and see what they have to say. >> All right. Um, one of the concerns I had also along the same lines with Bright Line is the parking implications of, you
know, the courthouse needs so many spots. If Bright Line were to take up that entire parking lot, I have concerns of what that would do where staff is now pushed out onto on street in light of like the Elizabeth getting approved. You know,
a fair percentage of its parking is on street uh in that PUD. I I would I'm wondering if would you be supportive of bringing forward an item where we could really take a look at that versus
avoiding it potentially is how I might characterize it. Really looking at >> avoiding what? Avoiding >> uh >> Bright Line or parking >> the parking implications of Bright Line going there. looking at the the required parking from Bright Line, the parking
requirements for the courthouse and making sure that if some to the extent that we can if something is going to happen there that that it is adequately parked. >> Okay. >> Would you be okay with >> So with regard to the courthouse um county, they've been there. They've been
there a long time. The courthouse is there. I think that the court the courthouse property has more than enough parking for ordinary court days and ordinary events or at the courthouse vicinity and even including our memorial
park. So I think that parking to me um parking is is adequate because it's constantly revolving and changing. Before you commit to that too deeply, can I can I bring one more? >> If you have numbers and stuff that >> considering that we are in the process
of building a 1500 person amp >> that's 1700 or something. Okay. >> To have adequate parking >> same thing. I think it's the same thing. that on weekends and evenings and
overflow and people parking along the street and that doesn't mean that we we it wouldn't be nice to have a parking garage for uh these kind of things. But even so, when you're looking at the what
is it 240 parking potential when with for the bright line if the county if the parking area is built there as far as I can see and remember when we looked at that was that um the parking would stop.
It would not take up the entire area because I see bright line more towards the lumber area. I don't even think it comes all the way down to Ernest, but I have to I have to because you know if the train thing is there supposedly the
length of the train that would stop here if the if we ever have that >> it would be between um let's say uh uh East Ocean and U Martin Luther King and it would be probably the length of it at
least that was what was given what what I looked at when we studied that and I didn't see the parking all of that parking space on that side of the courthouse been used up and especially if you have a parking garage. Um I still I know how you feel about lines.
>> Garage though currently that's if the if the option if that ever came up there would be a parking garage. There would still be flat parking and um >> the briefcas I think >> I wish I had found it
>> money. There's no money. >> No, I don't see anything. >> I don't see anything. Laura, >> are you sure? >> The case of I want your luck. >> Did you go upstairs? >> Disappear.
>> Yeah, I thought I threw it under the um >> Okay. >> Check. >> Actually, I left my pocket book. I don't think so. I'm grabbing the >> Okay. >> Oh. >> Oh, okay. >> Sorry, guys. >> Okay. Sorry. So, yeah, go on. Tell me
about why you this is in line with referendums. You want to do something? >> No, this wouldn't be referendum. This is more my my angle that I wanted to go was really taking a look at the parking situation more
holistically. So, so Bright Line would be set to take that entire parking lot. >> Okay. I didn't I >> in its entirety that that they don't have any they don't have any garage proposed. >> So what you would be looking at is the
station effectively over the tracks >> but that that entire courthouse parking lot would become Bright Line parking. So with that being the case that is going to force that Bright Line parking out onto on street. all of the courthouse
parking would effectively become on street parking would would consume the on street parking and um right part of the consideration too is if that's the case then you're not going to have parking availability
in that courthouse area after hours for the amphitheater right from behind. Do you get what I mean? So, so >> that's why we need to coordinate and to me I think that we need to coordinate and work to facilitate Bright Line and
work to facilitate park. That's my that's what I think is my answer. >> But I know that we're not working with the county right now on >> but but assuming Bright Line does not let you use their parking lot for events which it's a paid parking lot and maybe they you know maybe that will be filled
with Bright Line patrons, right? assuming that if you have that 15 to,700 person amphitheater, >> right? >> And that really creates a lot of pressure for parking
when you lose that availability of parking to Bright Line both in terms of staff during the day, right? people coming to Pitataries to get lunch or anything in that area will now be consumed with um courthouse staff that got there early in the morning and
presumably it would be paid parking. I'm assuming you'd have to do that. Uh you lose all of that available parking and a lot of that parking in front of the Elizabeth proposed location. All of that on street was calculated into their PUD.
>> Yeah. Yeah, I don't. >> So, it seems like we're letting we're like double, triple, quadruple dipping the same parking spaces for a lot of different things, hoping that, you know, depending on the time of day, depending on the season, that those uses won't overlap and that they'll somehow
magically be parking. But I'm really concerned that there won't be once we give up all that. So, I what I would like to do is holistically look at that because if >> we can look at it, >> would you So, you would be >> We can look at it. >> You wouldn't be against looking at it. >> We can look at it. And the other thing
to look at, you mentioned the Elizabeth, is that >> when we decide to move fully into Wells Fargo, >> I mean, are we going to, you know, the courthouse is right there. It's a busy place. >> We have said that we wouldn't put up um
uh parking garage in the past because it probably wouldn't pay for itself for the millions. you put in 15 to however many millions to prepare a parking garage and get it ready and then you may not have it. But if we decide whatever we decide
to do at the Wells Fargo property, right, >> there could be the potential that we could do it and make money off of it um on that property instead of doing the multifamily which was supposedly going to be there. Um but that would be a city
venture. Um and uh that would be something um to to think about. So yeah, in the whole context of things in that little area, knowing that city hall is going to be there, knowing that across the street is going to be the amphitheater, and I think the numbers
that we put out that says the amphitheater can accommodate just because the concrete wasn't there in that fashion and the um what do you call that thing? the the facilities for electricity and music and so on wasn't
there. We've had um >> concerts and events and everything there. We've had the seafood fest and other things there. We've had the arts fest and I think the numbers are going to be generally the same and the parking
is going to flow in that fashion. So I don't think it's anything to be too too too too excited about right now but yes in the planning we need to think about it but really for the it's there to accommodate 15 to700
but I think that the event events that we're going to have are still going to be the same thing the the beer fest the seafood arts fest and um people know I mean our police department, fire
department, we know our capacity and so we're not going to have like, you know, uh whatever Woodstock with 20 million people. >> You never know, right? Depends on the venue, maybe. >> So, >> um >> but it's it's a consideration. Yeah.
>> Uh moving on to another point. Um it came up last night. Luke Lean brought it up was the Willoughby extension. Yeah, that's been in the plan since I was in transportation planning. How do >> you feel about that? >> To have Willoughby come all the way through. It is a tight area.
>> Um especially coming through the um from Willoughby up through the the where the housing is there now just north of Willoughby Boulevard and then coming up along the side. But that path has been there to supposedly go into
State Road Five and we've taken the money off of it and kind of stop that process. We're putting in money, impact fee money with the county to do that. Um uh I know that they don't want to see a lot
of traffic coming past them, but that corridor needs to be considered and looked into. So if we wanted to look at that corridor and we can discuss it with them, talk to the MO again and see how much we we need to
do what's because you know the half of that corridor on the north side um of Central Parkway probably won't get other than what's there now. It won't get developed. Let me see what's there. We have the park. Our park is
>> it's park. It's green space. Yes. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> The liquor store. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Okay. So, um, pond management. This was another one. They had done the Joe Gellio did the trial program with the ponds to avoid spray.
>> Oh, yes. Yes. Yes. >> And he had >> You're talking about this the grass and spraying and all that. Okay. >> In an attempt to avoid spraying. >> Yeah. >> Or minimizing it at least. >> Yeah. Milton has worked with that. Yeah. >> Would would you be opposed to having him
It kind of fell off. We we had recommendations >> to work on that. I've talked to Joe about it. >> Okay. So, you would you would be open to, you know, bringing him in and really trying to move forward. >> Yeah, definitely. >> Awesome. >> I don't know how much money is there for to get it done. >> That's what I would like to see is like
uh real cost estimates. There were crazy numbers flying around. I'd like to really take a look at what it would cost to do what he recommends >> and have a few options, you know, to at least min minimize spring. I think FAU had money at one time but >> right and if there's even grants if
there's something Yes. Okay. Okay. So, this was another one. Um, with regard to staff rate increases, cost of living, even though it's not really tied to CPI,
>> you're talking about 3% colas or what? >> Okay. So that the number has varied each year and it is really at the discretion of currently of the city manager. >> What I would like to see in the last two
years to my understanding it went from like a 5% increase up it jumped up to seven and then 10% or 10% then 7% something like this. it it really changed dramatically uh since it was >> non-union staff.
