I'm calling to order. Oops. Are we going on record? Are we on YouTube as well? Yeah. Oh, thank you so much. the uh charter revision commission meeting on Friday, June 27th, 2025 at
10:01 a.m. to order. Welcome everybody. We have a quorum and uh our our mighty commission of seven is now in six because Dr. Tina has moved to Paris and not Paris, Virginia, not Paris,
Kentucky, but Paris, France. So, we are now down to six. All right. Um Irene Oh, I'm sorry. Uh Michelle, would you do the roll call? Chair Root here. Vice Chair Fannas. Mr. Chair Panny here. Mr. Lemon here.
Mr. Miss Gutas, Miss Jennings here. Okay. Well, our first order of business is approval of the minutes, but I want to just take a minute and say thank you all for coming and helping us wrap up this last piece of business. Okay. Um,
can I make a motion to um approve the minute as listed in the agenda uh from 2024 July 8th, July 15th, July 22nd, August 26th, August 28th, November 8th, and December 4th? Second. Is there
a second? Yes, ma'am. Okay. Um, can the record show that Mr. Kuscus has joined us? Um, the grand entrant. Was there grand entrant? Yeah, it's stealthy. You're in black. Um, all right. Can we have a roll call on the
vote? Oh, I'm sorry. Are there any discussions? Any corrections to the minutes as they stand? I have to say after reading them all, I was We did a lot of work. That's all I'm going to say. Well, we did a lot of work on this. All right. So, can we have a
roll call for approval of these minutes, please? Miss Jennings? Yes. Mr. Kuscus? Yes. Mr. Seaman? Yes. Mr. Penny. Yes. Vice Chair. Yes. Thank you. Okay. Great. Um the second
item on the agenda is um the election results. Has everyone looked at them? Because if they have, I won't I'll go ahead and skip it. But if we haven't or we want to discuss it, I wanted a minute to be able to do that or period of time. The only comment I would make is I think
90% of what we had requested a change was adopted. Yes, it was. Um, so it shows the quality of this what this board did and the work that was done. So, um, unless anybody has any comments, I just I just to follow up on Mike's
comments, I think it it reflected that we were in tune with the uh community and um I do have a follow-up question on one conflict, an Andy question, I guess. Okay. Can you
speak more into your mic because I'm having a hard time hearing it today. That better. Okay. Can you just speak louder for me? Yeah. Okay. I just I noticed that on um maybe I'm not reading it right, but on
14 and 15, questions 14 and 15, it looks like we created this conflict. Yes. So, how do we resolve that? The one with the greater number of votes. If if you with 14 and 15, if you went to the last section of that,
it was it's a simple one. It was uh simple enough. That's how we interpreted it. It was adjudicated in uh I believe you wrote these notes. Whoops. Correct. Mr. Sman, what are we looking at? I don't
know. The resolution section. Oh. Yeah. Okay. Resolution. No, Irene. Which one? Irene did that. All right. So, right. Yeah. No, I Irene.
Irene did that. Okay. So, um it was done by the majority whoever got the larger number. So was the was the the conflict because I when I was reading this it's like all right these two got passed as well as the board of commissioners
recommendations. Is that the question you had? Well the the question is it's just a plain conflict. One says that there is no residency requirement. The other one says there is a residency requirement. Right. So I don't think and due respect of our attorney. I don't
even have respect. I don't think I have respect in it but I I just don't agree with your opinion the on this item the interpretation is that the greater number of votes is thing and I don't I don't they both passed by a majority of the the vote but they conflict with each
other there is a conflict I think it should be resolved in some higher thing than just saying really Okay. Can you speak into the microphone, Irene, so it can be recorded?
Thank you. Yes. What was Okay. No, it's all right, Irene. Okay. My issue I'm I'm going to piggy back on Mr. Terrapy's comments because my issue was
is the way that charter re that uh charter amendment statement was. It looked very similar to what ours was on the first one and it didn't really address not including the department heads. You don't write it that way. I I know you don't write it that way, but it
leads to an ambiguity because the general public doesn't know what they're voting for. Yes, I don't agree with that, but that's a different comment. Well, the reason is is I mean, it might have gone out well discussed in in other
city information, but we have a large number of uh people in the city that don't get water bills, so they would never have seen that discussion. Well, I mean, they've given a a charter explanation and yes, so I I yield to the
to Irene and to Mr. Salsman that the the charter says the greater number of vote wins. So, well, which one? From from my perspective, they were in agreement residency requirement. Here it is. It says right here, if conflicting ordinances are approved, well, this is
it. This is under that general section. Um at the same election that ordinance receiving the greater number of affirmative votes shall prevail to the extent of such conflict under initiative initiative and referendum section 30. Pretty clear.
