--------- [Music] [Music] [Music] Well, in which line? If in the whole budget, if you say how many employees are in the city of Stewart, there's roughly 300. >> Looking at the department because there's this excess. Oh, >> but but by the way, that works. So let
me let me the utilities department has utility fees that are a specific amount that are budgeted that are utilities. So in the in the garbage collection department, those employees are paid
with garbage collection fees as well. And so if you don't collect garbage, there isn't any money to pay them. In the water reclamation department, those employees are paid with sewer fees. And so if they
don't collect them, they don't get paid. In the water treatment department, >> they're not in the general line of employee payments and benefits. >> Well, police and fire wipe out the general line of employee payments and benefits. All of the employees are in the general line and it shows the total
for the employees but each sub department or enterprise fund has the funding for those. Right. >> Thank you, >> Commissioner Gio. Hold on. Commissioner Gio, let me I just want to make sure I understood your question. So the
employees of the building department, if you look at general fund and there's a budget report in the budget every year that has here's the total salaries of general fund, here's the total overtime of general fund, here's the FICO of general fund. Those building employees
are in that line, but >> they are in that line. Okay. >> But there is a revenue equal to that expense in the revenue part of the budget. >> Okay. >> Okay. And so, so I if that expense for that building department goes down, then
that revenue goes down. If that expense for that department goes up, then that revenue goes up until the reserve is gone at such point. And then at that point, if we decided to keep the department and we didn't issue another permit to the manager's scenario a moment ago, well then Avalon would >> right
>> kick up the cost of those employees if we wanted to continue to employ them, >> right? >> But clearly with a shortfall like that, at some point we're going to start asking questions, >> right? right now. Yeah, Avenue supported that function previously. Now, we've been fortunate enough that the reserve
has been, you know, large enough to keep >> funding that permanent reserve. Now, if this was 2 years down the road and and as all these scenarios were thrown out there today, two years down the road, we haven't issued any permits and you say, "Hey, there's a million four here." Well, general funds picking up that tab, not the reserve, cuz the reserve would
be gone. >> And I just want to say everybody in the building department, this is not a conversation. Just this is just a little >> these are hypothetical discussions for a workshop >> and also to to the commissioners that >> the shortfall is not hypothetical.
>> Well, the short >> the short alarm isn't hypothetical either. >> Well, no. The shortfall in permit >> has been drawn down >> is is not is not a fake number and we will dip into that reserve this year. I just don't know how much yet until 9:30 September 30th. Also for the
commissioners, that statute said you couldn't use this money to offset taxes or that you couldn't buy down your millage or your taxes with the permit reserve. It could only be spent on permits. Okay. >> M. >> Yes.
>> Hi Jolie. I guess Charlie is in the in the beginning of his presentation an hour. Um, so this is all about funding sources and even though the building department is supposedly a
example or I just a discussion, I think people want to know where those puts and takes came from and how many employees uh would be um affected by a million
plus shortfall and what would happen. And I think people want to see today what is um what you're working with. >> So the currently you're looking at a reduction already of probably eight
full-time employees and then the 4B that was on the first page could be a number between zero and eight more. um if that's what you're referring to. Um but I don't know what that number is yet.
And so for example, and this is again the guy that drives the garbage truck that I'm referring to right now is not getting fired. So please don't think you are. But in the event that the guy that drives the garbage truck was terminated during this
budget process, we'd have to turn around and hire another person to drive a garbage truck because you can't not pick up the garbage. So, as we're going through this process to remove positions from the city of Stewart, I can't remove
positions that I know the day afterwards I'm going to get a request to rehire that position to replace that person because two things happen. >> Yeah. Historically, when they did a early retirement back
when um Dave Ross was the city manager, he offered this thing to do a budget reduction and offered a bunch of people early retirement and a bunch of people accepted it and it ended up costing the city $600,000 because when we went to rehire all those
positions that the people that had been working in left, it turned out that the market actually those positions were being paid more than the people were actually earning that left. So, it cost more to put new people in the positions.
Obviously, we're not suggesting that proposal here, but >> So, why are we bringing that up? >> Well, I suggest it because I'm not getting rid of people that are going to cost us more to replace the next day. There'd be no benefit to that. >> It doesn't make sense. What we're trying
to do is find positions that would not be replaced, that would never come back, that won't exist any longer. And whatever department that's in, it just simply is going to reduce the number of
people doing whatever that service is. >> Question, I think. Oh, you might have a follow. Yeah. No. No. So, and that's looking at the potential for the 4.75 um
millage rate or or or just or keeping it at the five. If we keep it at the five, we're not as behind. Uh so, I mean, our discussion here is to find out if we do bring it down. We know
that if we bring it down, we're going to hurt people. the the issue is how much in the aggregate is is is best for the the city at large or the budget. um when things are aggregated for the budget
versus what it impacts an individual um property taxpayer uh whether it's the residential we probably don't see that much but it's a commercial that that we'll see and um I just I mean I think that we need we'll
listen to Jolie but I think we need to to decide if um you're going to keep shaving given this budget based on are we going to do it at the 4.75 are we going to keep five
>> Mr. Vice Mayor. >> Well, I believe that Commissioner Reed was next. >> Yeah. >> No, Vice Mayor. >> Oh, sorry. >> So, I think it's easy to get lost in why this is relevant talking about bringing
the millillage down. Really, it's not the place of us to get into the weeds too much. Um, with regard to particular expenses, that's what we've hired Mike to do. The one lever that we have to pull to direct staff is
millillage. That's really our only lever. We can discuss different but it's not appropriate for us to say we should hire more people or fire people in any particular department. >> But if we look at the overall environment economically,
we're in a bit of a perfect storm. one, we have the COVID years now over. There was a lot of government spending, a lot of money coming our way. To Mike's point about ARPA money, there was just a lot
of money and growth in government. That era is over. At some point you have to start having those difficult discussions about how do you start to consolidate so that the government can continue to function uh
and perform the level of service people want. But on top of that you also have uh Bla1 Ignolia. I don't know if you guys follow the new state CFO that Ron appointed recently.
this guy is going around um talking about doing audits with everybody. He is I've listened to some of because I'm trying to get a sense of what's what's the state's take on what municipalities are doing and
um Bla1 is talking about in the next election cycle them pushing that constitutional amendment to do away with property taxes. That may or may not happen, but I think we should be as a board thinking about what does that look like?
It's not just, you know, signaling from Ronda Santis. It's happening. I'm seeing consistent and now actionable direction along that. The city of Stewart and Martin County would be particularly hit hard by that because we don't have the
population to to really get a lot of money out of sales tax assuming that that is where that money comes from. I think that we should be looking at how do we start to refine what we're doing in terms of personnel
um so that we're not hit so hard that we either have to raise taxes, right? So if something like that happened in the 26 cycle um you have basically two years to figure out how you're spending money in your government
and that's it. Yeah, once the the property taxes are removed, you've got a 2-year period to figure that out. And my concern would be you lose your fire department. My concern would be that the city dramatically has to cut where if we
can start a trend, and I know it it's painful to talk about, it makes everybody nervous and uncomfortable who might get fired or whatever. But if we start pulling back on that millage now, I think it creates a trajectory where you're refining and if that property tax
thing doesn't happen and it's just talking point, fantastic. We can start to push back and go in that other direction. But the last thing I'll couple on top of that was to your point about the increases in
um property taxes coming in. We've been seeing previously doubledigit increases and to your point we saw in this last round a single digit increase. I believe it went down to seven. >> Yeah. >> This is one of another compounding
factor that you need to look at. With an increase in our property taxes, we are still short $3.9 million. The trajectory of that has gone from
double-digit increases now to single. That's starting to shave off. As a business owner, when you're seeing your revenue decreasing, you need to couple that with a decrease in spending or you're about to be in a serious problem.
Now, it may just so happen that Trump does magic with tariffs or I don't know, some jiu-jitsu happens in the market and all of a sudden you're back to double digit increases. And again, now you can start talking about I made the point last time and I wasn't trying to be hard on you guys. You can talk about captains
or these things. You know, you got there's more money coming in. we're on a rise. But all of these factors right now, if you keep your millage at five, if you don't cut your spending, I think you're looking at really uh if any one of them is to hit, you could have
issues, let alone all of this together. So, I I I don't appreciate the the talking point about residential versus commercial. And you know, the average homeowner will only see 50 cents
of decrease in their property taxes. And you know, Walmart will get off the hook. I I don't think it matters really um when we're talking about decreasing spending. Um really, I'm small government. I'm conservative. You know,
when you're talking about taxes, it doesn't matter who benefits from a tax decrease. We should, if we're seeing increases in property taxes, we should want to see residents and business owners receiving some portion of that
net. It shouldn't just be how how much more money we have to spend in government as well. So, those those are my general thoughts. I I hope that by the time this is over, you guys can
make it work uh at that 0.25 decrease because of those reasons. Yeah, Jolie, my question for you was I've and and this should go to all you guys. I would request it from Jolie. I was sent uh the entire budget broken down. It helps you a lot to look through
it, by the way, instead of just looking at this stuff because that scratches the surface. Jolie, do you know what we spent last year in overtime for employees at the city by chance? >> I could find out. Everyone keeps talking
about letting employees go and firing them, but um I didn't know if it was easy for you to find. >> I I mean I I can't I didn't have that report open, but I will open it right now. >> Okay. >> Uh to that to that point, Commissioner, it's always a fine dance between us of when is it cheaper to pay existing
people overtime versus did you generate enough to actually just say it's cheaper to get another person and add add the you know the fringe benefits and everything on it. You also we also need to break that down into >> correct by each department. >> Each department because like
>> I think police is going to be close to $300,000 in overtime. Fire is at $525,000 in overtime and then >> when you get into the utilities, >> I think there's one utility that has about $100,000 in overtime and then the
others are $25,000 something like that. They're nominal. Then you get into like the clerk doesn't have any, the CRA doesn't have any, the development department has, you know, less than $10,000. >> Well, I was just I was curious cuz like I see it budgeted at a million dollar
and like for example, um maybe some of this stuff can be projected depending on the department. Um maybe holiday weekend, you might know you can send employees home earlier. Um hurricane season as far as garbage. I
don't know. I'm just thinking outside the box. I mean, you guys are talking about laying off employees, but maybe looking at the overtime budget, if it's over a million dollars a year. I don't know any business owner that runs their business like that. >> Well, that those departments would tell you that we need more employees.
>> So, would it offset the cost then to lower the I mean, it's which direction do you go, >> right? That's the question. >> That's just at 9:30 2024, general fund had a year-to- date expense of 1,31,000 in overtime.
That doesn't include the fringe benefits calculate on it. FICA tax and FRS >> and half of that is police and fire. >> No, it's probably >> police and fire are 76% of jewel police budget expense. >> And and so one of the problems that you
have trying to do it is that and and I'm not trying to throw fire under the bus by having the conversation. is just an easier example to use is that the fire department has minimum staffing standards. And so they have to have
certain guys in certain positions and if somebody's not there, somebody else has to come in and fill in for them. But every single firefighter that works for the city is already scheduled for 2496
hours a year based upon the way it works. And a regular schedule is 280 hours a year, but the 2496 goes into those 48 hour shift or 48 hour per week shifts or 24-hour shifts. So, as a result, anytime a firefighter has workers comp,
anytime a firefighter takes PTO, anytime a firefighter goes out on FMLA or is sick or anything, it's overtime. No, there's no, we don't have backup full-time employees waiting around to see if somebody's going to be
sick or whatever it's going to be. It every single time somebody's out, the minimum staffing requires someone else to come in. And unfortunately this year there was an anomaly of circumstances where there was a work comp issues or there was uh
I'm sorry leave, right? We have somebody out on military leave right now. But when someone goes on military leave, >> you have to keep their position and >> it's nine weeks of overtime every single time just because that's how it plays out. And I'm not saying it's anybody's fault. It's just
>> that's the nature of the beast. >> Yeah. And I wasn't targeting any specific department. It's just I don't know. >> But it's and I agree with you that it's and and for what it's worth, during the budget conversations, Jolie was the only one that sat through all of them with
me, but I had some serious conversations about exactly what you're talking about. And there are some positions that you could schedule. I'm going to use the Christmas parade for example. I know right now that every single
police officer in our police department is going to have to work on the first Friday in December because that's what happens on the first Friday of every December. >> So you could if the chief wanted he could have nobody patrol the streets on
Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday. That's just but and again and I'm not saying zero but yeah I I don't want to say the numbers that are patrolling but you could take them off because I know they're going to be there. I know it's overtime. I know the 4th of July is going to be overtime as well. >> So the key to that is okay well schedule
less leading up to it and then utilities for example talking with Peter about that when we have a pipe break and if a pipe breaks on Monday it's all hands on deck. So then the guys work and they might work till midnight Monday and
Tuesday night. Well, going into this next year, if they have 48, if they have 40 hours in and they're done on Wednesday with 40 hours, Peter's not going to have them come back to work for the rest of the week. They're just going to stop when that pipe's fixed on Tuesday night and
not work Thursday and Friday. And whatever they were going to be working on, they'll pick up next week when they get back. So that because they're already at 40 40 hours. So those Thursday and Friday would be a time and a half. Whereas if they just wait till the next week and do it less than that.
The only problem is that's about $40,000 is what that looks like it'll save. So it's not huge numbers. The the the police and fire is a harder um beast to to tackle it because of the
way the the scheduling goes. And so we are taking that overtime into consideration though. And I agree with your observation that it's a huge number and >> and it you know it's it's it's kind of misleading because if you don't include it
>> it's you know what people are being paid and what they're earning is is off by a million dollars. >> Any other questions? >> I just I think overtime super high personally my opinion. Um, I know there was discussion too, um, Mike, I don't
know if it's ever been mentioned to you as well, the MSTU, I guess, with the contract with SS Point being low. I don't know. >> It's a contract for 10 years adjusted till 28. >> 28. What would it be if it was the same as Martin County MSTU rate, like if we
matched it? >> I I have no idea. I haven't Well, first of all, if the Martin County's rate is 2.67 right now. So if you took the valuation of $950 million, which is what SS Point's most recent valuation is, so
950 times oop, I'm sorry, 950 um >> basically >> time. 0267 equals it'd be 2,536,500. I was just going to say it's definitely over 2 million that they would pay if
they were if they were participating in Martin County's MSTU. Their fable bill would be over 2 million. >> It's 2536 based upon their current >> assessment. Um, however, I don't know what exemptions they have and what, you
know, different homestead stuff. Now, for what it's worth, you have to remember that when it was entered in essentially 2017, the valuations were considerably different and the rates were different. But even then, the number could have been higher.
You have to be careful with that though because we've now when we did it, the city adopted that program because it had the capacity to provide the service without having to hire additional people. But we've now become, you know,
that's part of our budget if and I think it's about 900,000 now that they're paying. I don't think it's >> this year's uh No, the according to the contract, we're at seven. >> Okay. So 700,000 went from three there was a jump from three to five and now a jump again from five to seven. Uh we've
had two very aggressive jumpers. And there was I had put together two proposals that I thought were a different way to equitably determine it back then, but it was chosen to be at five and then and we're at seven. Well, if we said to Su's
point, it's going to be 2.5 million. S's point might say, "Okay, well, we're just going to go with the county and then we would have a $700,000 hole in the fire department because we wouldn't be able
>> I mean, well, without a doubt that the number should be readressed, but when the commission entered into that contract, it was a 10-year service or agreement with SS Point so that equipment could be purchased and things like that." And the way it was
negotiated with by the city manager at the time was the way it reads. And so if we were to cancel it, we under the agreement have to pay the difference between what they pay us right now and
what they would have to pay Martin County. So we would have to pay SS point. So >> that wouldn't make sense. >> Yeah. So we can't do that. Now, I have had conversations both with our chief as well as with the SS Point city manager, probably, you know, not having them in
public comments here as to what the amounts are, but >> yeah. >> Um, as to incentives to enter into an agreement early. So, if we were to try to work out a deal with S's point to enter into an
agreement early, that would be in 26 or even 27. We'd have to give them enough of an incentive to agree to pay significantly more than they're paying now, but significantly less than the 2.5 that would agree that would make them
want to agree to do a new deal early. And obviously, it would have to be enough to make the city of Stewart interested enough to make it go up. The problem is that when we look at the SS
point contract, we look at it as a service and a readiness and a we provide you with this fire service, not for the calls you actually receive, but for the ability to us for us to respond to a call in the event you need
it. Because last month they had 30 calls. So if it's 30 calls times 12 months, if it's a total of 360 calls and you're charging 2.5 million, they would say, "Well, wait a second. You're charging us, you know, $100,000 a call
or whatever it is." And and but it's not that. >> It's not the number of calls, it's the readiness, it's the >> security that we're there in the event the call needs to happen. So the way we look at it and discuss it is everybody, you know, if you're in Soul's Point, you
take the approach that it should be like allocart. We'll only pay when we call and of course you we can't provide a service like that because it would be impossible for us. >> Mr. Manager, um an analogy that we've used internally is it's like your water service. If we made water on demand
only, you turn on your faucet and then wait 20 minutes for the water to get there because they knew that you were asking for it. versus the readiness is the water's always there at the tap. You turn on the faucet, the water's there. That's our base fee and that's our readiness charge. After that, we charge
you for consumption, how many gallons you use. So, the fact that they don't have to normally if I use it, well, then we can't be on standby constantly to >> to be in the truck when they ask for it. So, >> were there any other questions? I was
going to Commissioner Gio. >> Um, well, now my questions are more because kind of everybody's gone around. First, I want to say that um I agree the overtime sound is really high, but the reality is if we had to hire more people with insurance, benefits, salary, all of
that would be probably more than that if we were trying to fill those positions to have them ready available rather than pulling for overtime. >> We increased the fire department's budget by $1.1 million by in hiring last year. And we still ended over a half a million
dollars in overtime. >> Right. And you would probably have more if you did not hire those into >> Exactly. It would be significantly higher. And that's what we did. We actually bought we hired three what I call floaters last year. And the floaters were we have A, B, and C shift.
So we hired positions that could go to station one, two, or three on A, B, and C shift. So if someone's out at station two, one of the floaters can work that station two position to avoid the overtime or wherever it needs to be.