>> Correct. So what what I wanted to to see if you would be for is I think that that is a really big deal that would benefit from transparency. Not that I'm I'm not opposed to a certain rate or something, but what I would like to see is procedurally
that that comes forward as a presentation and ultimately a vote for approval where right now it rests. talking about the minimum percentage or the percentage range that uh department head or the city manager can >> well it's general for staff it's non to
your point it's non-union whatever that rate is going to be >> just making sure that there's a public meeting >> there that there can be discussion about it that there can be a presentation if it does need to be 10% why you know having some kind of rationale for for for what those numbers are beyond it
currently being just um >> set in the Great. >> Yeah, it just kind of sits within the discretion of the manager and that that has the the effect of that can very dramatically change the budget. So, I think that's one of those
items that would for you know oversight general oversight for transparency having that be a separate item since it is so impactful towards the budget >> where we review it and then ultimately approve it or kind of like we do with the millillage.
>> Yeah. And and I mean that's that has its merits, but I sometimes you know the the the the the leadership and the the ability um the nimble the nimleness, the
agility of the city manager in terms of financial um management or fiscal management of the budget and the funing. resources that we have that that kind of
thing that ability for the manager to do certain things that is uh that's an important part of of their I guess you call it management skills >> but I I don't and it's not that we we we
don't set some ideas or level for people for them to work with and I think that if we need to change that that now that's fine. But some we just have to be careful how um
we don't allow people to show us how their ingenuity >> the most the highest salaries and that person will be the highest paid person. It I think it would be good to have some oversight maybe you know where they're
making a recommendation for what that rate should be and why and ultimately we are approving >> say that with the time when the budget has been developed they would tell us what >> and for transparency you know most people don't know what that rate is every year it's just sort of invisible
>> would you be you know >> I'll I'll something that's for me to consider Right. >> Oh, yeah. This was another one. Backyard hens. >> The chickens again. >> Okay. I don't know if this person is in
the city or county. I won't disclose. >> Yes. >> But I had something at my doorsteps that says, "Merry Christmas from the chicks." >> From the chicks. There was some eggs. >> Oh, I see. >> So, um so um
>> how how >> we had it in the urban in the urban um code for the urban farm code. It was okay. And those people actually had an urban form on the ground floor form property which is now um
>> collab kitchens. I don't remember the ordinance in a ton of detail, but I know that we had excluded it except for like single family home >> zoning >> and those are the ones who would want to do chick is um >> and people and so we had we we had
gotten to the point where >> it because of code enforcement issues >> and people complaining even if it's legal people complain one way or the other >> that we had said that >> if it's not there then people can do it
or not do it. It seems like that's the current >> as far as I can tell, >> but unless their ne and even if their neighbors complain, you know, there's no rule. >> So, um, neighbors will have to just kind of work with themselves and police themselves. >> And, and this would be the point I would
make to that is it does create a situation where >> the only people who are doing it are the ones who are knowingly breaking the rules. >> If but there are no rules. Well, right now you're not allowed to have it in single family zoning. Our code does not
allow >> you to have chickens, but people >> Sorry. Are they Can they hear us? >> People People do have hens. I have >> I don't want to, you know, get the guy in trouble in my neighborhood. I I wake up often to a rooster >> in my neighborhood. >> I see them. >> So, it's happening, but there's no
awareness of where on behalf of the city. There's no permit fees associated. and the people who >> and then to keep them sanitized and to keep them diseasefree and all. >> There's nobody that even looks. >> So, you want to do it? You want to introduce? >> I don't want to do it in my yard personally, but the ability for people
to uh I I'll try to give >> I don't mind a discussion on it. I don't mind it coming up. >> More context to the point would be if only the people who are doing it are the ones breaking the rules, it really just only boxes out people who are following the rules. >> Yeah. they won't do it be you know and those often are going to be the people
who do it most responsibly >> would be something to consider and I know there there are >> people who are very against it >> there are people rabbits and pigs as their pets >> I I haven't heard >> I haven't heard that I I did have we had one neighbor in our neighborhood who had
a pig in a front yard but >> but generally I haven't heard really any support for goats or pigs it was just people wanting to have I've heard this consistently >> you've heard support for hens hens, five hens, no roosters, you know, for their kids to, you know, um like 4 kind of
things. And >> we're not an agricultural area, but um >> absolutely, >> you know, but that doesn't mean that urban people can't have um quote unquote uh crops or chickens or whatever. So, that's something that
>> So, you'd be open to discussion. >> Yeah, I can I can I can listen to the public on that. Okay. Um, half cent sales tax priorities was another one. So, we already kind of touched on it, but the trail head off of Baker.
>> Okay, that's what this is. >> Having that be like a Kiplinger passive park light infrastructure. We've already really talked about it. You would be open to discussing that. It's a separate issue. >> The language would be similar. >> It's a separate separate issue from the referendum item. It would be really
using the half cent sales tax money, some portion of it to set that trail head up and infrastructure in the park. Would you be open to considering that and discussing that or are you against that off of Baker? >> Well, that Yeah, because uh the similar
language to whatever this was at the time. Uh um >> what you're looking at there is >> for the county that was their thing back in 2024 it seems like. >> So so what you're looking at there on page three is what Ruth provided. This
is the state statute on how you can spend that money that you're receiving from halfent sales tax. If you look at that highlighted portion >> s tax where we need to finance, plan, construct infrastructure and acquire land for public recreation, >> conservation, >> conservation, protection of natural resources.
>> Correct. So So to Ruth's point, I went and talked to her about this. There was some confusion >> before. I I was not fully aware of how we could even spend the money, >> but this does give very specific guard rails. So you would be we had talked about drainage and some ve you know very
interesting ideas but that money is to be used for um to finance plan and construct infrastructure and to acquire land for public recreation >> I guess last budget but I didn't I I don't remember how much
>> and protection of natural resources. So, so what we want to and I think Ruth is going to present on this next time to give us more context. >> Okay. >> But just even today, you know, for context would be I felt like that Baker Road trail head very much captured the
spirit of this because it is conservation, you know, and recreation for the public using those natural resources. >> Okay. >> Versus some of the other things we discussed. >> Okay. Okay. But I also would, you know, I'm not just trying to pitch all my ideas. If you I wanted to know what your
ideas would be related to half cent sales tax as well. >> Okay. >> What you wanted to spend I thought was appropriate. >> So, uh just to to end that particular point, would you be um open to discussing? >> So, the public um >> absolutely
>> needs to be informed on on that if we're ever going to put something up for reference or at least how we spend the money, whatever. Yeah. >> I thought what was nice about it too is we already have it planned. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> You know, with Tim, what what else do you think on the halfsent sales tax >> is would be appropriate. Do you have
ideas? Have you heard feedback from >> I don't have that right now. >> Got it. Okay. Um and then the other one more obviously is acquiring >> because you know all of the other the the within this whole thing there's a lot of things that um that it and I
think that's what people did the both city county anything that would come from that is to deal with uh conservation type things. So yeah, definitely. But I just don't have a specific other than, you know, trying to if we ever did anything else up north.
But um >> more broadly, uh I would like to see it used to acquire land or take our available green space that we do have to create some of that light infrastructure um i.e. like you know boardwalks,
gazeos, woodwork in in in areas where it's available you know to to for recreation like that. You talk about acquiring, you talk, let's say for example, over the bridge like the right property or something like that >> if and where it's there's opportunity's,
>> you know, >> there's one parcel I'm thinking of that I don't even want to mention. >> Okay, that's fine. >> But, you know, to be able to to have those spaces for people to enjoy that's green space downtown, pocket parks and things, >> I would love to see it used for that personally.
>> And those have to be looked at carefully. And I don't know if if you know, but maybe you do, but if you actually uh drive, let's say on Oyola, >> we have a wealth of little pocket parts from
>> uh um Hillbrand Park, which is a part of the old subdivision, and then going down to the end of Ocola. And then we have all these little um end of the road little culdeac things whether they're off east ocean, they're over here off of
the the river in the um behind Publix that whole subdivision there. There are lots of little pockets. So we we do need to look at you know if there are other pockets because people like them they want their neighborhood supportive
neighborhood identification and it's important to to do that. I see our version of, you know, we're not going to have 3,000 acre parcels to put into conservation like the county will, but I see our version of this as, you know, getting having more of these pocket park
green spaces and then ultimately >> whether it's um, you know, there's been discussion about dredging Pleton Creek or something, you know, preserving those natural resources >> as per that statute. >> Okay. So
moving into the the other items were related to the future city hall site to kind of segue talking about green space what I want to do >> and current city hall site. So, at the future city hall site, um, right now we have that building knockdown and green
space, >> what I would like to see is using that half cent sales tax, even preserving and building, you know, trees, infrastructure, park infrastructure on that green space versus the previous plan.