Yep. You thought we made it. Did ours have more votes or three? That's okay. So now there's no residency requirements for any employee. That's what we're telling the community. Irene. Yeah.
The four charter officials, city manager, assistant city manager, fire chief, and police chief. Okay, that's the end of my comments. Do we need to make a motion to ratify? No, we we don't. I just wanted to um
make sure everybody saw the results of our work. Um and uh Mr. Chair Penny, are you withdrawing your thoughts as far as needing it to be resolved by a higher power? Oh, they they had the higher power. Yeah, they did. I still think
it's it's confusing. Well, it it is, but it they resolved it for me. Yeah. Anyway, so that's that. It seems most of the uh down votes were for the dollar increasing the dollar amounts for everything. Yeah. The two and that is
correct. The the approval the two approving for the city manager and then the the real estate value. Yeah. And the five-year planning. So for Renee is going to work harder.
Okay. So that takes care of that. Is there any other discussions? Anyone else have any other comments? All right. Well, thank you. Um, okay. Now, for the guts of our meeting here, uh, review of, uh, um, the Charter Vision Commission's
recommendations to the board of commissioners. Um, uh, before Mr. Salsman starts. Uh Irene had in her package um a summary recommendations the board of directors which looks a lot like what
we had but there were some there were some omissions etc. Um I don't know if any of you went back to the original. Um I guess I I apologize. Would you uh
do we get one, two, three, one, two, one, two, three, four, five more copies of the or and two for you guys if you want it. This is this is the original one. We've got two sections that were emitted, one that was combined and one that had a significant change and two
with uh missing missing sentences. So, I thought that as we review this, it would be good to know what our original words were. So we had that. That was the July 22nd one. Yes. Just the first page. Just the first page.
Yes. Yeah, I had that. That's true. Yes. Was it Go Am now? That's go. Instead of go max, it's go am, I guess. Okay. Um, well, Michelle's not doing that. the I would like to say that it's been a
pleasure. Um I think everybody you know spoke from their from their heart and what their their true beliefs were even though we sometimes uh didn't agree on everything eye to eye. The document that we presented like Mike alluded to was
wellreceived by the community and so it shows that we you know talk things through and came to a good analysis and now that so much time has passed from when we did this initial thing. I've had time to think about to this
particular thing today and I'm not sure that the uh we were tasked with anything other than reviewing the charter and to make recommendations to change the charter and I don't know um how well
this will be received and so I'm going to call personally I'm going to call it a day. I don't think that uh this is just my personal beliefs. I don't think that that we're tasked with making recommendations to the board on other things. Although if anybody else
does that's that's fine. But I just I I don't have a dog in this fight. Me either. So that's what I'm saying. But I'm going to say we had a number of discussions that we decided that items would be better off submitted to the board of commissioners as
recommendations rather than as a charter change item. So I that's why we're back here to readress whether or not what we do and and I think that's an accurate reflection of the uh history of what the
committee did or the board did. But I'm saying I've I've had a change of Thank you. a change of um heart on it. And although the recommendations are good, I just don't think they're going to be well
received. And so I'm going to say thanks for letting me join you. Well, before you run off, let's let's let's pull the rest of us and see if we still have an urgent need to go forward with this. Okay. Okay. Um yeah, I don't want you to
quit in the middle of our meeting even though I don't think this is going to take very long. Okay. I have Yes. Um you know I and I may differ with you because I think
not only are we on the charter, but we're also citizens saying things sometimes that as a citizen you'd like you'd like to see your city embrace. Okay. And one glaring that I see and this is actually for the
benefit of the of the city is you know the the marine commerce. Okay. And and whether or not the city you know there there's a lot on a commissioner's plate and and for us to be able to bring attention to certain
items that we think that this that the the commission or staff should look at or or or take special interest. I think by recommendation I think it's to it doesn't benefit this board but it
benefits the city as a whole. So when we sat here for all those months hammering everything out, it was it was actually like a brain session where we sit there and and and and see what what the community may have needed or or or some
focus or a direction. And it all is is a recommendation and and I go back to the marine commerce as as an ideal example of what we could bring to the attention of the commissioners that they could maybe special have a special focus. you know, the uh you know, develop
additional marine opportunities because that one in particular, you know, everybody thinks we've gone away from being a a fishing village that that has a commercial fishing industry to more of a tourist tourist location. And I I think that's detrimental to the
community that we are that we are deemed a tourist location and not a working port as an example. So, expansion of the marine opportunities. Um, I I that's just one suggestion that was on here that I think I think we need to look at