Unfortunately, with FMLA or COP and a PTO and military leave and other issues, there were more people out than we had to replace them with. >> But that's not your normal ongoing. I mean, that just happened to be >> just one of those years >> firestorm in one year. Um, the second is
that at some point maybe you and I can talk because there maybe there are other ways we can increase revenue just I'm not going to go through them now and get nitpicking into them. >> Uh, the other thing is I just wanted to uh comment on Commissioner Clark uh
almost made it appear that if we stayed at five there would be no loss of positions and I'm assuming most of those will be attrition where you're not filling a position where someone leaves or they're retiring. So it isn't just at 4.75. It is even if we left it at five, there would be reductions. And then going to
the point of the vice mayor, we need to slowly pull back on that throttle. Otherwise, we're going to be in a situation in a year or two where we have to hit the brakes at the stop and we're going to be maybe having to really slash. I mean, it's much better to do it on a slower pace going forward and
control it, which is what we can do now, rather than have to react to it when all of a sudden we're hit with, you know, uh, catastrophes in whatever way, shape, or form, you know, property tax all of a sudden being pulled, all of the things that bring us revenue now. So, if we
want to, let's control it with our ability to do it now, do it slowly, which is, you know, again with slow growth is do it slowly, do it smartly. Don't wait till it's smacking us in the face and then you all have to, you know, kind of fire for lack of a better
analogy. You're out of fire and now you have to hit all forces going forward. So that's all I had to say. Thank you. >> I'd like to hear on how >> well she's talking about she's
>> Oh, just cuz it gets me it gets us all thinking, I guess, >> right? I mean and excuse my ignorance because I don't know. You say that we give annually money to the CRA. Is that a mandatory amount we have to give each year? >> Otherwise back county that actually work the same amount that
the county has to pay us from their ad valorum. Okay. We have to pay the CRA from our ad valorum. >> All right. Um and I know this is just always a hot topic. It's that impact fees and and lots of counties are doing them. They're increasing them. Number one, I have a an issue with impact fees.
they come in at a certain rate and the project doesn't get done till three 2 3 years later when those impact fees are really more. So maybe a a way that we charge those impact fees so that they cover the actual cost of improvement for infrastructure when that project is done
might be a better way to handle it rather than taking in the money and then waiting till the project starts and we really already short in doing the infrastructure around that project. So, that was one other thing. And the the last one I mentioned was I'm sure you're not just looking at positions to slash.
It's those I'm assuming a lot of them would be people who are leaving or retiring and you're just not filling that position. I mean, I don't know. I'm just I'm asking the question. Is that how you're dealing with some of the reduction in >> all of the reductions
that were would be based by attrition or filling like that have already happened. So any additional would not be attrition. >> Okay. So that they would actually >> we've had I've had two since the first budget workshop that
were that ended up having um separation from the city that upon separation I terminated that position just because it was fluid. So those two are already gone. And then there's about six more that um
there there were nine positions that were open that I that I froze to hiring. Six of those have been completely eliminated. And now there's a there's I think three positions still open >> that would potentially be open to hiring. And then there's also some other
positions that again we for I'm using a garbage driver, truck driver. We do have positions or I think it was a diesel mechanic for example a diesel mechanic left that position came open but we have to replace the diesel mechanic so I authorized Milton to hire that person
and a new person is coming into that position because it's just simply you know not one that was that was plausible for us to >> to get rid of. And to the manager's point, when he authorized that rehire commissioner, I then funded that position back. So that that position is
funded because we are in fact going to fill it. And I presume that person will be working here next year. >> So that was a that was a cut that had to go back >> and and again not looking at different departments, but I know nothing about trucks, diesels, or whatever. But are some of these positions something that
we might it might be more beneficial for us to contract out? I don't know how often a diesel person is needed, but maybe it is something in the long run. You're not paying benefits. You're not paying insurance. You're not paying a salary. You're just contracting out to an individual or a company that would come in and do that need for that.
>> We we spend a little over $500,000 a year right now, contracting out for services of those nature. And Jolie and I actually talked about an hour and a half this morning about some other potential positions. But like you said, there's a there's a fine line there.
>> Yes. you get rid of that employee and then you end up contracting out. It turns out costing more and and you end up analysis that gets done prior to that. >> And that's what I'm saying. We're like we feel like we're pretty close to that now. >> I'm sorry before Mayor before you answer Commissioner Reed's question,
Commissioner Ji. Yeah, we we don't budget impact fees. So that that's not something we budget. So we don't say, "Oh, we expect to collect impact fees this year." But if I have a an applicable project, which should be by the definition of the impact fees be an
expansion in service. So if they were going to build a fourth fire station like hey we're expanding service I can use impact fees that we collected to fund that project but I can't use impact fees to fund the salaries or anything. So salaries talking about the infrastructure around that.
>> To your point if I had the project I'd love it if this expense was projects I'd be like oh let me pull in impact fees and fund it. But um I do agree with you that it's grossly underfunded because it's like social security, right? They collect the money when you're 20 and then you know 70 years later they want
to pay you the money they collected that way when you're 20. So it's like yeah the impact fee should be 20 years from now what it's going to cost to replace it not what it was today. >> We did we also you can't you can't use impact fees for replacement or maintenance.
>> You have increase to increase capacity. So if we took a road impact fee, >> we can't pay it just to repave the road. We actually have to build new road miles. So a few years ago, we had an impact fee study done and we had to
reduce our road impact fees because we don't have any roads planned to be built. So there was no road miles. Now a turning lane can increase capacity or widening of a road can increase capacity
but >> a traffic light we have discussed with development we've had to increase roads two turn lanes put in extra lights so >> again I don't think the impact fees we charge covered enough of that >> the problem is it's also if you look
back at it you can only charge what the impact is by that developer We a a significant amount of our traffic comes from our neighbors to the north and south and they don't build in
Stewart and so if somebody built a building in Jensen Beach and they drive into Stewart every day those impact fees stay in Jensen Beach. >> Yes. No. >> Well, the part of Jensen Beach that doesn't >> Right.
>> That's and that's a calculation but by the state, >> right? So we don't have the ability to just Okay, we're going to help. >> Well, actually several commissioners across the state of Florida have increased their impact. >> So >> you can according to formula,
>> but like Manatee County that's they're in the process now. That's part of their SP 180 challenge. >> Yes. >> So we'd have to pile that into that. >> Doubling theirs for >> Yeah, I think it's a double for3. >> I just wanted to state like this is a prime example. growth doesn't pay for
itself. No, I can tell you that. >> Amen. >> You know, we look at our adorum taxes and uh this isn't a jab at fire, rescue, police, but it eats up our entire advalorum. So, the property values definitely aren't there to even sustain what we have in the city. As far as
village decreases, I mean, like Mike said, it does go more towards commercial. I know on the residential side for what I pay in property taxes, I do not utilize those services in the city. So, I'm one of those people that
contribute to the next household that's going to pick up that phone and call 911 or whatever services they have. I don't have children that are in public schools, but I believe in the next generation, so I am contributing. But how do you get other people to pay their
fair share? because everybody wants but nobody wants to pay it out of their own pocket. Instead, they want to come out of someone else's pocket. I don't think we should target um events that we have in the city and stuff like that because that's actually a revenue generator when
we have rock and river walk, any kind of music and movement um paradise that generates. >> Yeah. Like that that stuff I wouldn't go after. It's more so like I mean yeah the overtime it it is annoying but the advant the property values themselves
basically do not sustain the growth that we even have in our own city. So what do you do long term? >> When you say the growth we have in our city our city actually went down 690 people. Our population was reduced for the first time. So, and then I know you mentioned, Mike,
um something with commercial multifamily, they equate to the lowest 2,000 residences. How many multif family units were they? I don't >> Oh, it's so we say it's hard to I don't know how many units it is, but for example, the top >> apples impact the top 10 taxpayers in
Stewart >> were multi are indigo and whatever it is north of the bridge. And so they're they generate over or right at $2 million of the $18 million.
>> Mhm. >> Just those 10 in taxes and the bottom >> 2,00 generates $2 million. >> I was just curious. >> Those apartments eat up most of the services. >> Why?
a standalone home with a family versus an apartment with 200 people. They're going to use services more than that. >> We've what we found is that the um assisted living facilities and the 55 and older are the highest service users
and that's just by the very nature of the bank. We found that Access and Indigo have no more calls than any other neighborhood. >> They're newer and just the the people living there might be different
>> and so they just don't have the the calls that you would have. Walmart has a lot of calls. >> Um they're not significant, but it's petty theft and stuff like that. But they built they built a substation at the store >> um for the police to use. But just by
its very nature, also I think the firefighters that are here probably tell you they go to Walmart and stuff like that often as well just because people have issues when they're wherever you have a large group of people, you have issues. But the um the I do you have that chart, Julie? I don't know if you can ask it. I don't know if it matters
or not, but he has a chart that has the >> Well, we things on it. >> Like I said, there was a a time crunch. I had to to come up with what was the most economical. But >> and it also it it we also can't and don't >> determine the
who uses the most services like you know the does the person in this single family home over in my neighborhood use more services than I do so they should pay higher taxes than I do and and you just can't go down that path. Oh, no. That wasn't
>> because it's like >> the um well, Commissioner is on hold to service the whole community. >> Commissioner Gio, to tie it back to your earlier impact fee discussion, you know, when you're calculating to the formula the mayor was talking about, transportation impact fees are usually calculated based on what's called trip
generation. And they say, well, a CPA office isn't going to generate many trips. So, if you're building a CPA office, it's a very low impact fee. But they'll say like a bar is going to generate a lot of trips. Well, assisted living facilities are one of the highest
trip generators. So, they pay a larger transportation impact fee when they're going to build that. So, they look at the statistics and the science. They say, "How often are people how often is EMS being called there? How often is public safety being called there? How often is whatever happening there?
Accidents." And so you can look at those trip generations and basically tie that into what you're saying is a demand for service because they're saying this is how many cars are going to go in and out, right? A car dealership has a large number of trip generations cuz people jump from car dealership to car
dealership shopping for cars in one day. That's why the transportation impact fee is so high on a car dealership versus like a consignment shop is nothing, right? You're going to pull up, park, shop for an hour, and then leave. And that's that's one trip versus the
others. So, um, this chart that I pulled up, I know, are you done with your question? >> Yeah, I'm just I'm listening. >> Oh, okay. Uh, boss, >> the manager had asked me to break this out in a particular way. I did I did not have time today to break it out that way, but there's a direct correlation
here. So, this graph looks very similar to the graph I usually show each year in the breakdown of the properties. And what this is is to the manager's point, he was saying that there were 10. There's actually 71 parcels currently in the database at the
property appraiser tagged as multif family units greater than 10. Now, that greater than 10 could be 11 or it could be 300, you know, whatever the units are. And so, uh, this graph usually shows you how much we're collecting in
taxes from these groups. This today, and I, again, I haven't had time to label it correctly, but this is where the quarter mill, this is their portion of the quarter mill. So, and I know Commissioner Collins, you said it doesn't really matter where it goes if it's residential or commercial, but
passing on that quarter mill savings, this is how that quarter mil savings gets distributed to those property types. So, and this is residential only. And so, these down here on this end are those included in this are those 71 multif family units.
>> So, that the blue line where is >> the blue line is the number of parcels of that type. Okay. >> Right. >> And then the green is how much of the quarter mill savings goes to that group. Okay. >> Uh and and I broke it down a little
more. I know that we've mentioned these people a couple times and this is a standard display that we do every year based on what the average bill would be. And so in picking um so
this is what the effect of this is the taxable value of those multif family units and this >> here's my problem. >> Yes sir. and we're in a budget meeting, right? Why are we not looking at what was spent last year and where
versus what is proposed for this year and even maybe previous data? Why are we looking at multif family as being the generator of income? Why why are we putting so much energy into this?
>> We're we're not actually we didn't pick multif family. What we did is looked at the revenues to decide where the money's coming from. And it turns out if you go back to the graph that multi budget meeting is figuring out our budget, not discuss not trying to figure
out and double down on this uh talking point of this argument of like of uh >> this residential homes versus multif family. What's our budget? >> The conversation is not new this year. The purpose behind it is also because the residents get the services. They're
the ones that actually want the boardwalk. They're the ones that want the parks, want the garbage pickup, want want the services. They're the ones that really make up the community. The corporations don't use >> But that is not the purpose of our budget meeting.
>> The budget meeting is to balance what the residents want, >> our budget. >> Right. >> Right. So why are we putting so much energy into this narrative of multif family and commercial getting and out of a 2.25 decrease versus homeowners. It
just feels like we're really beating this >> service reduced. >> The amount that the homeowners are affected matters so that they can decide whether they're getting a good value for what the payment they're making is. But
our job is to figure out the budget, not that. >> Commissioner Collins, I'm sorry. You're looking right at me, so I'll talk directly to you. >> Sure. >> I provide this schedule every year with every budget workshop. We say what the pro if it was still five, I'd still have
a display of what the average taxpayer of v various rates. I've included it every year. You can work with the city clerk through the public records. Every year, we include what an average taxpayers bill would look like. I put a few different numbers of someone with a $100,000 value house, someone with a
$200,000 house, someone with a 50, somebody with nothing. We show that every year. This was actually looking at the savings and where it's going. If we if we're reducing a millage, I'm certainly going to produce this is what the new taxpayer would look like for those taxpayer types.
I I this is all numbers to me. I don't have a narrative, Commissioner. This is simply something I include every year with this is what your average taxpayer would look like. This is what the tax impact of the taxpayer would be. If I had a five, I'd put up the slide say here's the five. In fact, on the slide,
I do still show what five mills would be on these people if that's the adopted millage. Here's what the 475 mills would be on these people and what their proposed tax bill would be. But that every year, >> but in a business for a budget, right? Where are we deficient? Where can we cut from a budgetary standpoint? Reviewing
your income, your revenue, >> the first thing is what it is. What's the budget? What do we need to cut so that we can >> because they cut $913,000? >> Yeah. My point instead of reviewing the revenue and and where more or less of it's coming from what in the budget
needs to get cut. >> Well, starts with revenue. >> Where we left off is I was on this slide. That was where the 913,950 goes. The vice mayor has already said it's not up to us to direct not us.
>> I mean >> you just said that earlier >> but this presentation is is is supposed to be about >> comprehensive presentation of the budget and the effects of the decision we make. We're not concentrating on this more than any other element. >> The decision we make will be relevant to
the millillage that we set. Correct. That's the decision we're going to make. That has to do with the money we're spending, not the revenue coming in. The revenue coming in is what it is. The
decisions that we're going to make around where we set our millillage has to do with how we're spending money. >> Having a presentation today, well, on the budget is >> the revenue is >> we're presenting to you as the staff of
here's the current revenue at five mills and here is what it looks like. If you're reducing it to 4.75 mills, here's what that looks like and here's who saves from that and here's what those savings are for a house at 50,000, a house at 200,000, a house at 500,000 and
a house at 10 million to show what the revenue and what the payment the houses are going to be making pay to generate that revenue. Once you finish that and determine the revenue or for that matter the ad valorum on the revenue the advorum revenue then we go to the
expenditure side and you're right you say to me we're going to make the adalorum 2 mills and we have to go out and remove whatever that amount is. I agree. I'm just my point is with like what 30 minutes left on hand or whatever
it is. I I left off at zoning fees and I just said I don't know what utility tax propane did but it's really kicking it this year and we went far from there. So I was in the middle of going through revenues and saying for
you to say how am I going to balance this budget. Well the first thing I'm showing you is how I didn't just pad the budget and I was explaining what each of my revenue choices are and why we're upping those. I could come in here and just plug $3 million where it's done, right? But that that wouldn't hold
muster. It it it would be a hole in the budget. So I was trying to explain to you and I think it did generate conversation like why do you do this? Where does that come from? So I I was going at revenues first and saying these are the revenues that have changed since we last met. just for me like I would
want to see what the budget was last year, what is proposed this year, what the difference is and what that uh singledigit increase looks like across the different departments and then we make it 0.25 less versus five. What the
the who's generating um what you know who saves if it's five versus point >> from balancing a budget standpoint. >> Okay. I I I would still have to produce this schedule for the budget. Anyway, in the first in the first work workshop,
the budget sneak peek, you you did see that in general fund budget went up 1%. It went up $358,000. And there were many departments who had reduced their budget, cut their budget, everything. And I've said this to the departments at
the staff meeting in regular in a normal year. I'd be like, "Great job, everyone." It would still be hard to find the money because I said at the beginning of today's workshop, the difference is we've moved from capital expenditures that I could fund with impact fees to Commissioner Gob's point
to more operating and personnel which I can't fund with impact fees. >> Correct. >> So the first thing is I got to find money to fund some of these these issues, right? If if these programs are going to be kept, the programs that are being kept still have to be funded. on the very first slide we started with,
even at five mills, I'm still a million out. >> But that kind of information feels more relevant for us to make the decision we're going to make. >> Yes, sir. And and my point, I'm still going to produce a chart of what the average taxpayer impact is going to be. the the fact that you didn't want to see it today and I apologize that you didn't
want to see it. I don't want to see it. It's not as valuable. Okay. In relative to these other >> So just if you go on our website which you upgrade the information is available.
>> You can highlight each year. You can each category >> on our on our website. What's available under what's called the transparency portal >> is a real-time number of our current budget year-to- date expenses and all of our private uh prior year expenses. >> Okay.
>> It leads to 2022. Now, um we have more historical data available. What's not on our budget right now >> or on our website right now is this budget because it is not your tentative budget. It's not an adopted budget. It's still a working product. Um, some other governments have already posted what
they call their tenative budget, but you haven't actually they haven't adopted one until that first hearing in September protrim. So, and I was telling Commissioner Re before the meeting started after you adopt the tentative the tentative millage and the tentative
budget on September 8th, the next morning on September 9th, that tentative budget with that millage will be available. And then for that two weeks between you'll wait and then on September 22nd you'll adopt the final millillage and the final budget. And then that budget will be available on
the website as well. Now is it the final document that I submit to see if we're going to win the budget award? Maybe not. But it would be the document with the numbers and the guts in it. Okay. So that's where you get the by the line item account. So overtime here's overtime this that however much you want
to see in it. You know, the the bean counter gods don't require us to put seven columns in there, but if my commissioners want seven columns in there, I'll put seven columns in there. Today, what I was trying to show you is between the 3 million9 I left you at and today, how we got to a million 093 or
whatever it is at 5 mills and how we got to 2 million 23 at 4.75 million. >> That was very valuable. Okay, so I sorry I've I have manipulated some revenues since we last talked and I was trying to explain my rationale between doing those
revenues and maybe way off topic. So yes, the presentation has taken way longer than it was supposed to but you know so there I was just leaning off that I felt comfortable up in I wouldn't feel comfortable commissioner just going in and plugging a number hey you know we
we want to do 4.75 mills we're out of budget by 2 million. I could go down to the bottom line and say, "I'm going to make 2 million in widgets. Thanks, Don. Budgets balanced. Have a nice day." For me, it is it is all just numbers and they're very precise numbers down to the
dental plan on an employee in a So, there's a I'm going to get very particular with you right here. >> That's what I'm looking for. You you wanted the environmental attorney Well, some stuff I can't present here in public, but you wanted the environmental attorney's budget to be $300,000.