>> Well, we have to have something to raise money to have um, you know, for the future. we have to have something. And I think that um even if it's not all of it, we I mean when whenever the the cancer center goes, there'll be the
option to do some things, but I think that we need to have something there to um to be a a a source of of funding, something decent that can be leased or
used or whatever. But I hear you're saying just keep it as an extension of >> Memorial Park across the other side. And so City Hall will and that's fine. City Hall needs to be in a nice location where you have
>> some green space and some we don't have any lawn space. It's not like a a traditional city hall that's in the middle of a green space and you have uh avenues and walkways around it. It's a It's in a concrete area right now. You
know, >> as I as I would envision it, you know, in the past there was a parking garage, four-story apartments, you know, very intense development there. >> Um >> I still would go in a parking garage. If we're going to do one, do it there. My only thought is besides the besides the
um amphitheater and having that ex extra parking there, I wonder how much a parking garage would really be utilized there because there's often a lot of spaces even at Wells at the surface parking to put 9 10 15 million into a
garage at that particular location. >> If we don't need it there, then what? Where else? >> Deeper downtown. you know, if you were going to make a case for it either at this site, which I'm not, or like how Panala brought up the Freemason Lodge and a little bit closer. The closer you can get to downtown, the more utilized
it might be. >> Well, remember we have the trolley so people can park and walk or take a trolley >> when it's 90 95 degrees in August? You know, do little old ladies really even want to walk to the parking garage >> of being >> Yeah, >> they can get the trolley. They can get
the trolley. I mean, I I that's that's that's a good thing. We can think about it. >> Um, so >> you said the old the the new city hall, are you in onto this city hall site yet? No. >> No. So, so with regard to Wells, you're
not necessarily in favor. You would like that to be more uh income producing. >> Yeah. Income producing if a portion of it, but just still working. There's some beautiful trees there that can be kept. There's some things that can happen in
that area. Um I I think we could charge our staff to to give us something give us a Yeah, we can. >> You're making friends, huh? >> No. To give us something to to to work with because But then they'll also need
the direction if we're if we're kind of in favor of doing uh parking there or or you know, >> I'd like to see We're going to get rid of the um >> beautifying that that uh surface parking to having more, you know, shade trees
and making it a little more attractive and then having that green space be, you know, like I mentioned, gazeos and woodwork would be my vision. Not turning that into a large scale development. Um, I don't see how you you kind of either have to do one or the other >> because you either have to maintain that
surface parking. You can't really build much there without eating up that surface parking and having a garage on a smaller footprint for it to really be viable economically because I've heard, you know, brownstones, town houses,
but if you're going to build any kind of apartments, you're really locked into what we already RFP there. >> You're not going to be able to do you know, apartments there. So, kind of either have to do like larger scale commercial with garage or minimal development, i.e. surface parking and
and more passive park, you know. >> Okay. Um, uh, >> let me see. I I I can't remember what if we had even if we'd been presented with a >> because we had the the plan for the residential there,
>> but in terms of like moving our utility and having the drive-thru or something over there. I think everything is supposed to be all >> inclusive over there, but it might have to move. That bank thing may not work and they may have to do something else. But I know that um
I think that just we have to rework the um the the layout for that property and work on it. So yes, I agree. That's a that's a priority. That's an I Yeah, the layout for that property and whatever RFP we put in for this property or
>> or accept for this property. Let's put it that way. I think we're going to have to see what people send to us and see what we can uh work with. >> But you're open to discussing all of that. >> Uhhuh. >> Okay. So, in terms of this site then, that would be the the segue to this
site. >> Yeah. >> What is your vision for what we do here? >> From Flaggler Park to St. Lucy Avenue, including the annex building. Um, so there's a plan that should be just
laying somewhere up up there that I think has some >> Candace is going to bring us she's going to present. >> Okay. >> In the not too distant future. >> Good. Some ideas. >> Okay. So, >> I don't know how far back she's going to reach, but >> let's say from the dock to X amount.
Let's say whatever 60 feet, 100 ft >> in absolute open space, green space, whatever. Anything that's going to happen goes over here and if the road needs to come from St. Lucy like where
it comes from utilities and comes through the center of this and dovetail back into the quote unquote old road or >> so extending Oyola and then what having what commercial there or just extending
>> uh extending this um St. Lucy from St. Lucy. So I think that what will happen is that we won't be so close to the railroad track. I think with the building gone, let's say that that building gone, whoever comes in with a plan, um that entrance to the railroad
track probably won't be there. But then so it would kind of Yes, you're right, Ayola, because it kind of jogs right where the the ATM machine is and that kind of thing. So it would kind of come across there. I don't know traffic-wise how things and
especially if you had something here like say we accepted a convention center or whatever it is that we're doing here. I guess we'd have to see what their their plan is actually. But all I'd want to do, my main thing is that something
is here, whether it's a uh a convention center or whatever uh people, whether it's office buildings, whatever it is that we're working with, u I think that we'll have enough input to provide that, but we absolutely need to keep a swath
of um green space and keep our concert area and all that stuff with the with the um on the river walk. Um uh uh so um
yeah I there's a lot of work to be done but I've been involved with some planning for this site before and if um Main Street is going to come and give us some ideas and then we'll >> part of part of that even is I is you
offering some feedback because I'm sure she's going to listen. But I'll I'll I'll I'll get I'll get my ideas um together. All I know is that I want a swath of green. >> Oh, of course. >> Okay. >> I think they would be pitchforked. >> Okay.
>> Those are my big ones. You want >> Okay. So then let me try on some things. >> Yeah. What do you got? So, um, the potential you were talking about the chickens and so on, and I know that people want us to be both city and
and I mean city, country and urban at the same time. Um, or rural, urban, whatever it is. You know, people want to feel like this is their home space, whatever it is. You know, they want to go out in their backyard and do certain things, especially those who are single
family. But, um, >> I don't think it would be that many people. I think there the ant if there's antagonism toward it, I don't think it would be that many people that >> okay, >> but having a pathway that if people decide that that's what they would like to do
>> and they can get whatever license and work to do it, >> they have the the ability to do it. >> Okay. Okay. So, >> it's there's oversight to make sure that, you know, somebody could just check make sure that it's, you know, the setbacks are appropriate, you know, because right now, nobody there's
>> I got I got chickens walking down the street now. >> That's right. The type of fencing and the type of security, that kind of thing. So, that's that's something >> there are many responsible chicken owners that I don't even, you know, I I see the coupe, you know, from I've never seen the chicken. >> Yeah. There's many of those smells or anything like that. Right.
>> So, that's that's one thing. So the other thing is um expanding either expanding or reforming whatever we may want to call it the CRA boundaries and I know that CRA has its limitation statewide in terms of the
sunset and what's may happen but I think that it has served a great deal of purpose and the funding has created a lot of um uh development in the city of Stewart that people take for granted, but it was because of the CRA and
because of the type of funding that we've received that have gotten all of that. And if there are some areas, there are some people who've complained, you know, on the other side of Palm Beach Road or, you know, the south side of Martin Luther King in some areas that is
not exactly on the CRA. um they've complained and asked questions how they're this is happening and this they can't get the advantage of these things. So we may want to look at those boundaries. I know we went down to
Decker Avenue even off you know I don't know if that part of Palm City Road I'm sure it's the thing area that I'm thinking of. I don't think it's there in that area. So, we we'd want to I'd want to look at our CRA boundaries and see if
there's any ability to expand um or to round off or whatever you may call it so that we can have um certain benefits if they're if they're available to those people that they can
they can get it. I I just so it would be the CRA boundaries if possible to look at them and and that's something that panel can tell us if she's had interest from people but you know the CRA has its guidelines in terms of blighted area and
all these kind of things. So they may not meet all the guidelines but we just need to look very carefully um to see if that's that's happened. Uh we talked about sustainability with regard to those um
you know, developing for uh parks and so on, >> but um we have and I don't know if you're familiar with this, but we have a um a strategic plan for the city of Stewart. And if you don't have a copy,
I'd say, you know, get a copy, look at it, and um I know that you um some people don't like to use the word sustainable. Um, >> are you talking about the strategic plan or are you talking about the
sustainability plan, the >> Well, it it has some things in there. >> One was what we did as that workshop exercise at Flaggler, the strategic plan. >> The other is the um what you guys did before I got here. >> Yeah. The sustainability thing. Yeah.
So, I'd say look at both of those either way. uh at least look back at them and see if there's anything that um could now be incorporated during this next year or have a specific and I'll try to go back and and pull mine up too. I
don't I don't have that. And because as a part of that too, one of the things that I noted is that >> um I call it neighborhood identification. So people some people know that I live
in St. Lucy estates or I live in Serita Heights or I live in Cleveland subdivision or or I live in East Stewart or wherever the subdivision name is. >> Yes. >> Okay. Um,
we don't have that here where in some neighborhoods I've gone to other communities where they actually have welcome Serita Heights or welcome Baham whatever north of the bridge is I
can't think of it right now. um welcome to to to just this little these little neighborhoods, especially where Pocket Parks are located. >> And so when you're walking by or driving
by, you just feel a sense of neighborhoodness of almost security that you're in a neighborhood. It must be a nice neighborhood. There's a nice wooden sign. There's a thing. and it's uh sponsored by the city of Stewart and
>> beyond signage. Is there something more >> um that you're >> Well, you know, we've always pushed to have these um the the neighborhood watch thing um and to have people with groups like that. I think that now more than
ever with um security and other things happening, we saw what happened with the Christmas parade, you just I wouldn't say be totally lerary of your neighbors, but you just have to be conscious and cognizant of what's going on around you.