as far as presenting as far as our recommendation to the board. Mike, I I everything on there, everything you said being well thought out, um, you know, having a dialogue about it and the recommendations
is all true. I mean, the I think I helped write the first um waterways use and safety and and um having to do with the working port and hired the first harbor master who was a um a seasoned uh
seaman who could in an emergency jump on a boat and move it to save other other boats. So, I'm all I'm all in on the recommendations. I just I just I think there's too much opportunity
with this commission to be accused of overreach. So, while I think the recommendations are good, if you guys want to send them, that's fine. I'm just saying I'm I've rethought it for myself and I'm and for me it's just um a little
bit of overreach. Not that I don't agree with the recommendations. I do agree with the recommendations, but boards boards aren't commissions commissioners aren't forever. Um, and and that's why Oh, we'll revisit. I don't want to wait I don't want to wait five years to
remind them. Listen, it was great and I enjoyed all the uh the dialogue and the back and forth and um I I think we did a lot of good as as bested by the uh electorate. So, it's always fun to uh
spar with Andy. Well, we still have a quorum even with Mr. Chair Pany's departure. Does anybody else have uh issues to that level that they're going to depart? I don't I don't have issues, but I but I would say I think it's it's partly how we couch this when it's
presented and and I think we do have a mayor at the moment who was very involved in our process here also and I think he's expecting us to come with I agree with these things. If if if we want to take just a minute and talk
about Mr. Chair Panty's observations. I mean, we have the option of just um putting this forward as you know recommendations from four people. We can do that. Personally, on the other hand, I think that since this came out
of our deliberations, I I think it's important to say uh oh, by the way, I this is this these are these are things that we think we would recommend you take under consider. I think recommendation from a person as opposed to a body
I think the the body itself of this this board has to uh if if that's what they want to do has to move forward with a recommendation not an individual. I'm with Mike on this. Okay. Mike with your other comments also. You know I I think
a lot of these things uh pertain to a lot of what's uh in front of the board of commissioners right now. I know that there was a lot of discussion about hiring a market company to rebrand because you know uh sponging or education about sponging
blah blah blah and so marine commerce committee would you know kind of augment what they're trying to do you know from a marketing point of view. So I think all of this stuff has you know impact and I think u a recommendation from our
group would just you know put greater emphasis on it. Agree. All right. So, Mr. Terrapany departed. Let's go ahead with um looking at what uh attorney Salsman has provided us. Um
I will just start with um a summary of the changes from before. Um the uh the request to adopt a building height restriction ordinance has been omitted. Um Mr. Mr. Salsman, would you comment on
why that paragraph was submitted? I think it was just an oversight. So, that should be included back in. Yes. Okay. I think any of the ones that are not in there, they might just be oversightes on the document that I had. Okay. That I was looking at. Um, let me
just We just had a visitor come in. Uh, let's provide him with paperwork. and and if possible if possible uh just thank you for the visitors that you are commissioner. Uh uh is it all mind if I make a comment? Go ahead. to just give
you uh Mike an idea where where we're at. Um, one of the things that we're discussing is, you know, we've gone through this process and and we've labored this a lot of months and there are certain things that are outside of the charter, but that we discussed that
we felt that as a recommendation to the commission to give it some thought in in future planning, which is outside the scope of a charter, but would be as far as where we're concerned is the city should, you know, whether it's the
city's best interest or can the city do it? But um that that there should be some acknowledgement if in fact it is in the city's best interest to look at some of these things. Right. And m uh Mr. Commissioner, would you sit over here so
we can see you? You're behind the podium for me. Thank you very much. Can you see him? Oh, I can see him. Thank you. And thank you for your time coming here today. Yeah, we um um that was a great summary. Thank you
very much. Um okay, so that that was the first one. Uh the last one on repair the sidewalks budget for the setup of plan for repair and future funding was also omitted. Um ironically, they're replacing the sidewalks in front of my building. So
we're there's there's moving forward. So, in the plan in the plan, yes, it's part of the plan. Um, well, that was our recommendation. Let's get going on this. All right. Um, would that
was that omitted by oversight or was that admitted on purpose? Nothing was admitted on purpose. Okay. All right. Nothing. So, we we would not edit what the board wanted. If we just missed it, we missed it. I That's fine. Um, there were two that were combined. One was
request the city maintain CLG status and then follow the city's established guidelines when allowing changes to our local and national historic districts. Those two were combined to require the city to maintain CLG status and follow national historic guidelines for our
local and national historic districts. Um I have a problem with combining them. Uh, but I did want to point that out because of uh of the difference.