Because of a change in the dental plan, it's now $299,843. >> Maybe not that level of >> right, but I to me that is I have to do that, too. So, I'm going to go back and adjust the budget to make that budget $300,000
wherever I have to do that to make that happen. Okay. So, that's exactly what happened. a dental plan for that employee and there's only one employee in that department. That dental plan changed which changed my budget number and it flows all the way through the entire budget. So for me, you you're
you're definitely talking about you want the 5,000 level high fly to the airport. I'm trying to give you 5,000 without getting caught down on the runway where I am. >> And we appreciate, >> you know, less less around revenue. Yeah. More around >> Okay. I I mean
that's uh I I I wanted to give some shout outs like to the fire department. Their ambulance fees are up because they >> done some software and you know they they've done some process change. Um you know where that is. Okay. We'll talk about that.
>> Um just Mr. Martell we don't have a hard stop. You guys are the board. We have another meeting but it can start whenever this one's finished. I mean it just the advertising is start here. So but it doesn't have to
start at 4. It's just that we'll pick it up whenever we start. I think that the tape recording might do >> we have to make any decisions this evening with regard to the budget. >> Um you don't have to vote on anything to adopt the budget but the as much
direction as you can give me like you know if you said I do we do not want to provide garbage service anymore that would be very clear direction. Obviously, you're not going to say that, but any direction you give and I'm using as an example because I don't want to, you know, give people what overage will
continue to be, but >> it's clear. I mean, I'm I'm clearly hearing >> directed at the last meeting to not touch fire >> and utilities, >> right? That's very specific, >> but I but but you also directed to reduce the adorum by 0.25, which is 100%
fire and police. So it has a effect because you have to then go to other sources to fill that hat. I believe I also heard Mr. Man I mean you don't want you don't want as many reductions in
service as possible. Sorry I split the bonnet so I could see you know a phone book over here kind of ominous. Um, you know, so try in in the attempt with the manager that that's what our game is is he says like to garbage for
his example say, "Well, what if we cut garbage?" I'm like, "That's not going to help you. That's in the sanitation fund." Oh, you know, what if we cut the tram service? Like, that's not going to help you. The CRA pays for that. >> Yeah. Just general general question. >> And so, so each one of these proposals and possibilities is where we run down
to what is the actual effect on. So, by you cutting the millage 0.25 25 bills if that's what you do. >> It did reduce that 913,000 but it gave us back 152 from the CRA. So the net effect was 760 something,000. That is
what I'm >> so so anyway and every mill or every quarter mill that's what that would be every millage would be 3 million 8 3 million five. So so that that's what we're doing is we're running through these scenarios and believe me there's some crazy scenarios on on my little
notebook. uh you know, and all we're doing is waiting to plug them into that 4B to do it. So, what I you know, what I'm looking for is you to give the manager direction if we're in the right direction, if we're going whatever. >> I'll give you my >> I'll give you my quick is that's the
direction. I appreciate where you've gone so far with um 4 A. I want you to exercise 4B with 0.25 25 as the target and get as close as you can to that if not at that um as
possible is my direction >> for all the reasons I mentioned earlier. >> Yeah, that's my direction. >> Yeah, >> I just have a few minor questions. When I was going through, by the way, thank you for sending me the U budget so that
I could look at it. Um, I noticed and these are small amounts compared to what it is we need, but every little amount helps. The two the 2026 budget still shows 25K going to the Martin County Business Development Board, which we had
already reduced it out of the 2025. So, I guess my question was why was it now in the 2026? >> That was the initial uh so that's what came in from like last year's budget and it was put together when it's submitted by everybody. It was submitted. I don't think it's still
>> Yeah, it's gone. >> Oh, okay. Because when I looked it online, it was in the 2026. >> Yeah. And it it was the So that was the init what you got was a snapshot in time in March of this year. And that was the initial budget numbers that Jolie and I started working with to make those
adjustments. But that 25,000 has been removed >> in a in a large number. Commission 1.5 million reduction. Okay. >> The organizations that you're looking at, what what I what we tried to provide you that those organizations were when we were out by 3.9 million.
>> So already there's a million5 of that has gone and has been cut and altered. And so so >> you got the detail? >> Yeah, I got the detailing because if there's something in there that we haven't addressed, I want to be able to address that.
>> Right. If you if you were I mean I you know we'll just give you a checklist like done done oh wait a minute we haven't done that one you know >> I certainly I'm just but I hope you wouldn't vote before we hear from the public >> well right now kind of in the middle of my question >> okay
>> and there seem to be two line wages they may just be but they were both under storm water one nonep department departmental and one under storm water maintenance are they two separate departments or >> yes we're improved bean counting ex standards We keep the and it's called storm water
non-dep departmental. So those are expenditures that have nothing to do with the people in storm water. It's simply things that that fund must book. Each one of the funds has one of those. General fund has a non-EP departmental water sewer has a non-EP departmental. Sanitation has one. Uh the only one that
doesn't have a specific one is CRM. >> Okay. >> Because they don't have to play with anyone else. >> When I was going through line by line, there was no definition for the $1 million under the city mayor functions. I mean, were we attending that many fun? >> That was 1,00 commissioner. >> Oh, it looked like a million. I was
like, are we attending that many? >> No, we could. That'd be great. But easy to cut, but I thought maybe running off to the island or something like we cut the $1,000. That's for gone at all. >> Okay. All right. So, I just looked at
this this last week, so there have been a lot of changes already since I've looked at it. Um, and I think that was it. And you I'm not in HR. I'm not looking to tell anyone, but I I helped my boss run a small business. And whenever um health plans and whatnot got
out of hand because they do go up and they they're they get crazy. Uh has have we shopped for newer health plans or better priced health plans? I don't know. I'm just asking. We have >> we're we're in a kind of a self-insured
>> program and then we have Sigma act as our health plan administrator. I I don't utilize any of the benefits. I didn't need them, so I didn't take them. >> Um, >> well, Commissioner Giovi, unfortunately, this has been a bad experience here for us. >> So, this would be like you having a very
serious accident that you to blame for and then shopping for car insurance, right? Your quote would be really bad if you tried to switch. >> We need three years of clean. >> We need three years of really good experience before we're right. Yeah.
>> Okay. Um, and I'm very happy about the $1 million under the city mayor functions. Thank you very much. >> I flew you on a private jet to dinner. >> Yeah. Right. Um, all right. That was really my questions and I didn't, you know,
realize and I should have realized you'd be changing those numbers up until the day we were meeting today. >> Does the board wish to hear the remainder of the finance manager budget presentation? >> Sure. If everyone I mean yes. >> Sure. I would like to.
>> Yes, I would like. >> Commissioner. >> Okay. >> But you can say yes or no commission. >> I'd like to see it. You work hard, Jolie. >> Do what, sir? >> I said I'd like to see it. You work hard doing this. Get involved. >> And we so appreciate it. It's not easy
doing numbers and crunching them. And God knows none of us like to do it. >> There's some company or a city. This is a this is one of the more difficult ones in recent history that I know of. Uh so here you were looking at some numbers
and again because as I've spoken with some of you some of these line items um we're just talking about account totals here because some of the information is not public yet. And so, you know, I the
manager has frozen some positions and eliminate some other ones. So, I I wouldn't want to get to the granular detail of positions and things like that. The employees already are, you know, kind of uh paying attention. I've seen more employees in this budget workshop today than in uh many several
past years. So, uh there were some things like there were expenses for uh buildings that you know the manager was like, "No, we're not going to do that." uh machinery and equipment. I know that the the direction at the last meeting, I know there's a comment about, you know,
not cutting capital projects or infrastructure things. These were some toys that didn't need to be done. However, we did uh fund some projects that needed to be funded and put into the into the budget. Uh there was a
principal error rounding it. So, to my point a second ago, commissioner, about undowning the runway while you're looking for the 5,000 ft view, you know, there was a $3,132 rounding error in one of the debt service payments that had to be fixed. Uh repairs and maintenance. Uh we we've
deferred some of that and and those are 475,000 127,000 in in other kinds of uh contractual services, $63,000 in licenses and and other kinds of stuff. Some software issues that people wanted.
$9,000 worth of uh uh copers and some other things that that cut books and memberships. There were some outdated ones there. uh you know still even like some memberships at the county level that we don't need at the municipal level. Uh printing and binding we're on
it we're moving into a paperless environment and trying to do as as little on paper as possible. uh traveling pdium, the manager feels like training is is important. And so looking at traveling pdeium seems like an like a hot button issue, but it's actually
directly tied to training and education. And some employees have certifications that they need to maintain and always stay ab breast and new stuff. The uh general liability, I had already said that there was a 7% reduction. Now that was in the 3,9 out of balance. I had
already cut the insurance by 7%. Uh again to my point, I found a $180 problem that had to be cut. So yeah, as you said, every dollar counts and adds to that. Uh communication services, you know, a round error. And then some
things we did, we did add $86 to uh someone's office supplies to make a number work. Freight and postage, someone had left it out like you really need that promotional activities. Uh that's more of a reclassification. operating supplies, professional
services. We did that. And then the uh freight vehicle lease, there's that. There's a $100,000 adjustment there just because someone had the math wrong. But on our previous slide today, we talked about cutting 261 out of it by funding some of those purchases. So, this is a
this is a net number kind of situation here. Uh 4 million out of intergovernmental transfers. Now some of those transfers were to um outside organizations, some were to like just internal fund accounting and some were funding those reserves that we've
already reduced. So there there was a big chunk there. And then also things like contingencies. I try to put a contingency in the funds uh for this. However, the you know we reduce those. We're just going to roll the dice and
hope everything works well. uh 20,000 other uses is simply things like uh funding depreciation those those kind of uh really being counter deep things and then because of those changes I mentioned in uh
the FS the health insurance the union negotiations this is the net change to those personal service accounts FICA retirement special pay life and health and regular salaries so uh e even though there's reductions there because of some position
uh freezing and position removal. Uh there still wound up being a net positive change to those numbers. So that was added to the budget. And so you know it wasn't just finally the 3.9 million. We actually got worse before we got better to to get there. So that's
what takes us down to the point we are today with the 2 million 223 because I I have already put that revenue reduction in the budget just so that it wasn't left out at the last minute you know and done on just XL
but I've set it up so that um Commissioner you said as close as we could get. So yes, it if if it winds up gliding in and you vote for a 4.9 mills or whatever it is, it it's easily enough adjusted and but again it would flow through the entire budget and and
would >> right it's like if the dental plan changes by $1, I have to change all 600 pages of the budget practically. So um that that is where we're at and so um we weren't going to get any more into detail since some things are very fluid
right now. So we take further questions or direction or >> yes Jolie so so we pretty much know the the revenue at this point it comes down to expenditures if I'm understanding you correctly all the departments have or
um has union negotiations been finalized or is that >> so union negotiations >> well unless the union >> contracts with the union we have not be opening negotiations. We're fine with the contracts, but the unions haven't
taken that. They they haven't told us whether they're opening or or not. I told them to come today to to measure the tolerance of the board. >> Yeah. And is this something that can be done sooner? So, it's not like a >> Well, I told them that I didn't think it'd be a good year to open because if
they open the contracts, I was going to be asking them to subject their contracts to these same reductions because when the contracts were entered, we had another million dollars in the budget. So, if they open the contract, I'm saying great, now your department
has come to the table, too. Your employees are now subject to the reductions. Your staffing is subject to the reductions. your equipment is subject to the reductions and we can all share in it. If they don't open the negotiations, they can live by their
contract and I have to oblige it because I'm obligated to >> and they can do that at any time between now and >> this this month is when it would be they're going to it have to be like next week or the week after. We'll know. >> And then what are we waiting for from
department Jolie for nothing? So they submitted everything to me and then Jolie and I sit down and tell him no wants the needs as Jolie. >> Yeah, it it was it you know it it's a it's a fun game. The department head
leaves and we're like thank you for your time. Have a great day. And then they leave the room like well that's getting cut. >> Um byebye. So, so but no, but every every department head, including public safety, did offer uh some some things that they said, okay, these are wants, not needs, and they did tell us what
were needs. And this budget currently does its best to keep the needs and we did take the want, you know, the ones that they offered up freely and then the manager went a little, you know, once he got a taste, he went a little deeper. So, and then that 4B is some of those
other ones that we're holding in our pocket that we're, you know, looking to see which is going to be the the most doable. And as far as revenues, Commissioner, uh, so back to that revenue sheet, we we could still get some revenues because the state of Florida hasn't released
>> all the revenues yet. So, you know, communication service tax has been trending down, but still way slower than what the, you know, Tallahassee preached gloom and doom about 10 years ago, and they said it was going to be gone by now. Uh, it keeps dropping like, you
know, 1%. So, it's it's not it's not a major thing, but as we've added more people, more payers, the revenue has stayed steadier than even dropping 1%. You understand what I'm saying? >> No, I understand. And I guess for for future budget workshops because there's
still a couple over the next couple years I'm going to be a part of. >> Is there any way that I can get the wants and the needs list just for like >> so I have this but how do I know it's wants and needs exactly like >> everything is that that's what it is. It's they don't write I want this or I
need this. That's where you >> everything they say is this is desperate. We absolutely have to have this or we're going to die. There is if they tell me it's a want to write that then talk about you know one time commission.
>> Oh yeah. Sure. My dad said I would accumulate a lot of junk. >> My bad. I want a million dollars right now but I'm not going to get it. >> And I think that that's approaching it. >> They they hold the item up in front of you and if you didn't say keep it like instantly it was like like it went out
the window. So there were items that the department directors were like, "I must have that." And then if they were like, "Okay." And I just put a little highlight on. >> When I met with Yoli, he had lines through stuff. When I said to somebody, "Are you sure?" He thought that meant take it out.
>> I mean, it makes more sense now. That's why I'm asking all the questions. We're not targeting anyone. >> As I said in Commissioner Gobi, Commissioner Re the print out that you have is when it was 3 million out of balance. So those notes now that same report would have you know all those
notes are different. >> Well the wants and needs are really what you want and need. If you look at those and you say to me I you know the recognize that if we're reducing services across the board whatever it
might be I let's say every single part gets mowed every 5 days. Well, I might move it to every seven days because that way we can through attrition have less people mowing or have less people doing stuff. And I'm using as an example. It's not what's going to happen. I'm just I
want to say that again. But now you'll get calls that, oh, that pond needs to be trimmed or that park needs to be mowed. And yeah, it'll get mowed and it'll happen, but it's just going to happen. >> Not on a fiveation seven days, >> right? >> Well, like um ju just for example,
Jolie, this is just thinking outside the box, too. It's like like Mike says, sometimes you get into the weeds of some of these numbers, but like take for example background checks. Like I'm assuming the city pays for background checks for all employees, new hires. >> Well, yes, we did find a duplication in
one of the departments. One department had additional background checks in their department that we there were three departments that had background checks. >> Okay. >> And uh one was HR, one was police, and one was recreation. And we eliminated the duplication of that expense. Okay,
that's my next question. >> There's only about $1,200. We do have >> Yeah. >> minimal background checks on on all employees. But when we had like the community services was providing the aftercare program, everybody had to have an extensive background check cuz nobody
could be allowed and police have to as well. But >> so that got cut, right? Right. That that extra level of background was cut. >> The drug testing for every employee and things like that as well. Thank you, Julie. >> Thank you.
>> You've been so patient with us. >> No, no, no. So, I I'll spend the rest of today and this week, you know, I'll try as quickly as tomorrow to get you a >> a buttoned up PDF like or PowerPoint of the numbers and the reports and then comment on that with the city.
>> Oh, we do? Yes. I I just I just before we move on, >> I just have a few comments. And when you're dealing with a budget over $90 million, the challenge is the uncertainties. And that's they are they
are enormous >> for a city. And I'm just going to pick three of them. And the first is the abalone. And we can expect that to be going down pretty steadily. Now, as you know, economy the economies move in cycles.
and we peaked at 2008 in Anvilarm and it took us until 2019 >> to return to those valuations and we have had a dramatic spike in home prices as as you know those tend to roll over and they'll be going down probably for a
while. In fact, the median home sales price in January of 2025 in Stewart was down 36.2%. And that's from the bank rate monitor who does a pretty good job because they do most of the mortgages. It's also on
Red Fin. So we can expect that number to be going down. The second biggest number we have revenue-wise is interest. And if we're going to pay attention to what Republicans in uh the state or the
federal government are saying, what is Mr. Trump's one of his biggest priority right now is to fire the Fed chief and to lower interest rates. The only interest rate the Fed controls is called the Fed's fund rate. It's at 4
1.5%. He wants to cut that to one. He wants to cut that by 23. So let's not be that dramatic. But if interest rates go down just 40%.
So 40% 160 uh we could lose $1.72 million just in interest and we can't control that. >> That median house price would go up though. >> Well so commissioner just to say since that
that was a question that filtered through the manager to me. So the the city we have a comprehensive portfolio where we diver you know the money is diversely invested. Okay. And we have money in cash we have money in a government pool and then we have money
in a portfolio that tears out to the oldest investment we have only goes out 5 years because I wouldn't want to lock the money up in a in a lower rate if a better opportunity comes along. Right. Unfortunately though, um the majority of
our investments are in what we're allowed to invest in by state statute, which is mostly government securities and bonds. We have a little bit of corporate stock, but as I've said in the past two meetings, when the stock market does better, the bond market does worse, and so the city's earnings go down. We
also we we move money up and move money down on a weekly basis, right? And so if we write a big check for, you know, a water sewer project, the principle that's invested for that period, I just rated that principle that's invested for
a period of time until the money gets replenished or we get a reimbursement from SRF. That's one of our infamous ones. So, you know, if you had a million dollars in the account, you just wrote a check for half a million. Well, now you're you're only investing 500,000 for, you know, two weeks or a month
until you get that 500,000 back if you get it back. So, our interest is not only a function of the market and the performance, but also where the money is at any time based on inflows and outflows of of money. >> Sure. >> That one. >> Okay. Just so you're saying that
interest fluctuation that I have two factors moving at I could just watch CNBC every day and see where the money's going. have to also be like, "Oh, we just paid out $2 million for, you know, if we underground utilities in a big, you know, panel walks in with a big invoice for the underground utilities."
Well, that money's out the door for however many number of days and that reduces our available interest earnings on that principle. So, this isn't just some hoard of money like a dragon that we sit on for 30 years. It's it's an active portfolio. >> Is it safe to say that if Fed bonds rate
went down by 2/3 that >> the effective rate It would have a it would have I would expect investors to move into the stock market and move out of the bond market. >> Joey, can you tell us how much we're down in interest this year? >> I I I've cut the interest earnings. So
again, in the requested budget, um I had cut it 800,000. Now I've only cut it 350,000. So we're we're going to possibly do a little better than what I thought. But again, that's a real negotiation for me.