So, I think the more people we get involved in community neighborhood watch and working on that kind of stuff, not just because you live in a condo complex and they're already somewhat taking care of things, but we need to develop a
level of interest in the city and our residents. And I know that we're talking about the website and trying to put out as much information as possible to people, but I think having signs help and having the ability to have a
>> like >> a structured way of >> self-p policing neighborhoods is what you're saying. >> Yeah. Well, yeah. >> I'm trying to understand. >> No, just to get people to to to know to to take care to to watch out for their neighbors. >> Mhm. >> You know, >> to neighborhood pride.
>> Yeah. Neighborhood pride. So you would almost need you would almost want neighborhood meetings or something. >> Neighborhood meetings. The police does go out and do that. So we can emphasize that >> like how the county will have NAC's. You'll have those different they have NAC's the county but those have to do
those are are tied into the >> CRA and all of that stuff. But I think that people would be interested in some kind of a zone or neighborhood thing or whatever. If it's even two times a year that people know that somebody a
commissioner or the group is going to do something or say something to us that's for us. That's that's something that they're interested in us. And so people north of the bridge, we never get to see them. I don't know. It could be a walk.
We if we break it up in four or five zones and we have a neighborhood walk or something, anything to let people We're still a small town. We >> can we do the trash pick up the neighborhood cleanup kind of. >> Yeah. And when the city does the um the
pickup thing where they pick up the the hazardous material and they have the neighborhood cleanup. Yes. even on that Saturday when they're doing that, if they just know that one or two or three of our commissioners are going to be in the neighborhood just saying hi or doing
something, I think that that helps with with um things. >> That's one thing. >> We got a minute left. Anything else? >> We got a minute. The other thing I was going to talk about was civility. I You ran a nice meeting last night. I appreciate that. >> It has helped me having Jol Lee with the public comment. Okay.
>> I have too much of a bleeding heart maybe for public comment. So having him >> go through it >> when it's time, you know. All right, sir. >> Okay. So you like the idea of having the the the gavvel I mean the the bell >> with with the manager. >> Yeah. >> Kind of like how Don will do at the
county. That's where >> you don't want to stop Mrs. Jones. Mrs. Jones, I'm sorry you can't speak. >> I'd let her talk for 10 minutes, you know. So >> Yeah. Yeah. >> So it's it's been good. That was good having Joe Lee. I felt like it kept us in in order. >> Yeah. It didn't feel like, you know, for that that person that it was too
jarring. >> Yeah. Yeah. Well, I'm definitely going to get some more stuff. I'll get some ideas to Roz and Roz can always pull them back at you when we get here from the public and we know about some of these referendum type ideas. That's
something to think about. Um, uh, I don't know if the county still has money for I have to look and see about, um, there's no real impact fees that much anymore, but, um, people are going to be watching us carefully come this
budget season, >> so it's it's it's important. >> I'm going to put this in your box or I give this to you right now. Keep it. >> Perfect. All right. >> All right, we'll take a take a two-minute recess.
>> Oh, you have somebody else. All right, we had a meeting for 3:00 scheduled with Commissioner Rich. He has not showed up, so we are going to recess until 4. >> Sounds good. We adjourn till 4 o'clock. We'll >> adjourn until 4.
We're ready when you are. >> Right. >> All right. Susay, would you call the role? >> Mayor Collins >> here >> and Vice Mayor Reed >> here. >> Are there any comments from the public? >> Seeing none,
>> yeah. approve the vending machine options. >> All right. So, we'll get right into discussion. Vice Mayor. >> Yeah. >> So, the purpose of this meeting is to review uh policy direction that you'd like to go in uh for the time that I am
mayor, get feedback from you, including the CRA, uh what your priorities might be and in what order for me to share mine with you to get feedback uh about yours. >> Yeah. >> As well. So you want to lead off and go for it. >> One thing I wanted to say for the record
just to start out the meeting. Uh Chris and I don't communicate by the way outside of contrary to popular belief. >> Yes. Um I just wanted to state that I actually watched all the prior meetings too and I made notes on everybody and for the record Campbell Rich didn't show
up to his. Um but yeah, I I summed it up very well and um I have your backyard chicken ordinance. So there you go. >> Yeah. Yes, I brought that too for you. >> Um, my goals, I think most people understand where I stand. I want open
government. However, I can achieve that. I've mentioned things. I don't know if you want me to get into detail on what I'm looking for. >> Um, I know we changed the agenda, the GIS map. I'd like to see emails online. I want code enforcement more online.
Um, >> well, like how the county does it. >> Yeah. Yeah. and I want to be able to search permits and and it needs to be easier. >> That dovetales with what was coming up last night, which is revamping the website anyway. >> Yeah, the the it definitely needs it. Um
but yes, I want that. Um I've spoke with city attorney as well. I don't think magistrate stuff when it comes to fines should be handled behind closed doors. >> Um >> so what would you propose? But it needs
to be done publicly. >> So having >> I don't I don't want favoritism, right? So I don't want preferential treatment. I don't want favoritism. I don't care who you know where you >> live. Yeah. because then you can provide public input if someone doesn't agree
with it or you know whatever that >> I mean obviously it would be um assert obviously it would be um asserted by the city clerk on responding any public records request but those are public meetings >> right >> you know in our code the city commission
defers the code enforcement to the magistrate so the magistrate has public um you know hearings on it and it is open to the public I I Is it televised? I'm trying to >> Yeah. So, it is televised live just like this meeting. >> They're live streamed, magistrate.
>> Yeah, we don't they're not necessarily saved on our website, but they're open for public record if you'd like. Um live >> Well, they are live streamed while they're happening. They are running live on our website and on our YouTube page. They save on our YouTube page. If someone requests it, we send the link to them.
>> That's right. I have seen them. I >> But not on the city website. So maybe >> it's not saved on the city website, but it is livereamed on the city website. >> So potentially including them as as we do with the other agenda items and then having those be saved. >> Yeah. >> Yeah.
>> Yeah. Because I sometimes I can't go I think they're on Wednesdays. Sometimes I can't go to them and I like to look back upon them. >> Sure. I think that's a good idea. Um, I'd say another goal of mine is cleaning
up past issues in this city that I don't think I should have been in the position that I am in. And I think it should have been done a long time ago. Uh, I see, you know, the reges are here. That's one for example, knowing all the information
like where someone looks at it from a third party perspective. And I know you always use the sentence characterize it. I like saying more painting the picture. Um, if someone paints the entire picture to where it's finished and I never saw the process,
>> I missed everything. And whatever someone tells me, how am I supposed to back check it or research it? I'm doing multiple public record requests. You're, you know, >> so what would you propose? What What are you envisioning? Well, it's it's either going to be an individual from within the city or it's
going to have to be an outside firm to come in and look at some of these issues. Um, you can take uh Stankovich for example, that's another one that needs reviewed. Um, the the Hamilton church, that's another
one. the Leonard property. You know, these oneoff cases that we run into, I don't think they should drag out as long as they they should. >> Okay. What else you got? >> Um I I know you guys discussed like a parking garage. For me, that's hard
seeing a parking garage in the city of Stewart. >> I agree with you. I'm not a fan. >> Um I think it would have if it was done maybe before Aul Apartments, that was a location that they talked about. Great. But at this point, I don't know. It It pains me. It, you know, there was one
development that actually two one where it had an existing parking garage and obviously C. >> It came up during Bright Line, too. Is that it was originally including a garage and there was so much negative feedback, it got pulled from the whole thing. It's truly people want more
parking but not a garage. >> Correct. And I think when you see a parking garage for people, I I can speak on myself, it changes the entire dynamics of what this city is. >> Yeah. Just like when you see aerial pedestrian bridges that they actually
have in that innovation hub report scattered throughout Salerno. So they could hop over from Golden Gate and Solerno to Commerce regardless of trains passing by. So they want aerial pedestrian bridges, >> the grade crossings with the bridges and
the tunnels. Same thing. >> Yeah. It forever changes what this why people move here, right? The to me that's the Martin County difference. >> Sure. >> Um I can run through this. Your referendum for the two acres I support. Um the Sailfish ball fields I support
for referendum. Becky Bruner was the one that made the motion to sell off your baseball fields. It never got seconded, so it never happened. that was supposed to be a development project for I believe condos or town homes.