Any concerns? No. Okay. All right. So, we accept that. Um, there was one that had a significant change which it said improve and expand public outreach to citizens to increase
involvement in their city government. consider an active recruiting process where critical skills to a board are mapped to citizens and then ask those citizens to serve. That's been changed to impro improve board efficiency. Consider expanding the use of juries for
projects as used by the public arts committee by other boards. That's completely different. That is completely different. Yeah. Um, and I I think the the scope of that discussion was that when we looked at our our citizen boards was there are people in this community
have special skill sets and having somebody sit on a board just because a resident I'd rather see somebody with a skill set sit on a board than somebody with no skill set fill a seat to fill a seat and and and so if there's a
recruitment, you know, is to recruit somebody that has a some skill sets uh for that purpose. Um, and it makes it actually makes a board run better and and and not only does it run better, and I have found this in planning and
zoning, is that when you vet when you vet a applicant, the the questions that you're vetting the applicant on are actually material and important to to the application process and not somebody asking some a stare
question that really isn't relevant to this is this this discussion is not whether or not that's important. It's to understand why that might have gotten omitted by our and that's why and that was our intent. Right. No. And I I think we need to include this back in. Um so
we'll consider this an omission that would be included, Mr. Salsman. Absolutely. Okay. And then the qu the question then that comes to our commission is whether we include their additional statement that
says to improve board efficiency consider expanding use of juries for projects as used by the public art committee by other boards. Uh having sat on the public art committee uh the use of a jury is in the public art
ordinance. Okay. So, uh, I don't know whether it exists in any other ordinance. I I'm not I'm not too inclined to think about using a jury because you could par cherry pick your jurists. Yes. Well, not only that, public art is probably one of the few
that's not as traditional. I know that, but but being able to to cherrypick your jurists takes, you know, and and and so you don't want a commission to rely on the the jury to make a decision. Not that they would, but it's better to have
um a a debate over issues than than to have, you know, uh because you we we elect our officials to make certain decisions and not not a jury. Yeah. I I can't picture really how that would be how that would work like in P&Z
particularly. Well, yeah, it wouldn't work because those boards are dealing with, you know, legal aspects of their, you know, particular, you know, focuses where art is kind of squishy. Yeah. You
know, we're No, we're not public art doesn't follow any laws per se, you know. So right the thing is the whole you know jury idea is to uh you know kind of take something away from the public art
committee, put it in an area of expertise of other individuals and then bring that back to public art. So they're not they don't have to obey any laws or rules or anything else. Yeah. It just adds another level of bureau bureaucracy that
we probably just So what what what I'm hearing from the group is we would like to remove the statement that's been included in the recommendations because it didn't come from us. Yeah. Okay. And we don't agree. All right. So that's remove. Okay. So just so you know, I'm going through all these changes from our
original and then I will ask for a motion to incorporate all of those as our recommendations going forward. All right. So the next one was uh under allow PNZ recommendations to be included on the consent agenda.