But the problem is we don't or the fact is we don't have a lot of projects in the 26 budget. So I don't expect to be cutting new flows of money. The current flows of money for CRA projects, water sewer projects, and general fund projects are known to me. And so those
cash draw schedules are already factored in. >> These are complicated calculations. >> They're very complicated calculations. You know, I do my best to keep up. So, >> and then finally, and and and this is on the expense side, and this is something the Florida League of Cities fought very
hard for, and I think it had been 15 years, but the storm water rags had have just been updated. They actually will not go into effect till next year. And this is something that was fought very hard by developers because it's
considerably more expensive to deal with these precipitation events that we're having that are so much more dramatic than we're used to. And so we can't anticipate on our side and this goes to our most primary responsibility as a
local government to protect the health and welfare of our city and make sure we can travel on our roads and that we get rid of this water in a timely manner and that people can you go to and use businesses. So what they're
saying is these updated storm water rags are going to require more complex design and maintenance. Municipalities will need to allocate more space for storm water management features, use higher performing treatment technologies, and undertake regular routine maintenance
and eventual component replacements. Read staff there. The shift from traditional methods to treatment training strategies combining several best management practices will often require higher investments upfront and over the life cycle of the projects.
Design and engineering compliance. The performance-based approach requires municipalities to demonstrate through modeling and calculations. That's a cost we want to be incurring that new and existing systems meet nutrient reduction
benchmarks, increasing engineering and compliance costs. I don't know what those costs are going to. I know we're going to have to incur them. And so I hate
saying with not knowing, oh, we're just going to reduce the budget and not meet our obligation to keep our city and its citizens safe. So I have we are going to see our budget we we are going to see
revenue decline and we do not need to compound it. I give Mr. mortell and the previous commissioners tremendous credit for keeping it at a five. Over 70% of the of the municipalities in the state of
Florida over the past 5 years have raised their millages and we have not and uh it's through the hard work of the city manager and our budget director that we've been able to accommodate the already declining revenues we've seen
and meet the challenges of increasing costs. Let's move on to comments by I'm sorry, Commissioner Clark, did you have a comment? No, >> I said public. >> No, no, we have comments by city commissioners. Do you wish to make any? >> No, I'm
>> okay. Commissioner Reed growth doesn't pay for itself. >> Okay, >> Mr. Vice Mayor. Okay, M. Mr. Moel, >> I have no comments. Okay, I need an approval of the agenda.
>> We have a motion by Commissioner Clark. >> Second, >> a second by the vice mayor. >> What it says? I don't know what agenda there is. I think we already >> Okay, >> that's correct. >> We missed it. >> I do have one public comment. >> I'm going in order, but it tells me to
do >> um >> any public comment. Seeing none. All in favor? No. No. The court does have a on the agenda. >> No, we're going to go to public comments from the public. Okay. >> Helen McBride.
>> We're on public comments though. >> Yes. >> And I am the public. Helen McBride and Flamingo. You know, I as I told you the last time I've gone for for years at these budget meetings and I remember way back when
the city was really down. We're very proud of our city, the citizens, it's the cleanest and our recreation. Every one of our parks, Flagler, Shepard Memorial, the band stand and the weekends you see all the people coming.
That's great. That's great for the economy and that. But my main concern is the workingclass people, the children and our senior citizens. Now you want to cut cut. Well, you may make good money, but there are other people who depend on
the activities that happen in our city. Now, I remember I marched in parades. There was no there were the police department. No bands or that. It was just that we all got together and we um the kids from I think it was the um strip middle school carried the flags
and that but you know I I think maybe some people are being pennywise and pound foolish. We're we have done wonders with 5% and it's been quite a few years now. Why you know I don't understand why
somebody or some you commissioners, I'll I'll I'll throw you all in the pot. Want to bring it down. It's great at five. We're getting all these services, you know, our garbage, our trash pickup, the leaves, and that
you really I hope and pray that you stop and think of the little people, the seniors. I know I I'm over at the 10th Street Rec Center. My goodness, how how that has improved from when it used to be called
soul center back in the day. Activities every day there's activities going on. The the ball field, I'm enjoying it because there's soccer, there's football, there's lacrosse, and the little guys playing their baseball.
And there's football, but not too much. But please think of the the little people. I mean, it's fine sitting up there. I'm the commissioner of the Like I told you the last time, a couple commissioners wish there were more people here. I said, if you take away our services and we start
deteriorating again, you will see the public here. Thank you. >> I have Travis Decker. >> Gosh, this is the second time I've been up here in like two weeks. Not getting any better at it, though. So anyways, uh good afternoon commissioners, uh city
officials, and members of the public. I'm Travis Deckers, the legislative vice president for Steuart Firefighters Local 2411 Union. Um it's obvious why I'm up here speaking today, and I'm sure the first thought is I'll speak about the doom and gloom of fire rescue um in the city and why couldn't the millillage would be bad for us. While there's a lot
of the majority, While there is a lot that the majority of you don't understand what it is we do uh with the funding we receive, I'm going to take a moment to talk about not just us, but the overall situation. As we heard, when we cut the millillage, it's also going to affect public safety. Well, we're
saying we don't want to do that. So, we have to take from other funding sources, which is going to take from other services and positions within the city. So, when we say that, you know, we're going to do that just to make ends meet with fire rescue, sure, we're going to keep positions in fire rescue. That's
great. That's awesome. We love that. We don't love that other people are losing their jobs in order to make sure we do that. On top of that, when we have the funding we get for our annual budget, we're not talking about our trucks, the equipment we use. Right now, one of our
engines is over 30 years old at station two and it's transmission stutters and the water the tank that carries the water if I fire leaks. And that's no fault of our advent chiefs. It's no fault of anything that they're doing. We have trucks that are on the way, but
that's to talk about how far behind we are as a department. And I know that's not just us. That is every department in this city. So to say that cutting the millillage is going to save us is I don't know. To me that sounds crazy cuz it's not going to save us. It's going to
put us further back from where we've gained. Thank you. you >> Mark Breell, >> Mr. Breell. >> Good evening. Mark Bret Bill, 406 Northeast Finny Drive, Stewart, Florida,
34996. So, um, what what I wanted to mention, I mean, I think that this budget kind of reflects the diversity of Steuart. We have some very very wealthy people and we have some people that aren't wealthy.
They fall below the poverty line in many cases. Many of them are older, retired. They don't have that kind of income coming in. They're living off of social security. I think that we are going to see a reduction in revenues coming up and that's and and we need to be prepared
for it. But what we do now, I think should be more of a short-term fix without any long-term commitments. And then looking at the longer term, if this does happen, making those long-term cuts, and what I'm getting at is if we make cuts to the millage rate, and I
know you guys have all looked at this, um it's going to give money back to the wealthiest people in town because they pay the largest taxes. So what we're And in some cases, we've got RITA, which you know, people are already getting money. On the other side of that, what I think
we ought to look at doing is helping subsidize maybe only one use, no long-term commitment, but subsidize things like utilities. Our utility bills are high, and that's that's a big strain on most families, but utilities and um
and fire, you know, and and police, that type of thing. We can we can subsidize those costs. We have that fee for fire now. Maybe we can subsidize that cost for those people and not commit to that long term. We're not saying we're going to do this and we're going to stay here. The problem with reducing that millage
is once you get there, you know, you may not be able to get it back up and then at that point you may need it. This the flip side of it is we may go too long and not cut when we need to. So I would just ask that you look at the possibility of keeping the millage rate
the same and taking the savings that occur out of that and push it back through the system as a reduction in fees for utilities and other things. and and that would mean that there are some people who uh are not voters in the city of Stewart that will get a benefit, but
they have businesses in Stewart and they have uh and they live in Stewart and they they may be uh don't own a home, but they're, you know, they're renting. So, that's my only comment. I wish you know, just if you could take a look at that. Thank you.
>> I have no further public comment, Mayor. >> No further public comment. >> No further. Well, seeing no other items for our consideration, this budget meeting is adjourned. We will reconvene at 4:30
or not reconvene. We will bring Part: 2
Not at all. >> I'm I'm a complete fan of zero drive. >> You guys are switching. Nice fat riv miracles. Miracles happen every day. >> Fair enough. >> Are we ready, Madam Clerk?
>> Good evening. I'm calling this regular meeting of the Storage City Commission for the 11th of August, 2025 to order. >> Thank you all for being patient. >> Uh, roll call, please. >> Mayor Rich >> here, >> Vice Mayor Collins >> here, >> Commissioner Clark
>> here, >> Commissioner Gio >> here, >> Commissioner Reid >> here, >> and Commissioner Reid, welcome back. We missed you at the last meeting. >> Oh, I'm I I I wish I was here. Uh this evening the invitation will be provided by Pastor James Hart of the
Stewart's Alliance Church. And will you lead us in the pledge of allegiance afterwards? Please rise. >> Won't you join me in prayer? Heavenly Father, we thank you for this day, uh the gift of this day, the gift of life, and just the health and the ability to
be here. And Lord, we thank you for your presence with us, Lord. As we pray an invitation, we know that you're already here. So we we welcome you God to this place. We ask for your guidance over this meeting. Lord, there's some things that your word tells us that you are a
provider of. You give us wisdom, uh unity, integrity, and Lord, we pray that each of those things would be uh manifest here today in the decisions that are made. Proverbs 11:14 says, "Where there is no guidance, a people
falls, but in abundance of counselors, there's safety." And so Lord, we thank you for these counselors, these leaders that you have raised up for the city of Stewart. And God, we do pray that you give them wisdom and direction and discernment. And that Lord, they would serve us well because they are
ultimately serving you. And so we thank you, God. Bless this city, bless its leaders, uh bless its residents, and all those that come through uh the streets of this city. Lord, we ask you that you would just be with them and bless them in a mighty way. We thank the thank you
for these things and we give you praise in Jesus name. Amen. >> 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. >> We only have one proclamation. >> The arts moment. Oh, we have the arts moment. >> I'm sorry. We have the arts moment which is Oh, the singing of the national anthem. >> Daryl McIll >> by Mr. Daryl McIll.
>> Lovely to hear twice. >> Who's performed often with our own Jim Choski? >> Yes. >> Doesn't seem like that microphone's working. >> Um, here I'll take it. >> Isn't my thing making sure it's not bothering me though?
Are you should we stand? Okay. No, >> you stand for the >> I'm going to wait till he's >> stand for the You don't need a microphone. I don't need >> Please rise for a national.
Oh, say can you see by the dawn's early light what so proudly we hel in the twilight less gleaming boot stripes and
bright stars through the perilous fight for the ramparts we watch were so galling And the rockets red glare. The bombs
bursting in air gave proof through the night that our flag was still there. Oh s does that star spangled ber yet wave
[Music] over the land of the free and the home of the brave. Thank you. >> Thank you.
>> Excuse me. >> Certificate. >> Certificate. That blue folder. >> Thank you, Daryl. >> My neighbor. >> It's awesome. You got a great voice, Darl. >> Thank you. >> He's done a lot in the city. Thank you.
>> Thank you. >> Now, Mr. Bagot, if you could read the proclamation financial national financial awareness day, please. National Financial Awareness Day Junior Achievement of the Palm Beaches and Treasure Coast is August 14th, 2025.
Whereas the city of Stewart recognizes the mission of Junior Achievement of the Palm Beaches and Treasure Coast to inspire and prepare young people for success through transformative programs that promote financial literacy, work, and career readiness and
entrepreneurship. And whereas through hands-on volunteer-led immersive experiences like JA Career Exploration Fairs, junior achievement and participating schools such as future opportunities by offering comprehensive
financial literacy and delivering career readiness programs to every elementary and middle school during the 2025-2026 school year. And whereas the city of Stewart commissioners affirm their commitment to youth education and
workforce development and recognize the vital role that early financial literacy and real world skill building play in preparing students for lifelong success. Now therefore, I, Campbell Rich, mayor of the city of Stewart, Florida, do
hereby proclaim August 14th, 2025 as National Financial Awareness Day. And accepting this proclamation in recognition of National Financial Awareness Day is Katie Thompson, the president, I assume, of the junior achievement of the Palm Beaches and
Treasure Coast. Is that correct? >> Right. >> Miss Thompson, would you like to come forward and make a few remarks? >> Sure. Thank you so much for having me. I'm Katie Thompson, the very proud president of Junior Achievement at the Palm Beaches and Treasure Coast. We are so proud to partner with Stuart and the
students in Stuart to hopefully give students the skills that they need to understand all career possibilities and hopefully come right back here to the Treasure Coast after they go to college or a trade school and come back and be great citizens in this community. We're grateful for your recognition today and
very happy to be here. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Best of the best. Thank you. >> Thank you. Did she Oh, she did. >> Okay, we have three service awards
this evening. I thought we had or just two. I thought it was just two. Okay, >> two, I think. >> Um, the first is recognizing five years of service in the utilities and engineering
department. Devin Payne. speech. Come >> on up right here. You can say some words. And the mayor's got a little uh card for you, I believe. >> 10 minutes speech. >> Ah, there is a card. Yes. A fabulous prize.
If >> you'd like to say something say something, you're welcome to. >> He learned from Milton. >> Five years is impressive, but this is more typical of the city in St. Lucky. But for 20 years in the development
department, Grace Alvarado [Applause] >> after 20 years, you have to say something. >> Long speech. >> I just want to thank everyone for those 20 years. They've been ups and downs, but mainly good. And um I'm happy that I
started working here. >> Thank you, Grace. >> Thank you. That's so quiet all of a sudden. >> Somehow being quiet makes the picture better. >> Too many more. Okay.
Comments by city commissioners. Mr. Reed will Commissioner Reid will still start with you. >> All right. >> Despite your >> closer proximity, >> just temporary, >> right? >> Yeah. I wanted I I got a couple things.
Um so I wanted to sum up Bright Line in two things as well and I know it's been talked about heavily. Um so I'll give some facts on Bright Line. December 11th, 2023. [Music] >> It was meant to be.
>> Yep. So there there was a discussion there was an agenda item on December 11, 2023. The city of Stewart signed an interlocal agreement that night and the interlocal agreement was not in the agenda packet. So, how would you agree to something that you never saw, but it was signed?
City Manager Mike Mortell mentions this is no financial obligation on behalf of the city, but the parking garage will be the responsibility of the city per the RFP. The motion was moved by Vice Mayor McDonald at the time and seconded by
Commissioner Clark. The motion passed 4 to one with the yes votes being Mayor Bruner, Vice Mayor McDonald, Commissioner Clark, and Commissioner Rich, and Commissioner Collins dissenting. Commissioner Rich in his own words
stated at the time there were opportunities for us to get out if we so choose to that he doesn't believe we are signing a blank check. Well, guess what? Assistant County Administrator George Stokus
presented to the BOCC, the Board of County Commissioners for those not familiar, the very next day on December 12th of 2023 and said, and I quote, "I could not stand here and give you a cost on what your parking garage is going to cost. He
doesn't know how big it will be." That was December 11th, 2023. Now, let's move to December 12th of 2023. This was the board of county commission meeting. There was an interlocal agreement between the county and the city that was executed
where the city was put on the hook for $30 million and per the settlement agreement, Bright Line and Martin County would split the station according to George Stokus. The motion was moved by Commissioner Smith and seconded by Vice Chair
Heatherington. And that motion passed 50. Assistant County Administrator George Stokus all of a sudden put us on the hook for $30 million for the parking garage, by the way. And he mentions according to the RFP with Bright Line that they
requested 200 parking spaces. Yet the night before when it was presented to the city of Stewart, none of this was mentioned. And then Treasure Coast Regional Planning also designed a preliminary parking garage that they designed for the maximum parking spaces, which would
be 451. that would be possible on that parcel. So, I figured I'd give some facts where it was presented to the city one way and then the very next day all of a sudden he knew the size of the parking garage and the $30 million. And I think the public should know that. So, that clarifies that if anyone wants to
fact check that and look up the meeting minutes. Let's see. I got one more thing. What I'd like to see from our commission board up here as well is to finally get the Hamilton church project moving. Um,
I was on a team's meeting with with the state and basically from what I understand the scope of services needs submitted through an RFP process so that can come in front of our board. So
hopefully we can get some consensus on that to finally get rid of that. Um, I'd also like to see emails online in the city. The county has them online. I don't know how much time and effort our city clerk's office puts into fulfilling public record requests, but I believe in
open government. If someone in the public has a question, call me on my cell phone. I'd be glad to clarify it. I believe in transparency. That's why I'm here. So, I'd like to see emails online. I'd like to see code enforcement online. I think the public and myself up here
deserve to see this information without asking staff to get simple tasks done to fulfill our obligation as public officials. Um, >> for clarification on the code enforcement, >> are you saying
active code enforcement? So, if somebody calls and makes a complaint about someone's yard? So, if we roll back to where we had um the prior code enforcement stuff, you could see past code enforcement violations to where if you searched off of a street, a property
address, you could see all this information. It was available to the public. It was very good information. I like knowing the history of things and that's that's why I appreciate you up here, Mike. anytime we have questions, you know, the history of the city, but sometimes it's hard to know details and sometimes >> Well, that's what I'm clarifying though.
I was want to do something new, but it was like the past. What you want is the adjudications and stuff that happened in the past. >> Correct. I' I'd like to see that information just like how we can search uh permits. Back in the day, permits were very detailed. Now, they're very vague. Now, we we can look them up, but
maybe the building department can correct me if I'm wrong. We can still look them up, but it doesn't really go into detail on what the permit was for. It's just a permit date. Um, sometimes I like to know this information. And then I had a speech regarding Senate Bill
180, which I would have given when I wasn't here, but I was on my yearly vacation that my family grants me access to. Um, so I wanted to say today just not as an elected official of the city of Stewart, but as someone who
actually has a Martin County birth certificate and who has chosen who was chosen by this community to represent your voice, your needs, and your quality of life. I cannot in good faith rem remain silent about Senate Bill 180, a
piece of legislation that represents a direct assault on home rule and the foundation of local democracy. We were not elected, we were not hired to rubber stamp decisions made in Tallahassee. We were chosen by voters to
govern here in Stewart with the knowledge and insight that only comes from living among the people we serve. Senate Bill 180 tells us that our judgment does not matter. That our community's unique challenges can be
totally ignored. That distant lawmakers who may have never set foot in the city of Stewart, they know better than we do and our constituents that we represent. This bill strips us of the tools we need to govern effectively. It imposes a
one-sizefits-all solution to problems that are often deeply local. It silences the will of our constituents, your neighbors, your business owners, and your families, and your quality of life. And what's worse, there are elected
officials proud of this bill, proud of a law that silences communities, proud of a measure that erodess the principle of self-governing municipalities. I say this clearly. There is no pride in undermining democracy. Home rule should
not be a partisan issue. Isn't a partisan issue. It's a principle. It means that decisions should be made as close to the people as possible. That we here in Stewart should have the power to solve our problems whether it's zoning,
environmental issues, public safety, or community development. I urge my fellow elected officials across the state, stand up for your cities. That's who you represent is your local cities. Stand up for the residents. Stand up for the basic right
of communities to govern themselves. Let's send a clear message regarding Senate Bill 180. It's a shame on home rule. And I'd like to think the majority of us will not be silent while the local foundation of local democracy is slowly chipped away.