>> Um but I support saving that. Um reviewing the parking for the courthouse and how Bright Line would utilize it. Absolutely support that. Um the Willoughby extension, I I I sit on the no board with you. My thoughts on that
are if it was more commercial property on Central Parkway, it would have made more sense, but prior board members went and obliterated Central Parkway with commercial to multifamily zoning changes. So now you have a bunch of families that live there. They're going
to be affected. Um, not a fan of it. >> Um, you would support no build. >> I' I'd support a no build for no build. >> And and it's funny because that option was never even presented to us. And then when we brought it up, of course you can always >> Oh yeah, it's supposed to be in there
like all the other ones. Whoops. >> Houdini took it out. >> Weird. >> Um >> the pond management. I'm actually familiar with that because I used it as a campaign tool. >> Sir, remember? >> Yep. Um >> might have to republish that video.
>> Uh so yes, I support the mechanical. Um I know Ula Clark mentioned the cost of it. >> We never got real numbers. >> Yeah. So, I would like to have a real look at what it would cost based on the different options to consider. >> Yeah.
So, that one um I I do agree with you on the whole rate increases pertaining to staff cola. You know, 7 to 10% increases. Um that's not a cost of living increase. Um that's a that's a pay increase. At the time it was, and I've learned this later, this I didn't
understand it at the time, but it was to catch up with the minimum wage increase. >> Okay. So, the minimum of 14 right now an hour and that goes >> 10% raise across all salaries. >> Yeah. >> To it's, you know, it didn't make sense to me. I understand the rationale, but I
think that's something that should happen with presentation talking about it. Makes sense. It makes sense. And it doesn't. >> Yeah. Um, the backyard chickens I support. Um, and the realtor association should support this because they're all for property rights,
>> not not for us. >> So, um, yeah, they they should support that. Um, >> the half cent sales tax acquiring. Yeah, that was talked about acquiring more land, storm water management. >> I know you wanted to do the the
drainage. >> Yeah. And the money might only go so far. less about the money. The money's there, but in talking to Ruth, >> the uses. >> Yeah. >> Did you see that? >> I did. I wrote it down in here. Yeah. >> So, it was interesting. She brought that
to my attention. Oh, because that never really came up. >> Yeah. Something about finance, plan, construct, infrastructure, and acquire land for recreation or protection of natural resources. >> Yeah. recreation, conservation
like the three, you know. >> So, it's it's mainly conservation for us. >> You you have infrastructure for recreation land and then you might I guess you could make a case for like dredging the um canals. You can
make a case for something that's protecting >> creek you're talking about. >> Maybe even the ponds. I don't know. But you're you're doing these things that are protecting natural resources, you know. I think Ruth wanted to go even in the direction of dredging or something, you know. >> Yeah, we just sent that letter off.
>> Um, a future city hall site. >> Yeah. What do you think? >> Um, no parking garage. Um, green space. And I wouldn't be opposed to commercial development, just not I don't want to see the whole multi- I don't want to see
mixed use. >> I don't want to see the mixed use. And obviously, we went after the shared parking. So you're saying like a smaller scale commercial sort of like what was there but revamp >> match what's existing in our historic downtown? >> That's my thought on that.
>> Not like three and four stories though, right? >> Absolutely not. No. No. Because you're going to block the sun and the water view from everybody. >> Like I think your neighbors still want sunlight. >> That's why I didn't build a three-story house for my neighbor. I could have
actually the land development code. It was it was a minimum two story. I don't know if you know the story on my own house. It was minimum twotory >> and uh I had to come in front of this board and ask for permission to build a single family residential house. >> Was that that was before
>> that was the urban code in my neighborhood. >> That was poor creek. That was >> Yeah. And it and it still might be like that. Um but that's just an example. >> But yes, I had to pay money to the city to build a single family house. What else you got?
>> Um, the current city or All right. So, we talked about we talked about the current one, right? But the future, >> correct? Current and future. So, we did we did future. Let's do current. >> Uh, yeah. So, current currently here. Yeah. So, currently I talked about it.
No parking garage, etc., etc. >> You said future, no garage. >> Yeah. So, future no garage at Wells and and here as well. So I I might have got them crossed. So here I'd like to see the twotory commercial with some parking, some green space
>> like extending Oyola kind of a thing. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Just to match it. So that's where we're at now with the current. So commercial extension and then keep like having the existing
uh parking. >> Yeah. >> Then sort of maximizing green space on this portion of it, right? Like a park kind of thing. Yeah. Got it. >> Okay. So then let's go future.
>> Okay. So the future >> garage, but what do you think? >> No parking garage. I know they always talked about having the city hall building separate so we could close down all the other departments. That was always discussed. >> The cancer center would be >> chambers. Yes.
>> So having that be slightly more separate. >> M And then as far as uh I believe urban was it urban center that wanted to do the multif family development to the east of >> so they had rfpded out that whole section and if it is to be apartments we
would be bound to that RFP but if we did something very different we would my understanding not be bound to we don't have to build apartments there but if we build apartments we have to build what was RF Gota. >> So if you wanted to do commercial, if
you wanted to do a park, that was what I >> Yeah, >> I would love for that to be some kind of space there. You had mentioned having it be income producing. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. So I'm not opposed to either one.
If it was commercial versus green space, um I'm fine with either one of that. Same kind of thing like one two story kind right. >> Yeah. >> We don't want like what got approved
with city and stuff. >> And it's half the parking requirements >> and that's a concern is is making sure there's enough room for you know city staff ultimately is who will occupy wells along with >> anything any kind of use that's happen.
not over building that out >> because you want to have as much of that parking for >> correct. Yeah. >> You want to lose that it's happening on that part. So you kind of need that for overflow for events. >> Um from my notes, Ula had mentioned the
fire tax. >> I'm not opposed to that. I just I want people that are utilizing 911 services to pay their fair share. Like I know we all as taxpayers pay a minimum, but if someone is just
constantly 911, whether it's assisted living facility or a commercial plaza, like and I don't even know legally if you can do that, but I don't know. >> I think we have a current ordinance that says above a certain amount, they're
fined. >> Oh, if they call 911. >> Yeah. What do you mean? I you know I like for instance I used to work for the city of Port St. Lucy and I remember an issue coming up today. They had a similar ordinance when you let's say it's more than eight a month. you get
fined so many calls and and there was a a rehab facility, a nursing home that they it was our impression that they had to dial nine to get out and so people would call nine one for area code but hit one twice and so there was a lot of false calls and and it was one
particular I mean it was like 30 a month so it was like pretty ridiculous and we had asked them to >> change the nine to an eight to you know to dial out and and so I remember that issue coming up because we kept having to find them and it didn't seem to bother them. They just kept paying a
fine. So >> yeah. So it might be something along those lines because like we have the alarm, take the alarm permit for example. If you have too many false alarms, what happens? You get build, >> right? Right. >> So like what's the difference then? If someone's calling 911 constantly using
the services, >> how does that work, Lee? Is there a threshold where somebody would get build? >> I get build for my alarm if there's false alarms. public safety or something. >> Not not ne if you had a false alarm. I I'm not positive on this, but we'd
probably have to have fire come, but I I I don't think if you had a false alarm that you'd be fined. I think there's a a if I recall, don't hold me to this. I'm >> speculating. I think there's a limit if you had certain amount of calls above
that and you would be fine. Like um like take for example, right? They base the MSTU rate, right, for our millillage, how many calls does that get you then, right? Does that that make sense?
Because it's obviously state and countywide, but if you're just you're showing up to a bunch of calls, if my neighbor gets 10 calls a month for 911 and I might call once a year, >> so then maybe having
if it's appropriate an agenda item even to discuss how a mechanics because I don't know that's something that's above my understanding >> well it's getting data right so and and a lot of this stuff should be done with budget workshop as well it it kind of correlates >> um because then fire rescue can provide
the CAD data on certain addresses or phone numbers I don't know how they record stuff but >> this person over here if they showed up 200 times in a fiscal year and they came to this guy wants why are they paying the same amount the millage rate you know obviously it goes off property
values as well >> because you don't want to drift you don't want to drift too far into that direction >> because ultimately it's the availability of public safety that came >> correct and that's where base fee comes in >> right >> we're all paying a base fee so we're all
entitled to >> you know some sort of number of calls as far as I look at it >> yeah That's my thought on that. Um, let me see what else I had. >> I think I found it here.
>> Nice. >> And our code. >> Okay. So, it looks like the magic number is three false alarms within any fiscal year is excessive and con constitutes a public nuisance. So, that seems to be the number. It's
not one, it's three. Yeah, I know it wasn't one because I've had them come out, you know, before >> that was when someone broke in, but yeah. >> And it looks like we have some uh availability under code enforcement as an alternative to code enforcement proceedings to citymates due to civil
action to recover unpaid service charges. So, we do have something in our code obviously that addresses it. Oh, and as far as the chicken stuff, I I was I was watching Ula talked about that. Um because Ground Four Farms,
that's that's why it came back. I had a commissioner that was tied to that >> uh property. Um >> I don't think it should be at, >> you know, you're not like a single family house or any kind of backyard. And I'm sure it probably says that in the ordinance.