Um the the last part of that statement got removed. Let me re read the original and I'll tell you what part got deleted. Allow PNZ recommendations to be included on the consent agenda to address better use of the board of commissioners, PNZ
applicants, comma, and staff time. And now this is the part that got deleted. If the application has staff and PNZ recommendation for approval. I thought that was part of the Yeah, that's the only way it's going to get on the consent. Yeah. Cuz because one of
one of the things that we discussed and not not to just look at the language but look at the reasoning behind it is important is when you have a a a recommendation for P&Z. You go to a commission meeting and they have to make a whole new presentation for the whole
new thing and I think the commission in a consent item has the ability to take it off the consent agenda and discuss it. So to the extent there's no issue rather than having the the applicant have to make presentation in in a P&Z
and then go back and do it at the at the commission meeting if it's if they're non-issue matters it makes the the board of commissioners more timesaving and efficient to just pass it with the under the consent agenda than having to just
spend another 45 minutes on on another presentation if it's not unanimous like that. Yeah, meaning staff and P and Z, then it shouldn't go on consent, right? So that has that I think that we're we are in agreement. Whoops. Wait a minute. Let me just finish. So I'm hearing right
now we're in agreement with deleting that second part. Is that what I'm understanding? Uh Mr. um Commissioner, would you like to say something? Thank you. Thank you for all of what you're doing today. Um, the question
that I would have is if a commissioner does pull that consent agenda item, the applicant may not be there to defend themselves. I would suggest that they should be there anyways, right? Agreed. But not necessarily having to make a
presentation, right, if they're on the consent agenda, but understanding that they may, if it's pulled, they're going to have to make a presentation, but that's their fault if they don't show up, right? Um, but you know, for to save your guys' time. Oh, I agree. I It's a
great It's It's a great change. Um, I'm just saying, as you know, they just got to be prepared. People don't show up to BOAS. People don't show up to B&Z's. They just think it's just a cart blanch and that's their fault. Yes, I understand. Just we may need to just put
that in as a a disclaimer or whatever wording that we need to do before they they apply. I think if staff advise them, you're on the agenda, be prepared to make a presentation, but you may not need to. You may not. Exactly. Exactly. Yeah. Thank you. All right. Thank you
very much, Commissioner. Okay. So, we're going to go with that one. Um the next uh sentence that got deleted was on the section that said, "Charter Revision Commission recommends keeping civil service board." Um, the sentence that
got deleted was appoint and maintain a membership for the civil service board. I know we went through that quite a bit. Oh, we sure did. We sure did. And that's why I was uh Yes, Mr. Salsman. No, no,
we're not. Okay. Um, so uh I would recommend that we ask for that to be reinccluded. We agreement. Yeah. All right. Now, um on the statement here with revitalize
the Marine Commerce Committee on our original, we said C summary, which was the second page. Um it's been what what's on the revised uh uh versions as instead of C summary
it says charter requirement or ordinance and I would like to see that charter requirement or ordinance deleted and go back to C summary which is a separate what is the separate document here that we had summarized
what we wanted to see. Well, I I'll be honest with you. I don't mind it being a charter provision. Uh but that's not what we that's not part of our recommend that was not part
of our recommendation. Right. Well, that's why this is this charter requirement ordinance has like shown up. We were putting it forward as a recommend. I'd love to see it I'd love to see it recommended as ordinance because we can't adopt ordinances, right? But we can recommend we could
recommend that that the commission cuz it's a suggest it's a suggestion that they do this. So what's the use of having one uh uh you know term of commissioners and a
mayor do something then the next term does not and folds it as opposed to if it would so recommending an ordinance would require you could disagree with it would require the commission to at least have in you
know whether uh uh you know uh port authority things like that and that's why we'd have to look at the all those conditions. So I let's let's re let's replace with this charter requirement or ordinance as recommend
this be adopted as an ordinance as an ordinance. Chair I just realized why this why the document is different. I took a PDF and gave it to my assistant to put it in Word. That's why we're missing parts of it that I just I was
like what I didn't make this and they translated so that's why there's things that are missing but I'm wondering what this improved word efficiency is I I was like I don't know where that's why these that's why
the terms are supposed to be exactly as the document that you presented today I was like I don't understand how this is different why why is it different they probably used AI yeah And they're not it's not guaranteed to be accurate. Yeah. In um in in the future if if I'm
creating documents, I always have a word version. Well, I think yeah, I prefer to have it in everything in Word. It's not a problem. And if I haven't I was just that's why I was sitting over here going, "Wait a minute, that was in there. What? Why is it that?" Okay.