So, if you're tired of sitting in traffic on Caner and Monterey, stuck behind the consequences of unchecked growth with a billboard that clearly stated, "Let's put a pause on development." I urge you to join us in
the fight. Let's truly represent the constituents who gave us the honor and privilege to stand up for what is right in the city of Stewart. Let's fight for future where local voices still matter and where decisions about our community
are made in our community. That's all I have to say for now. Thank you guys. >> Commissioner Gobi. >> Yes. Hi everyone. It's great to see the galley filled. I like when everybody comes. It's great. Thank you. Um first I want to I have three things to address.
One is C Co Coast Bank and I first want to thank Commissioner Reid for reaching out to the public for input on the redevelopment of the Sea Coast property on the corner of US and Colorado Avenue. I've received many emails from constituents who've made some excellent suggestions. One suggestion I receive
from many residents is to preserve and repurpose the existing facade from the original 1961 structure. Not only is it iconic example of the mid-century modern design and one of the few remaining architectural expressions of that era in downtown
Stewart, especially since this year we here in the city and the county are celebrating a historical milestone. I would like to share some of the these ideas with Mr. Hudson and his staff who have worked on the redesign of the Sea Coast property. And thank you for all the constituents who followed Mr.
Commissioner Reed's lead and sent in emails uh suggesting things to be done with that property. Um my next thing that I'd like to address is also the 1895 church of Pastam Stewart. A meeting took place with Mr. and Mrs. Hamilton, Commissioner Reid, Derek Hankerson from
Brian Mance's office, Lucia Brea, the bureau chief of the Florida Commerce Department, and Sahara Jackson and Graham Mrian, plus additional individuals from the Florida Department of Commerce. regarding the CBG grant for this project. Prior to any RFP going out on
this project, I insist that the RFPs go out to designated contractors who are specifically licensed to work on historical buildings. I was not able to get a complete list of the authorized contractors who specialize in historic restorations, but I will provide it a list to the city manager's office as
soon as I can. The commissioners should have the opportunity to review and edit the scope of work on this project prior to the RFP and to review again once the RFP has been selected. The Hamiltons have had many threeinut sessions during public
comments before the commission over the last year. I would like to add the Hamiltons to the agenda so that they might have ample time to address their issues. As always, we here on the dis will purport ourselves at the most professional levels. The issue needs to
be resolved in the best way possible with certified historical building contractors as to not repeat the mistakes of the projects as made in the past. After all, like you and I, this is a constituent's property and we need to be mindful of that. Thank you. I also
want to address SB 180. Over the last 10 years, many laws not in the best interest of the public have been overturned by both federal and state levels, ranging from election laws, healthcare, civil rights, education, to name a few. At the previous commission meeting, two of our commissioners felt
that they were holding true to the oath they took to obey the law. In 1968, the Florida legislature amended the Florida Constitution authorizing home rule powers for both cities and chartered counties. I am also holding true to the
oath that I took it last August to support and protect and defend the constitution of the state of Florida which predates SB 180 by 57 years. I'm in favor of the city of student joining the growing number of counties and
organizations that are going against a stance against SB80. Partial list to date are Deltona, Vosa County, Miami Dade, Orange County, Manatee County, Lucira Beach, Sarasota County, Thousand Friends of Florida, Florida Chapter of American Planning Association, Florida
League of Cities, Republican Liberty Caucus, and the Conservancy of Southwest Florida, plus many others. Thank you very much. [Applause] Commissioner Gio, the city of Stewart also did pass a resolution just like those other cities and submit it to the state, those ones that's that the League
of Cities. The resolution you the board passed is identical to the League of Cities. >> Oh, okay. Thank you, >> Commissioner Clark. >> I uh thank you for including the arts moment. I know that it wasn't on the agenda this time, but um we'll get it
back on the agenda again the next time. Thank you. Um I want to welcome our environmental attorney who's I think it's her first day today, Miss Holmes. And um I also want to thank Jod for the budget workshop that we did earlier on.
And I know that a lot of people are concerned uh whether or not um anything in the city will cause their services to be either terminated or reduced or whether they may even be paying
additional for any services that they get. So with that in that regard I know that this was a workshop and we have until September. Did we have any any of the other two dates Mr. Mortell for the
next um hearings on the budget. >> Well, we the the hearings on the budget will happen in September, but during manager comments, I was going to suggest that we have the second budget workshop on the 25th of August. >> Okay. All right. That was that was my
only two things. Um I think we'll probably have time to bring this up, but since the other commissioners I'm not against um home rule. I just think that for the circumstances of what happened with the
city of Stewart and the way that our zoning change occurred that um this gives us an opportunity to go back and to do things uh properly, but I do agree that we need to maintain home rule and
um it's very very important. Thank you. >> Thank you, Commissioner Guard. Mr. Vice Mayor. >> Yes. Along the same lines as Commissioner Gio, I just would like to make sure that next meeting we have an agenda item where we can vote for or
against joining that. >> Yeah, that's it's on the agenda. >> Okay. Not as a DND, but where we can vote. >> I don't know how it's got put on. I know that it was discussed at the last staff meeting by the city attorney, but I can verify that it'll be a resolution. >> Okay. I just want to make sure we have a
vote so we can get moving on that. And that was all. >> That's all. >> That's it. >> I only have a brief comment this evening. Um, a couple weeks ago, I forget, but I was
lucky enough to be asked to do a ribbon cutting at Steuart Stewart's brand new freestanding emergency center, which is on Caner Highway. Uh it is um run by HCA and it's a very impressive facility
built in a an amazingly short period of time. It's a new form of modular construction. Um it's nice to have it on that side of the tracks. I was especially impressed with they took me into the testing room and because of new
computing power and miniaturization, the range of testing they can do on you now to diagnose what you have is dazzling. So, we're very lucky that that company made that commitment to our community
and um I hope none of you have to take advantage of it, but thank you. Okay, Mr. Mortell. >> Um, I too want to welcome Ruth Holmes, our new environmental attorney to the city of Stewart. Today is her first official day uh as a full-time employee
with us. Um, as a uh city attorney, um, I was going to put on to the agenda for next meeting as well that she would be sworn in and uh take her oath of office as a formality uh before the city. So, we will welcome her to that. I'm sure she wants to get up in front of
everybody and do that, but nonetheless, she will. But thank you for coming. Um, also, uh, the other thing I want to talk about was the budget workshop, um, and speaking with Jolie. Um, we can spe a special meeting, but it's he thinks it
probably best to go ahead and do it for the 25th unless you guys want to do it earlier than that. It'll give us time and just like today, just before the meeting on the 25th, the same way. >> Budget. >> Yeah. Why don't you just clarify? Let me the 25th would be better.
>> Yeah, as I said, rather than the 25th. Yeah, today like like today, but for the 25th, right? >> Close it at 2 p.m. also. >> Well, that's your call. >> Is that a regular meeting, too? >> So, that that's why I'm putting it to the 25th because that's when our
meetings are already scheduled. >> Um, there's a CRA meeting normally that day. I don't know. I'm looking. I don't know how long it is or when it starts, but we could start at 2:30 and I think the CR normally starts at 4:30 and then the city commissions at
>> 5:30 at 4 >> or 4, right? So, we could start at 2, >> right? >> Two it is. >> Okay. 2:00. >> Okay. I think I I hear in that date. >> The vice mayor will be showing up at scrub. >> I'll probably be in scrubs.
>> Are you good? >> No, I'm good. >> Probably will. >> Um, it'll be a workshop. So, Um, and uh, let me just make sure. And um, that is all I have. >> Wow. Very concise. >> I've been working on the budget. I don't
know what's going on. >> Move approval of the agenda. >> Uh, Mayor Rich, may I? >> Yes. >> Uh, as far as the approval of agenda, I'd like to pull resolution 07205.
It is. >> You're talking about the consent calendar or the agenda >> from the Oh, from the consent calendar. Is that on the next one? >> Yeah. >> Okay, I'll wait then. >> Okay. >> Are you from the agenda? >> Yeah, I'll I'll second it. >> So, we have a motion by Commissioner Clark and a second by Commissioner Reid
for approval of the agenda. Do we have any public comment on this item? >> Seeing none, all in favor? >> I Okay. Comments. Are there any comments from the public, Madame Clerk, on non-aggenda related items?
>> Yes, I have Robin Cartwright. >> Good evening, Miss Cartwright. >> Good afternoon, commissioners. Um, there was a post yesterday on social media by someone about the city manager. And I'd like to address a couple of comments made in that post because my name was
specifically mentioned. As you'll recall, there was a breach of supposedly confidential settlement talks around the Caner CPU where Costco is. And it has been long suspected as to who who it was that leaked that confidential information to everybody's favorite friend and neighbor who shared it
publicly, possibly derailing any meaningful settlement talks to mitigate the environmental impact of the Caner CPU. I was assured by Mr. Nicoleti, acting as city attorney, that this breach would be taken seriously and the culprit would not only be rooted out, but disclosed. But I guess that's just
attorney speak for basically, yeah, nothing's going to happen. What I find most interesting is that Mr. Mortell stated in an email to Ike Crumpler, who worked simultaneously for the city as a speech writer while he worked for the Costco developer, quote, "As a brief explanation, it has always been my
opinion that they didn't care about the land use and were using this as a political platform to attack candidates. The city manager casting dispersions on any of my motives is an insult." And let's be clear, this wasn't the first time that my motivations were questioned. By making this and other
statements which were shared with selectively with certain commissioners and supposed news outlets, my integrity was consistently called into question. This manipulation was and is completely strategic. And I get it. The city had a case to win. But it was done at the expense of me, my motives, my
reputation, and my job. But let's take me out of the equation. And here are the ramifications of these kinds of comments made by somebody in a leadership position. It has become virtually impossible for any public member to be taken at face value that their motivations are pure and intentional. People have grown frustrated with the
process and meaningful conversations about things like ethical reform stop at his desk. I'll remind you that I along with another resident who is also an attorney met with Mr. Mortell about the opportunity to create a committee for people to navigate concerns with the commission. It was supposed to be presented to you as an agenda item and
it never was. This is just one example proving what you are presented with are suggestions guiding you on how to handle something versus there being honest dialogue. You only know what staff wants you to know and what staff shares at least publicly is often incomplete and with a goal to get you to vote a certain
way. The public is limited to three minutes compared to unrestricted time allotments for presentations and dialogue from developers and their experts, even experts who basically fudge their qualifications. I've said it before and I'll say it again. There needs to be change at the city and at the county beyond those who sit as
elected officials on the dis and the only way to change who is on staff is to change who sits as a commissioner. >> Thank you. >> Thank you Robert. >> I have no further public comment. >> Okay, >> moving on to the consent calendar.
Commissioner Reid. >> Yeah, and I don't know if I should do this at my commission comment, but I'm going to say it now. on the consent calendar where it says it on the agenda. Is there any way to put the word approval right before there so it's clear and concise like so when we look at approval of agenda then we know but
it just says consent calendar I think if the word approval was prior to that it would be easy just an easy change just to >> sure but you're saying like where it says approval of agenda you wanted to say approval of consent calendar. >> Yeah that's simple enough right >> it's in our calendar it's listed out the
categories are in our code so can change it >> update. Okay. >> Yeah, >> it would mean it's sometimes Yes. I'd like to pull uh from the consent to calendar number four. It's uh resolution 072025. >> Would you like to make a motion first?
>> Yeah, sure. A motion to uh pull resolution 072025. >> Which which item number is that? >> Number four, the consent calendar. >> It's regarding project lift. >> Okay. So, you're moving, you're making a motion to approve the consent calendar
polling item four, >> correct? >> Okay. >> Anything else? >> You're pulling anything else? >> That's all I see. >> That's a long consent calendar is what I'm asking. >> Okay. So, we have a motion by Commissioner Reed. We have a second by the vice mayor for approval of the
consent calendar polling item four. Is there any public comment on this item? Seeing none, roll call, please. Commissioner Gio, >> yes. >> Vice Mayor Collins, >> yes. >> Commissioner Reid, >> yes. >> Commissioner Clark, >> yes. >> Mayor Rich,
>> yes. Motion to approve. So, Mr. Bagot, will you read item four for our consideration, please? Resolution number 07-2025, a resolution of the city commission of
the city of Stewart, Florida, approving the award of invit invitation to bid number 2025-102. City of Stewart's project lift vocational project to Proctor Construction Company LLC of Vero Beach,
Florida. the lowest, most responsive and responsible bidder with a total unit price of $6,474,35685 providing an effective date and for other purposes. >> Thank you. >> My turn.
>> Well, we have a motion and a second. So I' I'd like to make a motion for approval of resolution 072025 under the stipulation that guardian or patriot response group is not a part of this resolution.
>> Um >> okay we have a motion >> but that won't >> before we do that that would violate the law >> RFP RFP. the whole thing is over. >> Guardian is programmed through CDBG group and we can't undo that and
>> so it would be over. >> And I also don't think in an RF RFP process you can exclude any biders unless they have been banned by some felony or something as to a bidding list because you're actually manipulating the
RFP. >> But I would defer to the city attorney if you >> Yeah. just I I personally can't stand up here and and vote. Like I understand, Zakio, I I get the project, but as far as this contractor, I respect you guys. I've seen the work you've done, but if
Guardian is overseeing it, >> that's not what they do. >> I I I'm sorry. >> I actually have a motion. Do we have a second? >> I don't know how we would achieve that, Mike. >> You can just vote no and send the money back. >> Well, you he could reword the motion.
>> He can't exclude Guardian. Guardian is the manager of the CDBG grant. No matter what. >> No matter what. >> Yeah. There's no ifs ands or buts applied for the >> That's already Guardian getting any taxpayer money. >> What steps would the commission
>> Okay, hold on. >> Okay, >> he's made a motion. Is there a second? >> Is there any clarification, Lee, on how to settle this to where Guardian is not overseeing this project? They've failed multiple in the city of Stewart. Before we before we say the Guardian has failed multiple in the city of Stewart, I know
that you've met with the Hamiltons on many occasions, but I also went through that structural engineer and other stuff. And I actually have to tell you that Guardian has been the only one that has been helping the city and pointing
out to the CDBG that things that are have been done like the tearing out of the air conditioning and stuff like that. As far as the craftsmanship of that craft, I understand that. But they oversaw it. >> They were the project manager. Correct.
>> They were the project, >> but the issue was Patriot. And Patriot is not going to be on this job. >> I understand that. But if they failed in that sense by letting that workmanship, >> we can't have a discuss. Do we have a second for Commissioner Reed's motion? >> But he can seek clarification.
>> Yeah, he's seeking it from the attorney as >> he can as soon as we have. There's no reason to have a discussion about the particulars if there's no second. Is there a second to his motion? >> Point of order. Can I ask the attorney?
>> What is What is your point of order? >> Right. I I just want to ask the attorney since we're in the middle of a vote. Okay. >> No, we're not in the middle of a vote because we don't have a second. >> Okay. Then can I ask can I ask the attorney a question >> with >> without having a second? >> Right. without having a second. Can I
>> Does it relate to this particular item? >> It is pertaining to >> Okay, then no. >> If you want to second the motion, you can ask any question you want. >> Could the city clerk please read how the motion is currently how it reads?
>> Motion uh to approve without guardian or patriot group not being a part of the resolution. How would I Can you give me some advice? >> Right. I mean, that's the point. You We're being told by the CBG project. >> I'd like to see the project move
forward, but not with >> I'll I'll second it for purposes. >> Thank you, Mr. Vice Mayor. You can motion if you >> We have a motion by Commissioner Reid. Is it clear, Commissioner Joby, what the motion is just to be? >> Yes. >> And we have a second by the vice mayor. Is there any public comment on this
item? Okay. Oh, >> I'm sorry. >> Hello again, Miss Cartrite. >> Um, I like Commissioner Reed want to be very clear that I am a big fan of Project Lift and the work that they do with community members to learn a skill while it's partnered with their social
emotional wellness is amazing and what they do is absolutely critical especially for some of the members of our community who would not get any job assistance or social or mental health otherwise. But about the CDBG grant um and have money having to go through
Guardian, it is not stated at all in any of the documents that were provided as part of the agenda that I could find that Guardian was actually a part of this project. So, thank you for clarifying that they are. Um but like Commissioner Reid, I have concerns about how much taxpayer money is basically
going to a company that is basically a pass through of all financial funds. that is our tax dollars being spent to somebody who did a very poor job overseeing the Hamilton's church. Even if Patriot Response Group was responsible for the inputting of the windows, it is absolutely Guardian's responsibility along with city staff to
make sure that what was done was done correctly and it was not done correctly. So whether it's a historic building should have been approved or regardless of what you think of the Hamiltons, the church's project was clearly mismanaged on every level, especially and including Guardian. And while we can allocate how
grant money is spent, it's too bad that we can't take that money that is intended for guardian and use it where it's better intended to help the residents of our community. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Is the making the motion commissioner? You may go. >> Okay. So, Lee, I I should have brought
my manila folder with me, but I believe they can be removed from this. Um, >> if I can if I can >> I have a manila folder. If I can chime in and just provide some background on what happened so everyone's brought up to history.
>> When we applied for the CDBG grant programs, >> we went out to an RFP on who would be the manager for the CDBG grant programs and Guardian was selected. >> So under a request for proposals that
happened. Now, if in fact you could demonstrate that Guardian breached their contract, you could terminate that contract with Guardian. But if you're talking about basing it on
something that happened that you've been aware of since last September and waiting until the night of us awarding the project lift to claim the breach, we can't do that. We will have to claim the
breach, schedule the agenda, decide whether or not it's a breach, have somebody independently review it to see if it's a breach, and then go down the path of the breach. September 1st is the deadline. So, we will be out of time. >> That's fine.
>> I also want to mention that uh Guardian is only going to be involved doing administration part with this grant, with this project. Uh we have Kinley Horn that's going to be overseeing the construction of the project. So they are not going to be on site doing any monitoring of construction.