>> I think so. It's been a while since I looked at it, but I believe it was there were two different designations. You weren't allowed to have it. out of that commercial >> operation like that. >> Yeah. And as far as this the
neighborhood identification, I don't know. I mean, I know we have some Do people pay attention? I don't know. Are people like, "Oh, I'm in this neighborhood or I'm in this." I've heard a case for overall city pride, you know, having
stickers and like people really being proud of being in the city as a unique entity versus Martin County. >> Neighborhood wise, >> neighborhood. Yeah. >> I've never >> It's the first time I've heard that. >> Yeah, I could see citywide like we live in the city and not the city of PSL. >> It's a it's a privilege to live in the
city having flags up. >> Um Yula mentioned the CRA and expanding it or extending it. I mean, sure, it would make sense. >> Want to talk about that? >> Well, the county would have to agree to it, wouldn't they, Lee? >> Yeah. and you have to prove that there's
I wasn't here when we did it last time, but I believe we've done we've expanded it from from what the original one was, but so I've not gone through the process of expanding it, but I and my when it was asked earlier, I I tried to look at the statute and I think we have to show that there's blighted conditions and
>> I didn't want to get into the weeds, >> but philosoph weeds with it. So, like the biggest problem is like us being a city, it would be ludicrous to say, "No, we don't want no more CRA money. Why would we give it back to the county?" That makes zero sense.
>> Well, hang hang tight. Holistically, though, right? So, you're the money's coming out of general fund, >> county, and city. >> I need that to pay for public safety, right? So, so one point is that two and
this is this is a larger conversation you know expansion versus not versus even making it smaller you know um two the nature of a CRA is to try to increase tax revenue and increase tax
base so fundamentally the purpose of a CRA is to increase everyone's taxes >> correct and yeah >> thirdly the function of a CRA is to increase density and development. It's it's to pave the way for to make an area
more developable. >> Yes. >> All of these things, as far as I can tell, are antagonistic to what the average person that lives here wants. >> Is more development, higher taxes, and um less money available to go to public safety, which will ultimately raise
their taxes. So, I know it's a larger thing, but it seems this this whole idea, not that I'm recommending doing away with CRAAS. I'm >> not opposed to that though, >> you know, but it's I'm really not. >> It's like expanding them. >> My my problem with CRA and government in general is we're accelerating
one development, redevelopment, blighted areas. My personal opinion is I believe in blighted areas. We all don't live in SS Point or Sailfish Point, right? You have to start somewhere and that's where affordability comes in, >> right? And if you want to have affordable housing, >> that that's always been my thought
process. Um >> that can't just mean apartments. >> Correct. It used to be trailers. Now it's turned into overpriced one-bedroom apartments and you own nothing. >> You don't create generational wealth that way. >> So we're simultaneously trying to erase affordable housing and then build apartments.
>> Yeah. Correct. >> Right. >> And and and it was pitched to the board as if we add more inventory, it'll make it more affordable. Well, >> nope. What happened was is we're the number one seaside town and everybody wants to move here. >> Yeah, that was somebody didn't do the math. Yeah,
>> if you build it, guess what? They're going to move here. >> They will come. >> Um so that's always been my thing. Um Ula did, you know, she talked about civility. I think we've gotten a lot better as a board. >> Yeah. >> Um I think with the new chair, it should be
>> a lot better. I feel like I'm not going to be cut off the microphone when I'm talking or asking questions >> for clarification towards the public or towards staff. So, that's nice. >> Um the um the Baker Baker Creek trail head,
how do you feel? >> Support it >> because that could be a half cent sales tax. Some of that money could go into that. >> The exact total of what it would be right now. And and I I saw Laura Laura mentioned the whole traffic and traffic studies. I have my own thoughts on that.
>> What do you think? Yeah. >> Well, Lee, this might this is for you. Have you ever seen a traffic study fail? >> I'm being honest. You ever seen a traffic study fail? >> I can't say that I have. >> Neither can I. >> But even if it did, what does it even mean?
>> Well, should the development come online? So, like, and I know this is more state stuff, um, but I've never seen a traffic study fail. Um, DOT looks at roads as either under capacity, at
capacity, or over capacity. And then they give you a nice little rating, >> right? But even if it's level E, >> doesn't matter. >> Old baby build. Like, come on. >> Um, so that that's my opinion on that. Um,
why do we even require them, Lee? >> It's development project. >> Like, I got a question. Does it does it make us feel good in our heart by asking the applicant, "Hey, go get a traffic study. We're going to make you spend more money and make the process harder, but it doesn't mean anything to us,
>> right? You waste money. The city has to oversee it and waste money." >> Curious on that. >> You're having a lot of development questions. I think if you have some of these, we should probably have the development director in here to answer some of this because >> Yeah. That's fine though. >> We don't have the department heads in
here. >> Yeah. Yeah. No, I understand. I'm just ranting a little bit, too. >> It's fine. >> Um, it is. It's relaxed. Um, Laura talked about impact fees. >> So, here's here's my thoughts on it, right? >> What are we like $375 to change a hot
water heater out, >> I'm assuming? Right. If I looked at the fee schedule, somewhere around there. Commercial costs more, which multif family, even though if you have a single one, it's considered commercial way. Um, even though it's a residential unit. Yes. >> With SP80, I don't even know that we
could change our impact fees because for one or the other, it's going to be considered more burdensome. >> Well, what So, what I was getting at like with impact fees is think a developer cares about impact fees. Absolutely not. Now, if you're building a house, a single family house, and you're going to own and live there and
homestead, you absolutely care. But a developer just passes it off to the consumer. when we were doing it. That was one of the points I brought up is could we could we make it, >> you know, easier basically to build a house? >> Absolutely. >> Harder to build apartments. And there was contention about you. There was only so much you could do without being
unfair or >> I was ask impact fees before and I'm I'm not >> I'm not putting I'm not an expert at impact fees. So if you ask it there was a lot of layers to it, >> right? >> I'd have to I'd have to research it and and get back to you. So Lee, what I would appreciate is if you could look up
if we could revisit it because at the time there was like a fiveyear cycle that that we did it. But I I'm wondering is it something you can bring back up and and um revisit before that cycle or if we're bound to a certain rhythm that we have to hold.
Um so that was that for impact fees. But but talking about the hot water heater stuff, right? So, like even if you increase fees, my thought is more people are going to do unpermitted work >> because it's burdensome just to pay $375 for an inspector to come out and go,
"Okay, you're good." But like maybe don't hire uh someone that's not licensed um and stuff. You'll you'll see that and then they deter them from pulling permits. So, it's it's a fine line by charging too much versus too little. Mhm.
>> And I get it's a revenue generator for us. I know Laura talked about the homeless problem and stuff like that. It's it's hard for us to go build a property and and give it and have someone man. It is hard. Um
>> her her angle which you saw if you're watching was trying to support existing organizations that are doing it. You know, I I've been very adamant against having it happen on city property. or you know that is owned by everybody
and so allowing some people to have cheaper rate rent at the expense of everybody's property I think is inappropriate. >> Yeah. >> But she she was going more in the direction of supporting either through you know allowing multif family on that property with Salvation Army or
something. I don't know the nature of of what they've proposed because I haven't seen it but I guess they talked to her. >> Yeah. either being less restrictive of what goes there and or either giving them money or finding grants. I'm not
comfortable with giving money away, taxpayer money, because I don't think that's appropriate. But if there was an availability through the CRA to help them get grants or something, what I think you're going to have a hard time with is I mean, we all campaigned on no more multif. >> So I don't know how you >> how can you pick and choose,
>> right? because that's we said no, you know, and that's what people asked for. We didn't say hey no, but >> so it's kind of that's that's a hard thing. I would have a hard time voting for that because of that. >> Yeah. >> As much as I want to help. >> Um let's see.
I know there's something about the live local act and 40% I guess the county might have a tracking system. I know Lee mentioned >> I don't I don't know if there is one either, Lee. I never looked into that. Um, they also mentioned something about the
road closure with the boat show. I think the boat show should stay, >> of course. >> Yeah, I don't think it's going to go away or anything like that. It's, you know, look what happened to Solerno. You don't have the seafood fest no more. >> That was fun. >> Yeah, man. >> And if you missed out, you missed out.
>> So, I don't, you know, to me that's not like that doesn't turn us into a festival city by having a boat show. I know some people are always concerned about that. Um, what else do I got? I think that's it. >> You hammered through.
>> Oh, um, the development department. >> My Yeah, my my and and I can I I'll compare the city to the county, right? So, like when you submit a permit application in the county, you get a response back from all departments. You address those comments.