Okay. So, um and then uh Okay. Uh, can I can I just make a sort of grammatical change under scope number? We're not there yet. Oh, sorry. Okay. So, that's the first sec that's the first page on recommendations to board of commissioners. Is there anybody else
that has a comment on on that? I I want to put pontificate a little bit since we have a commissioner here to repeat kind of what I said before you walked in. Oh, go ahead. Um, the reason we had this discussion, okay, is because
we are a working port. Tarpet Springs, the Ankllo River is a working port. And even though there's a big tourist industry, I I think going away from the working port aspect is detrimental to
this community with regard to the the fishing, the sponging, um the shrimping, those things that draw residents here. and and that sometimes we would lose our focus as to what the
sponge docks actually is and and to spend more time more focus on and embracing or adopting opportunities to increase the marine uh uh commercial marine uh opportunities that Anklo River
provides. Um, the other thing that's that's uh uh I was going off a little bit of a tangent is you've got the Pasco site and as long as we are a commercial port,
it may prevent or restrict because the navigable waters are extremely important to to the vi uh vitality of Tarpon Springs. And I know on the Pasco side there are there were plans I don't know if they're still in the works to develop
a recreational, you know, if it's not if they shelved it now, it may come back and rear its head later on. and and this sort of would help the city of Tarpet Springs come in legally in my opinion to be involved in
the decision-making process on the Pasco side because it affects the commercial revenue and aspect of the Anklo River as far as it reflects Tarpon Springs. So expanding or making use or or
prioritizing or in quotes a commercial uh port um I think gives us a little bit more of a backbone or or or opportunity to defend ourselves uh in the event the character of the Pasco side changes. I I
think I I don't know if I summed that up corre appropriately, but but that's why not just because the vitality of of of increasing the commercial opportunities in the anklo, but it adds a safeguard
to its future as a commercial industry that I don't know you're you're involved in. Let's pull. I mean, personally, I fully support your statement, Merl. Yeah. Absolutely. Yeah. Uh, I also just wanted to throw something else in just
to reinforce more more of what Mike just said with the bounding. Uh, it it it if memory serves, uh, Tarpon Springs is also considered a safe harbor. Merl, is that still correct? Do you know? I I believe so. I know the area where Bell
Harbor is located is is considered a a hurricane hole by insurance companies, for instance, and stuff. And uh the next one uh down I think is Tampa Bay. So, if you're if you're some sort of uh
you know commercial venture out in the Gulf and you end up in a storm, you'd need the ability to come to Tarpon Springs and that would also feed into what Mike just said about the navigable areas and keeping it open because what what what you hear is in the in the the
shrimp boats, the fishing boats, whatever, when they become more difficult, not just because of the the the depth, okay, but when they become come more difficult to maneuver. Mhm. You know, you within the river because you've got
a zillion uh jet skis jumping your wake and stuff like that. They sometimes may choose to to take their their pl whether it's dump their shrimp at St. Pete or fish in or you know somewhere else. Um, and that's why it's important
for us to to uh make it an important uh um um focus on on the commercial industry here. Well, and I I think it it may well actually make a difference to the core of engineers as far as some of the government money needed to keep the
port open and and everything. If money gets tight, uh they might cut some other places, but with the commercial industry here, they won't. And there are some some interesting changes in the industry recently here with Florida Dock and
Dredge has a recently put in a new basin and they have a a 300 ton marine travel lift. It's I've heard the largest marine travel lift on the west coast of Florida. So we are able to pull up to
about 150 foot boats out with the travel lift. now in in the immediate area. Interesting you said that. I think we lost uh some federal money because they didn't believe uh feel that we were commercial enough for dredging and
that's why the state had to kick in extra money in the city. I think maybe had to kick in money because we lost some federal revenue for the dredging. Y'all correct me if I'm wrong, but because we did not they didn't feel we we were we were more of a tourist
location than a than a commercial port and they give focus on on a commercial industry for dredging. Yeah, that's why. Right. And as the uh the city goes forward with their rebranding, I think having an item like this that they're chewing on, the ring commerce uh
committee making that an ordinance that will keep it in their forefront that it's not just tourism, much more than that that we provide in terms of services to others outside of Tarpon. Yes, Commissioner, would you like to speak? Sorry. Um I just wanted to add in
case um not everybody knew uh Deneden shut down their jet ski uh launch along the causeway and which is influxed uh which is what you said so much more to our uh boat launches. Um that's why you