>> How much taxpayer money is Guardian going to benefit from this project? >> So this is going to come from the CDBG grant. Um when they applied for the grant, they were the lowest bidding. Uh they're going to get 220,000. >> Yeah. No way. >> To administer the grant, which they've
been helping us since 2021 till now. >> I understand. And so is this something where I should amend my motion, Lee, then to where we table this agenda item? >> It won't matter. >> No, >> September 1st is the deadline. >> Yeah, but we have a meeting on 25th. >> I have to get started on construction
because we have a deadline with Florida Commerce and Florida Commerce has agre um actually told us that they're going to be more involved with this project because they want to have monthly guard uh Florida Commerce >> um group. Yeah, they want to have like
monthly meeting with staff and guardian and whoever is uh constructing the project. So, they're going to be there's going to be a lot more involvement from Florida Commerce. >> And I can tell you that Florida Commerce is much more familiar with the historic church case than everybody here is because we haven't done a full
presentation. I understand >> Florida Commerce is also aware of Guardian, but does not feel as strongly as you do about Guardian themselves because they've been involved at a much
in much deeper conversations with all of the contractors and know the whole story and including that from the Hamiltons. I'm not trying to discredit at all. >> Get into the weeds of it, but >> but if Florida Commerce thought that Guardian was doing something wrong, Florida
Commerce wouldn't have given us the extra 4 to6 million that they've given us since this issue has arisen. But instead, they have in reviewing it literally tripled the amount of the grant during this process. I just I I
can't sit here in good faith knowing that they're going to benefit off a taxpayer money that work that they did. It's it's totally deplorable. I I suggest everybody in this room to go check it out because whether it's taxpayer money or it's coming out of my
pocket or your pocket or your pocket or anyone's pocket in this room, you wouldn't pay for that work. No way. And I can't sit up here and support that at all. So I don't know your opinion, Lee, on it
as well. But >> Guardian's opinion was that they shouldn't pay for the work and that we shouldn't have paid the money. >> Why don't they do it as an IOU then? I know. But Guardian's opinion was that >> first they they answered the the request
of the Hamiltons to do the change order for the windows and it was the Hamilton's request to do the change order for the roof. Guardian was the one that was saying they shouldn't pay for the air conditioning. It shouldn't the changes that happened in the >> itself. Well, when you say the
workmanship itself, >> workmanship, >> if you quality, >> I know, but before you go on, what happened was when Patriot went in and the ceilings and walls had been cut out, they were concerned and they said, "We can't move forward until a structural
engineer reviews this." >> I totally The Hamilton's kicked them off the job and they were never allowed back. They weren't able to finish the job. If I hired you or you were halfway finished installing a window and then told you you couldn't come back to my house and then took pictures
>> had the opportunity to fix it. I >> and I took pictures of the window and said this is the job you did. >> You can't I can't blame Guardian because Guardian was waiting to make sure everything was finished and then literally the job was stopped and Guardian is the one that's made sure the
windows are replaced right, made sure the bids being done right, made sure it's being followed. They're actually the ones that have been walking through and pointing out what needs to be done. We can get into the debate about Patriot at some point in the future, too. But
part of the problem is that the rem of the board doesn't have the benefit of whatever conversations you've had with the Hamilton. >> Even if it's not conversations, I mean, I've seen the pictures of >> But they're half finished. >> That's the thing. It's not the finished work. >> These guys are real contractors over
here. I suggest you go visit it and you give me your opinion. Well, and I get it. If you feel that way, I my recommend to just vote no. >> Yeah, that's that's what I'm going to have to do. And it's nothing against you, Zach, or Project Lift, but that's deplorable and they shouldn't benefit off of taxpayers. Once again, I'm sorry.
>> And I just want to remind it's not okay. >> I have a question. Okay. >> Commissioner Reed, are you >> I'm finished, but that's all I have to say. >> Okay. Commissioner Gobi. >> Okay. what steps we would need to take and and obviously we couldn't for this project to remove
uh Guardian and Patriot from these RFPs. You're saying that we are locked into it, but it came under an initial RFP. Could we do another RFP so that we could look for a different person to oversee these projects? >> No, this is we went out to RFP on
project and we've already awarded it to a different contractor that's not Patriot. So that's already happened. >> So Patriots out of the picture, but Guardian is overseeing >> the CDBG grant, >> right? That already happened under a separate RFP, >> right? >> But that happened or years ago.
>> It's not going to be the only CBG grant we ever get going forward. What can we do to remove Guardian from this position? >> Number one, you'd have to demonstrate they've done something wrong. >> You can't have somebody on a no. >> You can't just put them on a no bid list
because you don't like them. based on RFQ. >> Technically, they've got they definitely breach that contract. I haven't >> That's not true. Guardian has not. That's all out of context. That is not true. You >> need to be careful about assertions about the conduct of a business. >> Mayor Rich, please don't tell me that you accuse someone of uh what did they
do? Threaten someone. So, thank you. >> Ju just to be clear, Commissioner Joby, um there are there's a separate contract with Guardian. that the contract here today is with um Proctor, right? >> Um and so this is an invitation to bid
that we had gone out and that's what this contract is about. There was a similar contract that went out for bid and Guardian was the prevailing um bidder. I I remember it was I think it pre 2021. >> Yeah. Predated me. So uh there's a contract in place that they are to
administer all of the CBD grant money >> and that can never change. Well, it could change if they did something wrong or breached that contract along the way, but Florida Commerce has never accused them of doing anything wrong. Neither
has the city. >> I don't think the Guardians done anything wrong. >> As far as Patriot, they were awarded grant for uh rehabbing other homes, but we removed them from those projects. So, we did we can remove Patriot. And how
much oversight do we have over um Guardian, the city, our departments or >> Well, if in fact something was finished and Guardian said it was finished and our building official went there and said it doesn't
meet code, he could fail the final inspection or fail the inspections along the way. The circumstances of this circ situation are significantly different because Guardian's job is to kind of tell
the Florida Commerce how much this should cost or how much that should cost or what's the reasonable expectation of, you know, when you have to replace this window. If you pull out the window and the framing is all rotten out, is that something that should be done? But does that mean
you have to replace the floor too or is it just window framing? And so it's it's a relationship that I you know I can't possibly go in and say that I have a license to know whether the board was the right texture or whatever it was
that was used. But but we do have people that do those inspections, right? And Guardian wasn't determined to have done anything wrong. The issue with Patriot is more complicated, but they were removed from the job
>> and they're obviously removed from other jobs and that's fine and we're happy about that. But I still think that we should have some major or more oversight over Guardian if they're going to be the main or only contractor, I mean overseer of the contractors for these CBG grants.
It is a lot of taxpayer money. It's our money and I think that we have the right to oversee if we're a little >> not happy with how maybe Guardian performs. Maybe we have a little more oversight over >> realistically when we go let's say when
we built let's say the station 3 of the we didn't use a CDBG grant money we went out to RFP and we hired a contractor directly and we worked with that contractor and it happened to work out
in this case the CDBG grant went out to RFP three contractors responded the Hamiltons negotiated with all contract. >> Right now, we're really not talking about the Hamilton. We're talking about Guardian. >> They picked Patriot. We didn't pick
Patriot. They did. And then it didn't work out with Patriot. And Guardian was who had Patriot removed from the job and went in and took over and stopped it from going in that direction. Guardian didn't put Patriot on the job. Guardian
didn't tell Patriot to do anything or do anything like that. They actually were the ones that took Patriot off the job and put it in the direction to go the other way. We have direct relationship with the contractor of uh Proctor
Construction Company LLC of Vero Beach because you're awarding the contract directly to them. Right. >> We have direct line of sight with Proctor that we have. >> So that's the oversight I'm looking for. Then you have oversight. So we we have that directly with the contractor that's
being bid for the job. You also have Project Lyft that is in the construction business that has built a building identical to this building already. So they know exactly what they're looking for and I'll guarantee you Mr. Zakia
will be there every day. >> Plus, >> correct. But they're benefiting off taxpayers guardian once again. And I listen I understand Proctor. I respect you, Zachu, as well. >> You guys are not going to let the project fail, but they're going to walk away with almost a quarter million
dollars. >> Okay. >> But we don't have the ability to change them out at this point. At some point, what I'm asking, and you're saying we'd have to have grounds and reason that we could remove them as the project for the CDC. >> And right now, why would you?
>> And right now, Commissioner Reid, why do you think they should be removed? >> In an hour or two, I'll go to my truck and go through my mana folder with the contract. >> We can meet after the meeting. I'd be happy to because I'd like to have that. >> Uh, Mr. Vice Mayor, >> sometimes you're in you're in difficult positions where seems like both ways,
you know, can be >> just not right. >> It's not allow the vice mayor to conclude his remarks, please. >> I don't disagree with you, Commissioner Reid. Uh, oh, it's a tragedy what's happened to that church. >> I'm not even talking about the church,
though, just in general. under the the eye of who was watching. But at this point with this particular project today right now, I would hate for this to lose out on this because of past sins. This
is a huge opportunity for the city for project. And I I can totally appreciate not wanting to give Guardian another penny, but that's that's a boat we're in right now. If if this is going to go forward, it's going to be with Guardian. And if maybe
as part of an agenda item with the Hamiltons, we start, you know, looking at if there is some kind of case against Guardian and having them be on, >> right, then we move to remove them. >> That that's that's business for tomorrow. But today, I I just would hate to see us missing out on this
opportunity. So, for me, I'm going to withdraw my second for this motion. Um because my hope is we've had we've had >> discussion on this. We've had our questions answered, but I I really don't even want to vote on this. >> Are you more comfortable with more
oversight from the city over guardian? >> I know. I know. It's about them. >> I mean, I'm going to be >> I'm sorry. Can I just get clarification on >> I guess the vice mayor's removed withdrew his second. So, we need to look if there's another second. >> So, we're after a second. Okay. >> If there's no other second, then the
>> Is there a second for this motion? Seeing none, no action is taken. But >> can I make a mo can I make since is >> Oh, we had >> that was withdrawn that was taken out of the consent calendar. I move that we approve um resolution number 072025.
>> Second. >> So we have a motion by Commissioner Clark, a second by the vice mayor. >> Is there any public comment on this item? Miss McBride, >> a question. It the guardian. Were they over my project?
>> Yes. >> I will just say and I said it here before. They were wonderful. I I kind of get a little upset when things don't go my way. I'd call and that afternoon guardian was right there to clarify and
make sure it was done properly. To begin with, I picked out the contractor I wanted. They picked out the contractor they wanted. I was very fortunate because I didn't even know Mr. Deanis, but I I did pick out the right contract. But I will tell you, Guardian
was the the young lady, even the gentleman himself. I make a call, I say, you know, I was nervous about what they were doing. Guardian was right there all all the way through my project. They gave me the He gave me a card, she gave me a card. I mean, I could understand
that church, but they picked out their own contractor. Maybe they weren't home like I was watching everything they did, but I did. I was there guardian. I mean, I can stand here and say they did a fantastic job backing me up when I
thought they were doing something wrong. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Helen. >> Thank you. >> Any other madam clerk? >> No. >> Any comments or questions from the commission? >> Seeing none, roll call, please.
>> Commissioner Clark, >> yes. >> Vice Mayor Collins, >> yes. >> Commissioner Gobi, >> yes. Commissioner Reid, >> no. >> Mayor Rich, >> yes. Motion passes. Commission action. >> Thank you.
>> Mr. Bagot, will you read item 12 for our consideration, please? Resolution number 63-2025, a resolution of the city commission of the city of Steuart, Florida, authorizing the execution of amendments to leases between the city and various
tenants at 301 Southeast Ocean Boulevard to include the allowance for the termination of leases in the year 2028. Further authorizing city staff to relocate in accordance with prior commission action, providing an effective date and for other purposes.
Um, Mr. Mortell, I'm pretty sure you're going to take this. Um, this would be the balance and it's uh the I'm starting over. When we originally
had the agenda item, it was for the two leases um at Wells Fargo. Uh the vice mayor asked to bring it back and include the leases. The cancer center has still not signed
their lease yet, so I did not include it. But I did include the Bowman lease. Um, the thing about it is just for for technicality purposes, the Bowman lease expires this November and they were
looking for an extension to November and of 28. the cancer clinic was the one that we were getting to shorten their lease. It remains my opinion that if they're not going to shorten their lease, it doesn't matter. It still benefits the city to go forward to the 28th. But I just wanted
to fully disclose that that if they didn't sign it, that you know, the commission may say, "Well, then I want the city to leave city hall and go to the to the take over the Bowman fourth floor of Wells right away." But I don't think that'd be in the best interest of
the city because it would leave one department in city hall and then have the clerk, city manager, and city attorney not at city hall and 120 >> and we'd be given up the revenue. So it to me it's to your best interest to go
forward. I've attached the lease amendment to the um agenda item and it like I like I point out it's really one page. The only real change in the lease is that it's until February of 28. >> Thank you, Mike.
>> Do we have a motion? >> Resolution number 63, 2025. Move appro uh >> Okay, >> I move that we approve this. >> Second. >> So, we have a motion by Commissioner Clark and a second by the vice mayor.
Is are there any public comments on this item? >> I have no >> say none. >> I have a question. >> Um >> as the maker of the motion, Commissioner Clark, >> there's a question. >> I know, but you get to go first. >> Yeah. >> Oh, I didn't have any qu Oh,
>> that's okay. >> Yeah. >> My question is what is M what is Commissioner's question? >> Uh my question >> my question is to to you Lee and Mike. Um, I noticed that they can terminate
the lease agreement anytime after January 1st of 27. Should that be in there or should we just run it to February of 28? >> Well, we discussed this last meeting. I'm sorry, but you weren't here, but with the um the uh issue before that is
that they're literally right now they were looking to get out. Then I said I could give them the extension. >> They're just going to be trying to find a place to go and if they sign a lease, right? And so what we figured is well this is kind of bonus for us and it's a gap that we're filling anyway. So yeah
we could hold them to it but they might not agree to the 28. Right. >> Okay. Thanks guys. >> Yeah. >> Any other questions or >> No, I'm good. >> Public. >> Seeing none. Roll call, please. >> Public. >> No, we already did public.
>> There was no public comment. >> Commissioner Gobi. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Reid. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Clark. Yes. >> Vice Mayor Collins. >> Yes. >> Mayor Rit. >> Yes. >> Motion is approved. >> Mr. Bagot, could you please read item 13
for our consideration, please? >> Sure. Ordinance number 2543-2025 and ordinance of the city commission of the city of Stewart, Florida, rescending city of Stewart, ordinance number 2539-2025 pursuant to section 28 of Florida Senate
Bill 180, which was adopted and effective as of July 1st, 2025, providing for conflict, providing for an effective date, and for other purposes. And this is my agenda item. >> I would hope so. Uh I want to remind the board that this is the second reading.
We had first reading last meeting. Um so we will be looking for final action today. Um as a recap, as you recall, the city commission initiated a moratorum in our zoning in progress uh
last September. So when it initiated, we did a three-month initial and then a three-month um extension, a total of six month of a moratorum. Uh during that time, the city commission had held numerous meetings, public
meetings, workshops, and um and which resulted in several amendments to our land development code via ordinance 2539 2025, which is the ordinance up for recision today. Um many of these amendments can
be argued that are most more restrictive uh or burdensome on applica applicants and for development within the city. I think it would uh it's definitely arguable by by an attorney. Uh, Senate Bill 180 went into effect on July 1st
and obviously section 28 of Senate Bill 180 prohibits the city from adopting amendments to the land development code which are more restrictive or burdensome uh through June 30th, 2028. They even made the law retroactive to go
back to August before our moratorium started by about a month. The state law that went into effect on July 1st also makes our zoning of progress and moratorum and the subsequent ordinance null and void.
And so uh I've put together this ordinance to resend if if the city does not resend ordinance 2539. Uh there's going to be a consequence. I see um under the law, any resident or residents uh or any business owner in
the city uh have the option of suing the city for um declaratory or injunctive relief. Declaratory relief is to declare that we violated the law and an injunctive relief is to prevent us from doing something.
Under the law, there's a uh clause about a 14-day uh notice. So whether or not they're entitled to attorney's fees and cost, I I think the law was poorly written on the attorney's fees. But if a resident or business owner does provide us with
notice of their intent to move forward and uh challenging our ordinance, we have 14 days to notice that we are going to take action to repeal it. And if we do do such notice, then we'll
have another 14 days thereafter and which to take action into repeal. Uh I I have already received notice from two um residents/ business owners in the city and uh I I I
received them. I guess one's probably arguable. He's arguing he sent it to me a week ago, but I didn't get it. It looks like he sent it to the wrong email. But I definitely got both of them today. So I it's my opinion that our notice of intent to repeal is clearly in this ordinance that we're seeking to
rescend and as I said yet last week recision repeal are the same. They're synonymous. I chose resend because we did that with bright line and I thought that was term more comp that you guys would be familiar with but repeal is the same
way. Uh it acts the same way. So I it's my opinion that we're put on notice today. We've got 14 days from today to take this action to repeal slashrescend ordinance 2539. Otherwise, we could have multiple
lawsuits. Um, it doesn't give a cap of how many lawsuits there are. So, it's arguable that multiple people can sue the city. Uh, if we resend this ordinance 2539, I I know there's talk about joining a
lawsuit. We talked about it last time and and I know we've all gotten emails about joining a lawsuit challenging Senate Bill 180 and by rescending our ordinance 2539 would have no bearing on whether or not we we do join that
lawsuit. So I think it's my opinion that we should go forward with rescending ordinance 2539 because we do have people already challenging it and threatening to sue us. There's, you know, if if if a court
finds that our land development code amendments are more restrictive or more burdensome, it's an easy case to make uh from the other side. It would be very difficult to defend that whether it's myself or we end up getting outside council to defend the city on these such
lawsuits. Um, I've had conversations with the lawyers that are are proposing to do the lawsuit and there is no in my discussions with them. There's no harm to joining the
case from them or myself if we resend this uh ordinance. It's it actually in my opinion looks better because we have facts that we're being harmed by uh Senate Bill 180 because we went through months of making these changes and we're
actually having to go through the process of rescending the law and it I think we makes us have better facts. You know, there might be other cities or counties that might join this lawsuit. They haven't done anything yet. So, it's more of a whatif, but with us it has
clearly been impacted. And also by rescending the law now, we avoid having to pay out any attorney's fees. Uh if if uh if the case that's been proposed goes forward and and understand that there's
no guarantee the case will go forward because in my discussions with the council, they're looking to have 10 uh entities, municipalities or counties to go forward. And there's no guarantee that they will get 10, but that's seems to be their minimum number they need to
go forward with it. If if they do go forward with it and we have rescended this ordinance and they prevail, whether we're a party to it or not, we can always then readopt our uh land development code changes that we've gone
through. We've already had the workshops, we already had the order ordinance drafted. we can just do first and second reading and readopt them. So that's why it's in my opinion that we should rescend and we can always read just to avoid these lawsuits that are
clearly going to be coming. >> Mr. Vice Mayor, do you have any questions of Mr. Bagot? >> No, I just wanted to make comments. >> Okay. So are there any questions of Mr. Bagot? No, he answered my question which
was if we were to resend then would we have to go back to the drawing board and I certainly don't want to do that and I don't think anybody else does either. >> So you're saying it would just be a motion to bring back what we had done during uh ZIP. >> It would be an ordinance. You'd have to you'd have to
>> instruct us and we'd have to do first and second reading. I I'd say it's arguable we wouldn't have to go back to the advisory boards, but technically the law says we probably would have to go back to the advisory boards. You wouldn't have to do the whole zoning in progress and all the workshops, but you would have to follow the due process of the advisory boards. >> We would have first reading just like we
did in this last meeting and then second reading >> because this is an ordinance we're sending. So, it's the same process. It's an ordinance, but we've already gone through and I don't even have to we don't have to draft changes to the ordinance be it's already drafted and we've done it. So, we would just need
direction from um the commission to readt it and we would have to go through the process of doing first and second reading. >> But if it's more restrictive, >> I'm I'm saying hypothetically if the case prevails. >> Gotcha. Okay. >> And and it's unconstitutional the law, >> then we can just go back and read it. In
the meantime, we're deflecting any lawsuits that we're going to get sued with. >> Okay. Do we have a motion? >> I have one more question. >> Okay. the city attorney, Mr. Gob. >> Um, so you're saying if it goes forward and they the Florida state says, "Okay,
it's unconstitutional." What if they amend the SB80? They take out that last bit of language, the last 58 pages, which is really the one taking away home rule, would we still be in the same position to be able to just adopt the ordinances
again? When you say the last section, you talk about the entire section 28. When you say what, what what do you say hypothetically? >> SP 180. I mean, in for the most part, it's a pretty good emergency bill. It was the last sections that were added
which are restrictive to the home rule. >> Well, section 28 is what is at issue now. And it says that each county listed in the federal disaster declaration for hurricanes Debbie, Helen, and Milton and each municipality within those counties may not propose or adopt a moratorium.