Don't come back after the fact over something else after you've already done a review because then it turns into back and forth over multiple little things like that should have been caught the first time. >> I know I've heard discussion about making it >> to where they could get their own done
like private like say if I went and hired someone. You can do that for Florida building code stuff but you can't do it for the development department planning and zoning. >> So what are you proposing to try to streamline? I I think there needs to be some sort of deadline. For example, it
shouldn't take six to nine months for administrative variances. I just think that's entirely too long. So, I think for some of these applications, there should be some sort of timeline that goes with them, but it doesn't outline it in our MUN code. I don't believe it does,
>> have you talked to Jody? >> I have. We've talked about it throughout like the ear amendments and I've mentioned it in some of my comments. Um >> because I think you might if you raise that issue and and you talk to her, she may have solutions, you know, on her and
that she needs things from us. >> Yeah. No, and they're aware of it. I I've mentioned it. I probably mentioned it like six times I feel like >> in my comments. Maybe not that detail. >> If it's a staffing issue, if it's some sort of issue internally or whatever it is. >> Um yeah, I don't I don't think it's I
mean, I'm not in that department, so I wouldn't know for sure. Um I finally have access to the development department as like an employee login, but I want the public to be able to see that. >> I shouldn't be the only one just because I'm an elected official. >> I used to be able to see it when I was a
regular citizen off the old old system. Um, and you could see everything. You could see people's water bills, literally everything. You could see it, permits, historical stuff. Um, so that would be nice to have it back.
>> Yeah. I don't know what else I got though. >> You're the man. >> Anything I missed? I know going through the MUN code would help like um I know um
trying to think of stuff offhand, but basically just the application process, cleaning up some language, and Jod's going to have all of her revisions on that. Um I've spoke to her. uh they had notes during the zoning in progress but we didn't focus on their notes because
we were doing it this you know direction but they have a bunch of notes in the development department for things that they need clarification on >> and um formbbased code is not that bad in my opinion I don't know if you know why form based code was there for east
it was to make development redevelopment easier >> so like if I showed you a flash card blah blah blah what changed though what we talked about was the zoning So, and I'll talk about that tomorrow. >> Got to plug your in case anybody's watching. >> Yeah, we got a town hall meeting
tomorrow night, 5 to 8:00 p.m. >> 10th Street Rec Center. Yes. >> Um, >> what are you going to be talking about? >> Local government um agenda packets, agendas, MUN code, um I can explain formbbased code, how if you want to get
involved, how do you get involved? >> Awesome. just government in general because >> demystifying it. >> Yeah, I've spent a lot of time down at city hall um over the last year. I don't spend as much time down here as I did the first six months. I felt like I was down here for like 40 hours a week.
>> That's a fire hose. Yeah. >> Yeah. Lee can attest to that. And I know they don't see me as much down here. Everything's okay. I'm just busy with work. Um but I don't come down here because I don't like asking questions unless I need an answer to something that I can't figure out. So, that's one
of my biggest things is I want to be able to go get the information at my fingertips. >> And you're empowering residents to do the same thing. >> Correct. That That's the goal. >> 35 minutes. You're the man. >> Well, I I I watched prior meetings.
>> Fantastic. >> Made a bunch of notes and I'll turn them in for public records as well. >> Um >> All right. You don't have anything else? I'll close it out. >> Uh yeah, and I know they talked about engaging the public more. I don't know. I don't fully understand what Laura was
getting at. Like, did she want like employees interviewed, department heads interviewed? >> I, as far as I can tell, it seemed like she wanted to have maybe employee profiles or videos or departmental
um to help people be more familiar with the people who are in those departments maybe on the website, you know, that is also up on social media. I know we've done that in the past. you know, we've had different departments. >> Yeah. So, we did that in the past, but in the past, it wasn't necessarily like
what Laura was saying. In the past, it was during government week, >> right? Yeah. >> And they would interview someone, they would describe who they were, what they did, but I think having it on the website for like even for department heads because like what happens when you got to go update it? I feel like anytime
we add like a maintenance item, it's harder to update it. And whoever does maintain the website does a really good job. >> Darren, >> I don't know. >> I think it would be Darren and Misty. >> Darren and Misty together. They do a really good job. >> Each each department individually takes
care of their own web pages, but Misty kind of is the lead on dealing with the company. >> She's really good. >> It doesn't take care of website >> and she'll actually send out a newsletter summarizing our our city commission meetings. I don't know if you knew that. Yeah. And I I read those and
they they're very accurate. folder. So, that's always nice. >> I don't know what else I got. Am I missing anything? There's the public. I got four people here. Am I missing anything that needs addressed? >> We're here.
>> Would that be like abolishing the CRA or No, it's just getting rid of >> There's no microphone. >> Come up to the mic. You want to talk, John? >> Yes, sir. So, I know we've talked to Nauseium about different ways to fund things, so on and so forth.
>> Oh, my name is John Hatch, president, local 2411 Stewart Firefighters. Um, I've talked to both of you, Nazium, about that >> and different ways to fund different projects. So that considered talking about
was um different ways to fund for uh training facilities so on and so I both see right for especially public resources as well as possibly outside
income so I'd just like to propose you guys look into that >> now when it and and so like when it comes to CRA funds they can't leave the CRA so the CRA funds would still come in they would just go to how does how would that even work Lee
like that's >> for public safety the only time I remember looking at this in the past was >> just in general with the CRA like >> right it's got to be it's got to be the the funds have got to be utilized in the CRA and I I remember looking at it from police standpoint not from fire but the
police officer would have to be, you know, fully full-time in the CRA, which would be difficult, but >> very hard. >> Um, I I don't remember looking at it from from the fire department's perspective, >> but I I there's some restrictions
on how you can use the money obviously and and and I don't know, putting in a new training facility is one of those, but >> yeah, I got a question for you then. So, like when it comes to these big PUDs and stuff, could you put a stipulation on order order on it to where they have to pay for a new rescue or an engine
>> or is that out of our scope of >> I I I I would probably say that's going to be out of the scope of a reasonable um condition. >> I mean, I there's what's called DRI, which let's say a a significant we don't have them here, but I know like Western
Port St. Lucy, they have them when they build a a monstrosity of a development. Yeah. >> They might be required to pay significant amounts of money towards school and and safety, public safety. But >> I I don't know that a small PUD for a gas station that you require that I
would probably say no. But >> so like >> talking large impacts. >> Well, I'll give you a scenario. I won't name this particular project, but hypothetically speaking, if someone was asked to provide more
landscaping and they said no because it met city land development code, how does that work? Because we've done that in the past and they've agreed to it, right? The applicant. But if what if >> when we when we were paying for half of their landscaping like through the CRA, >> say I no this is kind of going out of
>> they didn't fulfill their >> correct like I'm just giving a scenario. Say I'm a developer. or I come in front of this board, Mayor Collins says, "Hey, we want more landscaping. We want more trees." Well, if my landscape plan already met land development code, I can say kick rocks.