So that's which is what we fell under uh at least Milton that I'm aware of. So it says that >> and that that could go into forever because there isn't enough time I can remember that one part of Martin County wasn't under the disaster of a hurricane. So again, my question is if
>> that that part that you're concerned about because there's additional parts that say if thereafter within a if they fall within a year, they also barred from with a year. But this initial date is through the 20 uh 2028. Um I
>> if they if they say that whole section section 28 is unconstitutional then we just again we just readopt our our our 2539 which is the zoning in progress stuff. Uh like Mr. Morpel said we don't have to go through all the workshops and we don't have to do a
moratorum because we've already identified the laws that we changed and and so we just go forward with a first and second reading of those changes just like we already have. But actually we we went to more than first and second reading with Darson in progress but I think we had four readings
>> but we would just have to go through one and two readings. >> How long could could this litigation last potentially? >> So I understand that it has to go to a trial court >> between with uh Weiss and Serotaa and the state. >> My understanding and my speaking to them they want to start as early as
September. >> But how long could >> they would file a lawsuit? How long could it technically last? >> Something like that would be expedited. So, it's not going to be a jury trial. It's going to be like a a hearing. >> Is it possible that it could last for more than a year? >> I don't think so.
>> I don't think so. But >> is it possible? >> Well, it could go to the Supreme Court like the initial ruling is going to come up. >> It could be appealed and this whole process. >> Well, it's going to go to an appeal. There's no way a trial judge is going to make but it has to go to a trial judge first. So hypothetically, if the composition of this commission was
different and two of us have been very against the zoning in progress, if there was a different composition up here and it and we rescended our zoning in progress, you may not have a commission that was
favorable to reinstitute it >> right in the mix. You're right. Also, Lee, is there any benefit to getting into this case? I know it's a separate matter, but it is related. Getting into this case and each of us
having an opportunity to talk to those lawyers and get a sense of whether or not rescending this is the best move instead of preemptively doing it. Is there a possibility that us each individually getting to talk to
those attorneys before making this decision might prepare us to make a better decision on rescending this? >> Well, it's my understanding that some of you have already spoken to at least one of the lawyers. But as as a as as a municipality that has signed on to the
case and joined the case now having that kind of a relationship with that firm >> if we so I don't know that I when I spoke to her I actually posed the question she wouldn't answer it for me. She goes you need to make that call basically.
>> Is it possible is it possible that that could give this board >> more information to make a better decision with whether or not to resend this? I obviously anything's possible. My understanding is we're not going to have like a
when we hire lawyers here at city outside lawyers, we have like the attorney client sessions and so forth. We have a direct individual relationship. You know, we're going to be in a group of municipalities and counties and it's not going to be the same relationship. how she described to
me, you know, we're not even going to have much decision rights in the case that the law firm, how it was described to me, is going to be making the majority of the decisions. They will be communicating with the cities, but it would be
a little um disorganized to have, let's say, 10 join or 20. I mean, you can't have 20 boards appear at an attorney client session and be all who who makes the decision to do what. So, it didn't
seem like we would have a direct uh >> direct relationship with the law firm in in in >> but right now we don't know and it is possible that that could inform us to make a better decision here. Is it also >> to rescend or join the lawsuit? We see it seems like we're talking about two
separate >> No, we're talking about rescending. Is it also possible that joining that case might provide us some amount of shield with regard to lawsuits coming in? It would make sense to me that if you are somebody who is looking to sue the city,
looking at that case transpiring, it may make more sense to wait and see what happens from all parties except for, you know, unless you got an axe to grind, which I'm sure there's some of that. >> We could always raise a defense in a
lawsuit saying, "Hey, we are filing a lawsuit claiming it's unconstitutional." >> Correct. It's in litigation. >> But I want to give you I Let's say I'm I'm Let's say that the state low I'm just going to give you a crazy exam example of you know in my
mind. Let's say that the state lowered the DUI limits and I get pulled over for a DUI and well judge I I I shouldn't have this case. I'm I'm challenging the constitutionality of this law over here. I mean the law of the land is still what it is and right now the law says
u that we need to rescend especially if someone is requesting us to and for me to say over here that we're we we haven't filed a lawsuit yet and they could probably file a lawsuit against us before this lawsuit with the other
municipalities gets initiated. Um, but it it's it's a defense you can raise, but I'm not sure like a trial court judge would have the ability to just stay it. It it's the only thing I can say comparatively if like if we lose at a
trial court and we're appealing that case, you can stay the judgment part of it. Might owe uh interest later, but you can stay the judgment part of it while it's pending on appeal, >> right? >> But um This is different. Someone's going to
sue us because of violation of a current law and we're going to say, "Well, we're challenging it over here um with this other lawsuit." I I think it that that case is going to go forward and and they're going to pursue prosecuting us for violating the state
law. And when I say prosecuting, I meant civily for attorneys fees and cost. Uh if we we do challenge it unconstitutional, that's something that could be raised later. I mean, if we if we got a judgment against us for the attorney's fees, we can just appeal it and hopefully by that time the other
case has gone through the channels. But the the Senate Bill 180 challenge has to go to a trial court judge somewhere. They're going to have to pick a venue. I assume in Tallahassee, maybe somewhere else. Maybe they the law firm says that would be more beneficial to be in this court. I mean, people make that
decision all the time. um you know, this court of appeals would be a better venue to go first because Tallahassee is a different court of appeals than for us. So, I don't I don't I I haven't got I didn't dive into those types of questions with the law firm, but they're going to have to go to a
trial court and then it'll probably take a few months to get a trial court ruling and then that's going to be appealed. Nobody's going to accept that. And it's going to go for us, it's the fourth district court of appeal in West Palm Beach, but if it's in Tallahassee, it would be in Tallahassee with the first
district. Um, we it it would ultimately go to the Supreme Court in my mind and it would be it would be expedited, but it would still take several months to go through that process. >> I would agree with you and will agree
with you when it is seen in court and it is shown to be constitutional, but as it stands right now, I see it as very much not being constitutional, and it's unconstitutionality is being challenged by many different municipalities.
>> I'm not giving you an opinion on the constitutionality of Senate Bill 180. I'm just giving you an opinion on on the current state of affairs that we're going to get sued under Senate Bill 180. >> The issues of the challenge by the missiles is really an agenda item for
next meeting, >> right? separate item. >> But but to that point, um if we do resend this, we may not get another chance uh by the time this all finishes up to be able to reinstitute it.
>> After the two years, >> assuming this takes, you know, with appeals more than a year, which it very well could, you may not have a board that wants to reinstitute those changes, which is exactly what we were elected to
do. to do. >> I have to read. >> Oh, you had your light on. Go ahead. Sorry. You go first. >> Yeah. So, >> they're flipped. >> Oh. >> Oh, I see. It's completely >> No. Go ahead.
>> Um, so basically I I understand at least. So, we have to rescend it, but it doesn't stop us from the lawsuit. It's >> correct. >> And in fact, I think it makes it >> stronger. If I was at Weisser, I think you you're you're going to have a bunch
of cities and counties join, but some counties and cities are going to have better facts that you're going to focus on, you know, and and let's say the city of Sebastian, and I don't know if they did anything. Let's say if they join, but they never had a zoning in progress, but we want to do one, you know, they
they haven't had anything impacted them, but we have >> with the strong fact. kind of a question for the lawyer who's >> Well, that's that's that's kind of what I'm getting at, too, because like if if we have 14 days, so we could do this at the next meeting still and table this
agenda item and have discussion with you and your office individually with this law firm. >> Um, >> yeah. To avoid the exposure, 14 days starts today. So, we have another meeting within 14 days. So, >> correct. So that's another um avenue I guess to get more
information to table it to a date certain of August 25th. >> What was the date you received that first? >> Today. >> Well, I got two emails today. >> But one was forwarding a prior email that allegedly was sent to me, but I
never got it. And it was on the 31st of July. And and I >> was told it was stamped though. >> It was they have a record of delivery. It looked like it went to the wrong email address. Okay. >> But then he forwarded it to me this time and it looked
>> the clock is ticking as of today. >> Well, the state statute says that we have 14 days to respond and then another 14 days to amend. >> There's two 14-day triggers, >> which we responded to the one 14-day trigger, right? >> You you have to you get a notice from
anything >> someone demanding that we we repeal. you have 14 days to respond to that by telling them we're going we have the intent to withdraw whatever the issue is and then what you have 14 days to
respond to them but we already had we already had this this is second reading so we've already done an intent to to repeal it that's what we're here on the second reading now so it's my position that since I got the emails today then it would be 14 days from today
>> to rescend it to rescend it. >> So, we could do it at the next >> and then if we don't, they're they can sue in in in court and get their attorney's fees and cost assessed against them >> because you're not suing for damages. Yeah. >> You're suing >> like an injunction. Yeah. You're you're all they're going to do is get a judge
judge declare they violated the law. That's that's all they're seeking >> and then attorney's fees and costs. Um >> because you can't really do anything that's more restrictive in your land development code according to Senate Bill. >> You can't do anything. Correct. So like >> I I mean literally >> that's completely unconstitutional.
>> It could be anything that's restrictive. I mean you uh yeah I mean we could go on and on and on if all these other counties and municipalities have not rescended. They've submitted their comp plan changes and let the state deny them. Everybody is is moving forward.
And I to me beating on that same drum. the more of us that are collectively doing that versus, you know, rolling over and I think we should all stick together and that there's power in numbers because we're on the right side
and this is completely unconstitutional and ridiculous and it's going to be overturned. >> Do you know how many municipalities have already joinly? I know we spoke about last week. >> There's not a none. >> Yeah. Still the the suit is still >> they're not she wouldn't identify it. Well, none have joined because they're
not they're not going to accept it. So, even if the city of Stewart voted to join tonight, >> they wouldn't allow us to join until they are guaranteed 10 people joined. >> So, even if city voted on it tonight to join, we wouldn't be joined until they
told us 10 people had joined and it was a lawsuit. So, as of right now, there is nobody that's officially joined and officially challenging it. I think there's like four or five at least that have signaled interest in >> So, so where your consensus and where you stand would be to wait for the next
meeting and then between now and then >> speak to the attorneys. >> Um >> I don't know. It's >> even I don't even know if you're going to have enough time in the next two weeks to really iron that out with them. >> I would want to wait until we're able to do that before I was to resend this.
Right now, this is live. I don't want to kill it. >> I want this to stay. I want to submit our comp plan changes to the state and I want to get into that case. I want to be able to talk to them and then get a sense of, hey, you're okay if you rescend it. Don't worry. Or
>> listen, you should hold on to that. You guys are being rejected by the state. Your comp plan like just like Manatee County did, you know, and that's the position I I'm I'm in is I want to wait to get into that case first u before preemptively rescending this on on our
own. Mayor, >> Commissioner Gob. Okay. >> Um, just to add to what Vice Mayor Collins said, um, the the back end of that is if we rescend it, this large case takes 3, four years, the composite
of this commission could be different. Yes. >> And all of those changes that we worked so hard to do and never now getting into the comp plan changes will be null and void. They'll be gone. Uh and in the meantime, all of those changes that we did to restrict certain things will now
go back to July of 2024. >> And there will be people who are going to say, "Well, this is the time to now put in for those projects and whatnot while they're under the old." >> So, for for what it's worth, the day that the governor signed the bill, it
went back to July of 2024 immediately. Yeah. So, it's already been there and we haven't had a single application. Well, I think with it getting a lot of, you know, a lot of press now, people are beginning to realize, I mean, I think there's one point in the in the bill
that says if a developer or a person feels it's burdensome, well, then you now have to prove what is burdensome. >> No, that means anything. >> Yeah. I mean, so that's an open and I think people are starting to read it and starting to realize they can just take municipalities to court or they can go
back and they can get things done that they weren't able to do when municipalities made changes. >> If they don't stand up now, it's going to be worse next. >> What they're saying is the Alamo >> they can take they can take municipalities to court that don't rescend it. as it relates to the city of
Stewart, at least the the developers that I've talked to, regardless of what bills you guys or ordinances you guys passed, if they want to do live local, they
could still come in and build apartments at maximum density and maximum height. So, it doesn't affect multif family at all regardless because they can do the live local and there's no minimum size to live local. you can build a live local of four apartments and make two of
the apartments $2,500 a month and qualify and move forward. So, it doesn't really apply to that. And I think that that was the bigger overreach of the state statute between the two. >> I think all three and by the way, under
live local, they don't come before us. >> Yes, I know. >> And if you're looking to sue the city, if this does get overturned, you're paying the legal fees. I I think that's worth mentioning. >> The people who sue will not we will not be paying those legal fees if this gets
overdone if it gets reversed, but they won't pay our fees. >> They're not going to pay our fees, but they're going to pay those legal fees that they So, if you got an axe to grind and you're just trying to sue us over the zip effectively, you're going to be paying those legal fees when this gets overturned because it's not constitutional.
>> So, I not because I I I get that feeling of being on defense and I don't like that. It's not just us paying legal fees. If this gets overturned as those legal fees, >> in the event that the commission is voting not to overturn this ordinance,
then tomorrow at the staff meeting, I will be asking Mr. baggot to instruct the development department that they have to now apply code that's contrary to the current
Florida law because you're instructing him right now that you want because you want him to apply the zoning in progress adoption not Senate Bill 180 >> correct throw I want you to throw those boxes of tea into the water
>> and SB 180 is in direct conflict with the Florida Constitution itself. >> Correct. >> Well, we haven't had any applications, Mike, have we? >> Well, every application we have, like Kai, the guy that's doing the pizza place, I don't know if there's any impacts, but it has to be re-reed under
the old code. >> C Coast Bank will have to go back in and be reviewed. I think it only applies to mixed use and to residential, but I I don't know if there was any of the other setbacks or other nuance stuff. So, I
don't think those apply. And I think they'll be able to quick jumps. But if there was anybody applied for a shed or if anybody applied, I know that somebody sent in a request as it related to the use of a um a guest house or whatever
they had to use it as their own personal home office. So that will obviously be done. And if there's any shared parkings, those would be um addressed. I don't think it's significant at this point. I know we haven't had any multif family applications,
>> but um I don't know about the rest. I have to ask development. And regardless, the real question is moving forward, it's it'll be the city attorney will have to give a an opinion tomorrow. >> When when did we finish our zoning in progress, Mike? >> September 4th. >> No, when we started,
>> sorry, March 4th. >> So, we finished it March 4th. Does that mean anything from March 4th until now would have had to have meet the new land development code? have to go back and address. >> So has >> so from March 4th until the governor
signed my billion is um Jody has there been any applications that are just on hold? >> No. From March 4th until the governor signed it, we went processing it with the zoning in progress in place. >> Okay. And then when the governor signed the bill making it void like whatever
that was 30th, July 1st, July 2nd. >> So between June and now >> there has been no applications processed cuz you don't know what development code that it falls under. Jody, >> no. >> No. >> Her instruction from me was to apply the
zoning in progress when it was adopted. Then that was applied until >> the legislature passed Senate Bill 180. Then we were in a window for about two weeks waiting to see if the governor was going to veto it. At that time we were
dragging our feet. When it got vetoed then we said okay now we know or not vetoed a signed signed >> then we said okay now we know that the state has rescended it. So then we retreated we treated state laws any
August 24th of last fall of 2024 is when it was what the Senate Bill 180 said. So whatever the law was on August 24th of 2024 is what has been applied since then. >> Okay. And then Vice Mayor Collins is
saying to make it applicable to the new >> now, right? It's going back to the zoning in progress law contrary to the state law. >> That's what Manatee did. That's what a lot all these other municipalities have done is submitted their stuff and let the state deny it.
>> Which is comp plan changes. >> Those are comp plan changes, right? >> Yeah. >> Hold on to your code. Do not rescend your code. Send in your comp plan amendments and let the state you know. >> I think there was one that sent it in and the state rejected it. >> It was orange county manity.
>> That can happen. >> That's that's my point. >> Has anyone talked to Florida League of Cities? I know Mayor Rich, you talked to them quite a bit. What's their consensus on it? There's they don't understand our concern about this one because our existing code >> who did you speak to >> specifically
>> our existing code I've talked to a number of >> I understand >> our existing code is still in place as Mr. Martell indicated what you're going to end up doing is pushing everybody over to live local. >> Is there anyone I should >> because they're going to go to live local.
>> Why? If they want to develop, they'll just go to live local because then it never comes before us. >> That's purely administrative and we lose all control. >> No. >> No. With with the >> Have you seen the prop? >> No. >> Have you seen the proposed development in Fort Pierce?
>> What? >> That's under live local. >> That's going to happen either way. That has nothing to do with our zoning in progress. If that if somebody's going to do that, they're going to do that anyway. This is fear-mongering over the zoning in progress. >> Well, it's not fear-mongering. If if you're the city commissioner for
>> this is a crowbar. >> Mayor Rich, is there anyone in partic I know you have a lot of communication with them. Is there anyone in particular that I should speak to at Florida League of Cities because I can't speak to you outside of meeting? I actually went to a conference in Orlando which was the uh
Florida manager, Florida County and city manager >> um last month whatever it was that >> and went to three different um panel discussions on it and the one discussion was scheduled for an
hour and two and a half hours into it they had to tell everybody to move on because there was so much >> animation going on. But I can tell you the consensus that was reached at that panel was absolutely none. Um, everybody felt like it was an overreach and
>> Florida League of Cities. >> This was the uh FCMA or what the the Florida uh city and county managers association. And there was a lot of Florida League of Cities people there, a lot of city managers there, a lot of county administrators there. And lots of
people were frustrated by it. But the Florida League of Cities has not filed a challenge of it and the Florida League of Counties has not or what do they call it? Has not filed a challenge. >> Who would I reach out to then for Florida League of Cities, Mike, from a local level then
>> to do >> just to get the consensus says that they're totally against it and I'm >> um you can call you can look on their website and call everybody on their board. >> No problem. So I don't know myself. No, that's the that's the uh Treasure
Coast League of Cities. >> Florida League. >> Um the the Florida League of Cities on their website. >> Provide a name >> to the clerk and she can provide it to you. >> Right. >> Thank you, Mayor Rich. >> You can go on and look at this. >> But as Mr. Martell says, they have not
>> and this is what they do, but they have not >> chosen to join a lawsuit in opposition to this. >> I I don't know if they're going to or not. I don't know. Um, so if you go on their website, they have a legislative resources page and then
they have issue specific resources and they have um Casey Cook, chief of legislative affairs, Charles Chapman, legislative consultant, David Cruz, legislative count counsel, Rebecca O'Hara, deputy general counsel, Matt
Singer, legislative advocate, Sam Wagner, legislative advocate. So, and I'll forward that website to you right now. Um, >> but everybody's going to be in Orlando the next couple days, >> right? At the League of Cities meeting, >> the annual meeting. So, >> but you're that's who I would suggest
reaching out to. >> Okay. Yeah. I'm just curious. I not to harp on you, Mayor Rich, but when you say something, I'm just curious because like if you ask me who I speak to, I'll gladly give you the first name, last name, cell number, email, whatever you want. I believe in transparency. And if you ever have a question for me, by the
way, Mayor Rich, I'll be glad to answer it on the DIS because that's the only time you and I can communicate. Other than that, I have everyone blocked up here on my personal cell number, so they can call or text me. That includes city manager, too. No offense, Mike, but it's just easier because I don't have to worry about public records. It's easier
to have a phone call. But yes, I I believe in that and uh that's why I'm here. >> Okay. Are we done with questions to Mr. Mortell and Mr. Bagot? >> If so, is there >> Mr. Mayor? clerk. >> Okay. So, um
I definitely don't want uh erosion of home rule. Like I said before, I think the three things that I that we got out of the um the zip, the the um parking uh
requirements in some land use areas and the 0.5 unit and then the East Stewart code and the East Stewart code was the biggest area that was changed and we had probably one of the most um involved
public hearing even So I I didn't think that we had followed even though we had public input that we had followed um a very thorough procedure to make the type of changes that we were asking for in the the zip process. But at that
meeting, people had lots of uh questions and lots of um input. And they the last thing they asked before we finally adopted the zip was remove East Stewart and give them a chance to have more planning meetings
and more opportunities to talk about that area and to look at the land uses in that area other than what was being suggested uh during the zip process. And so that
is my biggest thing with this um process is that I really think that people were a little bit shafted in that whole um uh process. uh in that the biggest thing that came out of the the um the ZIP
process was the you know restrictions creating additional restrictions for commercial uses and particular locations in the East Stewart area for developing uh additional
housing in the future. Um I know we have you can look and see all the discussions that went on but I think people still wanted to have additional discussion that's why whenever it has come up with regard to the uh
um the the the the um I guess the whole idea of of home rule restriction and uh the state preempting us. It has been a a very um
constonation for me because I want to make sure that the state doesn't use every opportunity to erase our um ability to have home rule. But at the same time, that thing was added into this change during the zip process. And
when we get this back from the state that says that anything that has happened in the rules after these hurricanes and and it was all included just like um Commissioner Gelby mentioned the sections. Um, I just I
really have misgivings and I think that the best thing to do would be for us to adopt at this time uh, ordinance number 2543 2025 and we can always work on some other
things at further down the line. I think we're setting ourselves up for additional lawsuits and uh I know that uh you've mentioned about having 14 days that's cutting it very close and people
are ready. people were ready when we were there at the last meeting. I think on the 20th of um one of those months, March or April and we had a date in at the 10th Street rec center and people
were ready and they had their arguments. Now, I don't know if their arguments are going to hold up uh if these 10 cities do join in and they put forth arguments. Um but those folks were ready as to why
they thought that um what the city was doing, the process that the city was following at the time. And that's my thing is that the process that we followed and the the way that we responded to the citizens, I didn't think that um
uh it was uh it was a fair chance. So that's why I have this crossroads here and it's kind of like splitting ears. Um but I do think that I um we should resend and we should do it tonight. I
hear that there's talk about trying to table this particular item number 13 until the next meeting. And I'll ask Mr. bag it again before I make my motion official about ordinance 2543
2025. If we put it off and have it con be considered at the August 25th meeting are we um running out of time at that time? >> No.
As I mentioned to you, technically I think that that the the meter starts running 14 days from today. So the next meeting is within 14 days. So we just have to take action to resend within 14 days. Uh there is a a question of when I
initially got the email, one of the one of the u objectors sent me an he sent an email on July 31st. It appeared that it went to the wrong email address. And then he forwarded that email to me today and said I never responded to his other
email, but it looked like it was a different email address than I got today. So it looked like an incorrect email address, but even I would have to respond to him within 14 days and then another 14 days triggers. So I responded today and I indicated
that we have it on the agenda tonight. uh for recision and so that would check the box for the first 14 days. Now a new 14 days starts that we have to actually resend within and I it's my opinion that starts today and and so
next meeting would fall within that 14 day. >> But what if we fail to rescend it? Isn't that then >> effectively saying we'll find out? >> Yeah, they they will they have the option of suing us and then they're we'll be entitled to attorney fees and call. That'll be the that'll be the
issue for next week's meeting because then we'll ask you I don't know if those attorneys would defend us or how that would work. >> And we could have several people just filing because they're going to get those attorneys fees either way. >> Not either way. >> No. >> If that case doesn't work out, they're not getting those fees paid by us.
>> The only thing that they would get is an automatic injunction. >> Yeah. Okay. >> Um Mayor >> until it was resolved. >> That's a lot more clarification. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Can can I ask you one question, Yula? Is did you go through a
sevenmonth process of meetings with public comment when it came to redefining what a unit was and instituting half units in 2020? No, >> because as a member of the public, I had no idea that that was going on. Where this commission went
>> through seven months of meetings >> with public comment with everybody coming in, even going into East Stewart specifically to try to bring understanding. you've consistently um knocked at the process that we went through in the zip and you using that as
a a reason for why you would support rescending it. But in 2020, the commission didn't come even close to providing the level of community engagement for the changes that it made and even redefining what
units were. >> Mr. Vice Mayor, I'd ask you not to criticize your fellow commissioner. You may express your concerns previous >> I I don't need you to inter I don't need you to interrupt me. I'm speaking specifically to something that happened in the same way that there might be criticism of how we did that process. >> Terms regarding that.
>> I'm criticizing how that process. >> Okay. I I hear you. And at that time the consensus and my feeling was that the half unit was given the allowance to get some Yeah. to get process is what I'm speaking to >> some affordable housing in
>> but the process of community engagement and the number of meetings and the public which >> and there were no objections at the time and it was on the agenda >> but we didn't go through that same process that this commission >> was a comp plan change I mean it wasn't it wasn't a a zip a
major change for the entire >> we did have public hearings on plan amendments but nothing Like we'd gone with a standard hearing. >> People did >> but like things that they wanted changed on bulletin boards and had like workshops and the whole thing because it
was an ear amendment review for the comp plan. >> When the half units were adopted in the >> ordinance, it was not anywhere near as lengthy as the >> right. >> Um >> I hear you >> the zoning in progress. So, I I just for
the record, I just don't appreciate that criticism of this process we went through because I feel like we were very comprehensive, especially relative to past um which is why those half units needed to be corrected in our zoning in progress because
we were elected to fix those problems. The majority that's on this board was elected because of frustration around the way it was handled in the past. >> Yeah. And I understand I said I had no problem with the half unit change back and the the uh >> res
>> and but that's not really relevant. >> Okay. All right. That's okay. It's just a pro. So I'm making a motion. >> No, wait. I have I've already >> Sorry. >> I've already had for a while before you make your motion. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you, Commissioner Clark. Sorry. >> Uh based on what Commissioner Clark had
just said Oh, my mic. Sorry. based on what Commissioner Clark had just said about revisiting um the parts of the zip and all of that, that would be even more reason for us not to resend because we wouldn't be able to just bring everything back just on an
ordinance because we'd now be looking to revisit parts of the zip which would reopen everything. >> It could still be considered burdens. >> Yes. So, I I just wanted to make that statement everybody understood. Thank you. >> We don't have a motion.
Okay, I'm going to make I'm making a motion. >> Okay. >> Are are we making a motion to table this to the 23? Make a motion to anything you like. >> Okay. I'll make and if if nothing happens um today, Mr. Bagot, what is the
process? >> The state law stays in place. >> Yeah. I mean, the state law is the law. >> Yeah, that's currently if nothing happens today. I I I I I would assume that is being tabled to a next meeting, but >> that's I I think the commission's
direction to you was that the staff start applying our zoning in progress law. >> Right. >> I got commission I got the vice mayor saying that. I don't have I don't have a consensus. >> They're not rescending it. >> They already passed it. >> Well, then I would if they're not rescending it, that doesn't tell us to
take action. It's just saying they're not rescending it. So, I would like consensus from the board. If you're not going to resend it, you're you're directing city staff to move forward with adopting your previous amendments. >> Correct. >> But they were already adopted. >> It's Yeah, it's already I'm sorry.
Implementing it. We have >> dispose of 13 first, please. >> Well, >> yes. >> So, we have we have >> I'm making a motion to approve ordinance number 2543-2025. >> Okay. Is there a second?
Seeing none, the motion fails. I >> would you like to make a request of the commission? >> I I would like consensus from the board on directing city staff to implement the um the amendments from uh ordinance
2539-2025. As Mr. Mortell had indicated we had since July a couple weeks before in I guess a couple weeks before July 1st, we stop implementing it because of the pending uh Senate Bill 180 which had
subsequently passed and and was signed off by the governor. So currently we were not implementing it and we have not sent it to Munichode. We stopped implementing it because we were taking action to resend it based upon the governor signing the bill. The commission voted not to rescend it.
They're not take this was second reading. It didn't this this hearing is over this. So it didn't resend. >> That basically is the direction building department would follow >> the zoning progress changes including beginning to prepare the comp.
I'm hearing >> Okay. Do you do you need a motion for that? >> No. I'm trying to get consensus that that's the the direction. >> I don't think you need consensus. I think it's our action. >> I would like consensus cuz I've got two commissioners telling us to do that. I
>> think Mr. Charter, that's what it is. >> Doesn't matter. >> But if he'd like to hear from a third, >> you failed to resend the change. The ordinance changes are in place. That's it. >> It's not a matter of opinion. It's what
it is. >> Public comment. You want to offer public comment even? >> No, there's no motion. >> But even though we didn't No, >> even though we're not in a motion, you don't want to offer public comment. >> No, I do not. >> There's no provision for that. Why? We're not We're not taking >> the discretion public here. >> No.
>> I'd like to make a motion to allow public comment on this. >> I Yeah, I second. Okay. >> On any subject at all >> on this uh particular agenda item 13. >> Second. >> Roll call. >> Okay. None.
We have a motion. >> Thank you given the opportunity though by Commissioner Reed and a second by the vice mayor. Is there any public comment on the ability of the public to provide public comment? >> Seeing none.
>> Regardless, >> seeing none, roll call, please. >> I do have a public opinion. >> That's more comical. >> What? >> I have a She has a public opinion. >> You have public comment on what? You have a public comment on this item. >> But the item failed.
>> Voting on public com. >> We have to. >> Okay. So, you want to take public comment. Okay. >> I don't think you need a roll call. >> No, just let take the commissioner. >> According to Mayor Rich, we do >> take the public comment one more time. >> Just vote. You Commissioner Clark, please.
>> Here you go again. >> Do we just have a roll call? >> I don't think she heard it. Did they're doing a call on that. >> You've already called. >> Okay, Commissioner Clark. This is to allow public comment on >> public comment. Thank you. Yes. >> Okay. >> Vice Mayor Collins.
>> Yes. >> Commissioner Gobi. >> Yes. I think public should always have comment. >> It's a shame that someone has to make a motion to allow public comment, but yes, absolutely. This is who we work for. Thank you, >> Mayor Rich. >> Sure. Yes. >> Unbelievable.
>> And do you, Madam Clerk, is >> I do have a public comment. Robin Cartright. I don't understand. >> Miss Cartright gets a trifecta crazy. >> Well, Mayor Rich is the chair. So, >> yeah. >> Um, so just to clarify for everybody
watching at home, Senate Bill 180 is going to nullify the independence of every municipality, and we are being bullied into repealing the zoning in progress. So, thank you for your non-decision tonight. As a reminder, the proposed lawsuit to protect the municipalities is not guaranteed to be a class- action lawsuit protecting every
municipality. That's up to the judge. And a favorable ruling doesn't negate the Senate bill. More than likely, it will require the legislature to rewrite or amend the bill. And FYI, these developer provided talking points of quote, "It's now a law and we have to abide by the Florida Constitution are misguided and incorrect." And some are
blindly making these statements on behalf of people with a vested interest. What's enshrined in the Constitution is eloquently stated by Commissioner Go in her initial comments as the right to home rule. So, some real life examples for those at home as to how innane this bill is. Treasure Island has proposed a
moratorum on impact fees. In Orange County, developers are suing to basically nullify a voter approved restriction on growth. And in Manatee County, developers are saying that wetland shouldn't be protected under this Senate bill. And according to them, wetlands being protected is quote unquote burdensome. So, here's what's
burdensome to any resident of any municipality. waving impact fees causing the cost to be incurred by residents through probably a tax increase. Nullifying a voter approved referendum, ignoring the will of the voters, and allowing wetlands to be filled in, causing a literal cost to residents to
pay for storm water infrastructure and probably higher insurance rates because now the area might flood. By these standards, we should nullify the voter-approved amendment to support all aboard Florida and negate the bright line efforts because I need injunctive relief from something that is burdensome to me.
But seriously, not only is money going to be forcibly removed from budget planning, there would also be the additional cost of infrastructure needed, fire rescue, storm water management, and schools to support any projects approved by anybody claiming that they're using this bad bill to get approved. And for all of you who say
that development pays for itself, you can obviously stop because the only thing development is paying for are the lobbyists, the development experts, and politicians who voted for this mess and some other bad bills that are being forced upon us. This one removing home rule is especially egregious. I hope the
city city commission and staff and those at the county are figuring out how to better protect our communities. You need to take a stand, commissioners, because you only get one chance to get this right. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Walter Lloyd
evening, commissioners. Walter Lloyd 150 Cabana Point Circle. I'm I'm standing with join the fight with anybody that's willing to join the fight in Florida. I think that we're representing the people that elected
them. Uh others in the state are stating that they are going to join the fight. I understand that there may need to be a certain number before the actual initiative is taken. Um, and I would ask
us to please join that fight. The bottom line is that the local taxpayers are thrown under the bus by the state allowing developers to have their way and we know why that happens. Our
quality of life is compromised and doesn't mean much to anybody when it comes to money in the pockets. Do what you were elected to do. And it it just seems so easy to recognize that everybody from Tallahassee down to this
board works for us, but it seems as though it's been reversed. It seems though they think they can make any decision they want whenever they want and trample on our quality of life without regard. So I'm asking you please
join the fight and thank you. >> Thank you >> Mark Breville. Mark Breville, 406 Northeast Finny Drive, Stewart, Florida, 34996. Um, I I commend you guys. I think this
is, you know, I think this is a great great uh way to approach this. And, you know, we need to rein them in that, you know, it's it's gotten out of control and the residents don't want it. So, you're doing what the residents want. But uh my concern is just a practical one. Like right now, for example, I'm
going to be trying to reopen that restaurant that was closed for a little over a year. So, I've got to go in now and figure out um whether or not that property is going to qualify. And if I get caught in the
crossroad uh in the crossfire of this thing, I'm worried about the situation we had years ago. >> They bar shared parking. >> Do what? the the the new law bars shared parking. >> So, it won't qualify. >> It won't qualify. >> So, I can't put the same restaurant back there that I had before.
>> I I don't know if it's been closed 180 days. The answer is no. >> No. >> No. >> And there's no exceptions to that. The city can't >> Well, you can come through for conditional approval. Okay. >> But I had a conditional approval that ran with the land. Anyway, so this is the thing I'm talking about here. I'm
stuck in the crossfire here. And we may not know the answer to this for 6 years or four years or three years. I mean years ago we remember they built three story um you know town houses or whatever it was in Jensen thinking they had the right to do it and you know four
years later they got all torn down. I don't want to be that guy that puts the money in and then it gets torn down. So that that was my complaint is that what happens to people like me and others like me who are trying to just make a living and you know we we had a piece of
property we bought it with a certain use. We used it for that. Uh a tenants's gone out. I need to get a new tenant in and now I'm I'm going to be told I can't do that. >> You follow the code and you would do a conditional use and if it's not going to create a parking issue there then it
should be fine. >> Yeah. Except at the conditional. I mean, that's expensive. I mean, I've done that. I I got out of that before because I got help from the city. Frankly, they wouldn't help anybody. >> You went door to door, Mark, how frustrated people are with parking traffic. Right. >> I understand that, but you can
understand that. I have to pay the I just will say it. I I'm concerned about that and I don't want myself or anybody else to kind of get stuck in that. Is there any way to approach this from the standpoint of some kind of middle ground thing where we can we can make our case
known? But at least be definitive in terms of allowing people to follow the existing code if it's there. Um I just I just want to see if I mean I it could >> you need to speak with Jod. >> Yeah. Okay. >> Hopefully she'll be able to give you
guidance that's at a reasonable way forward. I have Aaron Hawkins. >> Mr. Hawkins. >> How you guys doing? >> It's uh >> Could you state your name and address? >> Oh yeah, sorry. Aaron Hawkins uh 1616
Southeast Arapjo A Stewart. Uh I just wanted to make a quick comment just to give a little bit of context. I follow a lot of the state uh legislative session and the and the bills that they uh pass.
Uh it's funny how interest align. I have been speaking out against the overreach on home rule for at least 3 years now. Um I'm just glad to see that you guys found something that you wanted to stand
against when it comes to that. Uh but you know in 2023 alone there was over 60 bills in the state legislature that affected home rule in some way. >> Uh live local I actually agree with Mr. Martell. Live local was a much broader
overreach in my opinion than the current bill. Although this bill is also overreach. Um and yeah I just wanted to come up and say and put that out there. You know, over the last 5 years, there's been almost 200 different bills that affect
home rule. So, you know, this isn't just a new thing that has come back into the limelight. It's been a reoccurring situation with our Florida state government. >> Mhm. Um, and I hope that if you guys end up winning this battle that you pursue
some more efforts. Um cuz you know whether it's the more the defending your zip or defending local labor laws or defending uh local environmental regulations that some other places might have wanted to use uh
for their for their city or their county, what they thought was right for their community. Um there's a lot more to talk about in terms of uh fighting this issue on home rule. And I've never been a fan
of the zip. You already know that. I think that there were changes that did need to be made, but it could have been made without uh doing a zoning in progress, but that's kind of we're kind of past that. So, but yeah, just wanted to put that out there, give a little extra context.
>> Thank you, Aaron. >> Thank you for your kind words, Aaron. I have no further public comment. >> See no other items for our consideration. This meeting is adjourned early. I thought it was going to go to like 9
or 10.