>> It's the fundamental problem with PUDS is you can violate them with impunity basically. So, if you if it's if you stick to the comp plan and the LDRs and you don't make PUB exceptions and one-offs, you're you have more of a
hedge against that very thing. Once you're once you have that one-off pud, it's very hard to enforce those types of what do you do? You're going to you're going to pull their CO or now now you got to go to court, right? But if they don't follow the the LDRs and the comp
plan, that's that's the power of the comp plan is it's really hard to change that. Well, I guess what I'm saying is >> PUD is just you get an amendment, you do a thing, it's a quick >> Correct. But what if they come in for a PUD and they're asking for relief from this sidewalk >> and we provide them relief from the sidewalk, but then you're like, "Oh, we
want more canopy trees." >> Good luck making them do the canopy trees. >> Oh, you can't force them, but you also don't have to give >> go to court. You know what I mean? Like, how do you do really? That's the problem with the PUD is really hard to enforce it. >> You just don't grant them the exception on the sidewalk then. I >> it's a fundamental
>> I went through that with COS I mean we >> we asked for more buffering >> yeah redo it though but I'm saying if someone hypothetically >> says no is there any >> there is be a condition that you're placing on we want more
>> right >> what's the difference between that condition and telling them to go pay for a >> I I look at it from million >> well let's not look at dollar amounts though let's look at what we're asking though I And I and I'm I'm throwing hypotheticals out like
>> making approval conditional upon an engine is you can't that's not legal. That's a what what is the technical word for that Lee? um you know they they >> it's extortion. It's I mean it's always an ask and you know they can always say
no but if they say no it's >> back to the original point though with regard to I I would be interested in having a a conversation some kind of item maybe it's a CR meeting but really
digging into the available uses for CRA funds >> and if there is overlap with public safety that is not inappropriate or could jeopardize the CRA Okay. With examples of other municipalities and you
know like you know for a burn building or if there is something other places that have done things that may be creative or out of the box versus this you know straightforward use if there is some precedent for how to be creative with that fund. So it could
help. >> Yeah. >> You know. >> Sure. Sure. >> Sure. Yeah, >> right. They break. PUD is the worst. >> What's What's the worst? >> Puds. >> Um, thank you. I just want to ask you about
Main Street. Uh, Senator uh Reed. Senator. >> Not yet. >> You might You might be prophetic. You might be prophetic. >> I hope so. >> Yep. You're jumping the gun. >> I'm sorry. Hey, >> Vice Mayor Reid,
>> I want to ask you a question about um Main Street. >> I've always been so curious about this. I I think we're still giving them like 70 grand or something a year. Well, it really stuck in my craw during co they still came and wanted that 70 grand
and people were struggling so much and I thought the main thing is we were helping Main Street but eventually they were going to get off the you know it was just to help them. So we're still giving them a lot of money. Why do you
do you like that? >> So can I speak to it? You mind? Okay, mayor, you can go. I >> mean, you too, you speak to as well, but >> and and how I've how I've tried to process this is previously we had a
woman on staff at the city, right? So, we're paying that salary to to do basically the same job plus benefits, right? And now now it is a public function versus semioutsourcing that it's not private. They're kind of quasi
public. It's but it's there they are fully responsible for doing these things and removing that obligation from the city for roughly the same expense at the same time they are paying to to operate
riverw walk you know the the the um >> so they're giving more than >> they're responsible for a few things they do the rock and riverwalk right they there's a few of these events that they do several of these events they also So, um,
get the Flaggler Center, the ability to rent the Flaggler Center at a discounted rate. It's it's they still rent it for a reasonable rate, but it's discounted versus market. um and have the ability to subleasase within Flaggler, use it for events, you
know, and and then they also run the green market. So they are able to generate revenue from that as well. So our partnership with them is along those three major they they receive that 70 grand for
doing Rock and Riverwalk and operating the main street program. they get the green market that they're responsible for and also recoup and then Flaggler Center. All that said, just looking at their numbers, these are not huge revenue
generators and a lot of their continued functionality. It it depends on um donations from businesses and people within for Main Street to even function. They don't have like a lot of staff. It's not a heavy duty operation that's really
lucrative. So >> they do get they do get um which is more of a conversation of of would be more like benefit to you know is it worth rock and riverwalk? Is it is it worth u they also will with Flaggler
receive donations to have like new windows got put in and ma maintain and manage it. there's, you know, it's not a clear-cut thing and it's like, is it worth, you know, what you get? But for me, I I do like that the city doesn't have to have that person on staff and
pay that that pension and those benefits and that same service is offered to residents. What do you think? I gave my thoughts. >> Yeah, I'll I'll sum it up real easy. Government is not that efficient. >> And if we did it, like Chris said, I I
think we'd cost taxpayers more money. I think the only thing I would like to see is if we're giving them $70,000, >> I'd like to see Dancing in the Streets come back. Like that's what made the city great. >> I think things like this, and obviously I can talk Martin County Pineapple Festival for anyone watching at the
county, bring it back. This is what made us great. The boat show, seafood festival. It's just I don't know. That's that's what small town is about. Um, but I just, you know, whether or not we took
the money from Steuart Main Street, um, who's going to maintain those events? And I think it comes down to cost. I mean, like Mayor Collins said, $70,000 is probably going to cost more for an employee to do it. And that before you even get into spending the money on
anything. >> That's true. Was that the first time they ever received money then? They came during >> CO. >> Was it bumped up during CO then or >> I think they wanted to but it didn't end up happening.
>> I think they even asked >> roughly I recollect this but >> so maybe we can have a direction from staff to update us on the progression >> of it just like the FEC lease. That's a That's garbage for what? FC. I mean, I I
looked at the history and stuff on that I see laughingly, but I'm in the wrong business as well. Like anybody that's related to FEC, they're making bang. >> Rupo Mexico. >> Yeah. And I was always told if you closed one or if you wanted to add one,
you had to close one basically because FEC doesn't want rail crossings anyway. >> Um, and I had mentioned this to the prior city manager. Um, Right Boulevard and Dixie Highway. Um, moving that train crossing down to the
signalized light and it was put on Martin County's website. I still have the screenshot of it. Why I'd have to go through my emails on why prior city manager said it couldn't happen. Might have emailed me on it. But
I I think stuff like that should work out because that's a horrible area to come out of. Alice Street there instead of just moving that down. >> Bring it up at at a meeting. At a meeting at a meeting and we'll get it agenda. >> I think it was something to do with like right away and stuff with FEC or
something. Something along those lines, Lee. Maybe. But stuff like that should happen. It makes it makes it easier for traffic and stuff and safer. People are scared to cross the roads nowadays. Um and and that's another thing talking about
CRAAS. I mentioned it heavily last night with the streetscape, complete streetscapes. Narrowing of roads, in my opinion, doesn't slow traffic down. Instead, it makes it harder and people are still going to speed. You cannot teach common sense.
You can take my neighborhood for example, Chris. We never had street parking like we do now. Now, it's a little bit wider, but people still speed through there. People cut through there. They're they're always going to speed. I mean, you can ask, you know, >> did you live over there before it got in Harrowed?
>> Uh, in Colorado? >> We actually had the property for a long time. So, I actually Yeah, we used to um Yeah, I grew up over there and my uh my aunt's grandparents. >> And you don't feel like it slowed down traffic what they did to Colorado? No. >> I mean, there's detective right here. I
don't know. I don't think Colorado has slowed down traffic at all. People are going to speed regardless. They go with the flow of traffic. >> They could be in a hurry, whatever it is. But um I actually think people have gotten nastier with what we've done with their driving.
>> Like people don't even use turn signals. Like if they're going to merge, I wait to see if someone's going to use a turn. Just be respectful. Some people forget what one is though. Um but yeah, people in my opinion, they're going to speed more because they want to cut you off to merge over on Colorado.
>> So whether there was one lane, two lane, three lanes, it's still going to happen. It's just How do you teach that people? I don't think you can. >> Okay. >> I wanted to bring something back up on the lease with Main Street
>> because it was in my head while you guys I was searching for it, but >> they pay us back $30,000 a year in rent >> out of the 70,000. Just >> so it's probably a net afford. rent the Flaggler Center >> and and to put one person down there all day to rent out the facility and on the
weekends, >> you're going to have to have two or three people and and and >> like the mayor said, it you put in benefits and all that. It's cheaper to pay them to do it. >> And we still have access to Flaggler for city days and things that we >> Yeah. They give us I think like uh 20 or
30 city days where we get to use it for various functions. >> Yeah. >> For free. Um, also something about like the budget workshop. >> And can I say one more thing about that? In the past that that was rent that was used for uh event hosting events. There
was um a company that it was exclusive. Flaggler was closed to the public. But now the way it's set up, you could rent the room. You could rent the space from Candace. So we have now the public has more access to
>> Flaggler than it did. Yeah. >> Where that wasn't the case before, you really couldn't do that. >> Sorry. >> Oh, no. You're good. Um, when we go through like the budget workshop, I um
I would like to see people start presenting sooner. Um, fire rescue and you know, no offense, I'd like to see stuff come sooner, not wait to see what numbers are because I feel like they know what they want.
just ask for it. Um I also want to see department heads presenting their budget and not just a city manager and a finance director. >> I think to some extent with fire with Raz at manager, you know, that's happening in that time frame, which it will be.
>> Uh you no longer have that sort of two-step process where if they come to an impass, you know, you go to the manager. She's both. So you got one shot. you got one shot to make it work, which I don't think there'll be an issue. >> Yeah. And >> it should happen quicker.
>> Yeah. So, I' I'd like to see that change. I'd also like and there and this might be more appropriate for the budget workshop, but I want to see full-time employees listed in each department. It doesn't list it on the budget paperwork. Um,
I also would like something to be discussed about potential take-home vehicles. Um, >> so just kind of more transparency across expenses. >> Yeah, just just more expenses and and seeing what it is and like the whole >> You should bring all this up before we get there. Like like that would be a
good have like a a hot list of what you would like to see. >> Yeah. >> Before we get into budget really think about all those things that >> Yeah. Like I just I don't want someone just after the institutional stuff just to
you know come after it from a monetary perspective. Like >> I'd like to think most people get involved with government out of the kindness of their heart otherwise why get involved >> because you might not always get the money but you get the benefits and stuff like that. So it's always a give and a
take. But I'd be curious how many people have take home vehicles. That was a that topic that I heard from the community. They noticed all the new vehicles being out there and like I said, who's taking one home? I have to drive to work and if you drive to work
and then hop in a company vehicle, I think that's a different scenario. >> Yeah. >> Awesome. >> I think that's it. I missed something that you wanted my opinion on. >> No, I I appreciate it, man. This has been fantastic. You got a lot of work
done. All right. Are there any other comments from the public? >> Okay. Seeing none, I'm going to close this out. >> Thank you. >> I was prepared. Two minutes.