will see more jet skis around. I don't know whether they're going to reopen it or not. Um and the second thing I don't know if you know that as a commission we did investigate um doing the dredging of the back areas um because the uh the
last survey that we did um was kind of obsolete and it was also prior to the hurricane. So the hurricane disturbed pretty much all of the numbers. So, we're having it redone uh to know where we need to put our money. Um because
judging of the cuts. Yeah. Well, not not just the cuts. I'm talking about all of the auxiliary and clo. So, which is which actually what Jim Kianis was speaking about behind his house, the um cremer bayou, the witcom bayou, all of
these have become in low tide uh non-usable. So we we don't know how much it hasn't been done and nobody could even tell you whether it's 40 years, 50 years or 60 years. It's not been done period. So that's what the u I know it's about a year and a half to two years out
from getting the report for then deciding on where we're going to dredge or what we could dredge financially. Thank you. Thanks Mike. Thank you for your comment. All right. Um moving ahead. Um uh
uh well I'm taking that we're replacing C summary in our original with recommend this be adopted as an ordinance. That's our recommendation. Yes. Agree. Okay. And then um Andy, excuse me, Andy is is there still an existing ordinance for
the commerce commission? I believe it was by resolution. Um I'll double check. are trying to get all the boards done by ordinance. A section okay are done by resolution
done by ordinance. Right. Right. Right. Okay. Thanks Irene. Okay. Um so I' I'd like to clean up this first document and then we can go to the Marine Commerce Committee summary. Okay. So, I'm gonna I'm going to go through
and um you know, so much we're back to our original document and uh so I I believe I you all have a copy of the original the original. It would start off with two zeros before
recommendations to the BOC. Is that what's in front of you? Yeah. Mhm. You have a no on your face over there? I do have a no on my face. There you go. Anybody else need that? Did you get one?
Oh, I did have that one. You have it? Yeah. Okay. Okay. Um All right. So, I'm going to summarize that we're going to request that the uh recommendations to the board of commissioners take the form
of the 722 20224 document uh with the date change to today's date, which I believe was the 25th of June, 2025. Oh, today the 27th. Oh, sorry, never mind. Where am I? 2025. Okay. Um,
so the uh the changes that would be made to this original document include deleting the if the application is staff and PNZ recommendation for approval,
removing that line and ending the statement um after the um allow PNZ recommendations to be included on this consent agenda to address better use of the PO BOC PNC applications and staff
time period. All right. Um uh I recommend that we adopt the changed terminology for the request city maintain CLG status and follow the city's accepted guidelines to our
changes to our local and national historic districts. And that change was require the city to maintain CLG status and follow the national historic guidelines for our local and national historic sites. And on the last item, revitalize the
Marine Commerce Committee. Replace the parentheses C summary with uh it's recommended that this be adopted as an ordinance and not in parenthesis. just put a period there and then the statement is would recommend this be
adopted as an ordinance period. Um uh and as a scriber error I mean correction changing goax to Gulf of America. Well wasn't scrier's error at the time it was done. No, I agree.
But we might as well be current. Um, and I can provide a copy of this to you in order so we don't have to do this again. All right. So, I'd like a a motion that uh accepts those changes.
Motion to accept. I have one sort of general question. I'll second it first. Second discussion. We can discuss. Okay. Uh, I'm just wondering, and I mean I I don't have a dog in the hunt or anything
particularly, but should we have an opening paragraph that kind of explains how these came to be and and why we're submitting the at this time? Mike's words. Yeah, I think that makes sense. Yeah. To kind of and to to make it clear
to the BOC that we're not trying to tell them to do this. were suggesting that they consider these things. I I don't know if I could rephrase what I said, but I'm sure Well, you're an attorney. I'm sure. Yeah. But try to remember.
Well, it's recorded. You can go back. There you go. Ba basically, it was going through this process and I'll just explain it and however you want to do a preamble or intro into it. I'll I'll let the attorney come up with something like language for that effect. But during the
the the the process of this committee, there were things that were discussed that were not appropriate for a charter provision. However, in looking whether sitting on this committee as a citizen or or a member of this committee, there
were certain things that came across our desk that were not charter appropriate but appropriate for the consideration and and rec to the city. Uh and so we decided to make recommendations of what we thought the commission need may need
to not necessarily in a charter but whether it's an ordinance or discussion or direction that would benefit the the residents or the the taxpayers of the city uh for those commissioners to to uh review and the charter the ch the marine
commerce being for me top of my list. Um, and that's why we came up with this uh these recommendations. That make sense? Okay. Yeah. Hold on. I got it written. Me, too. I could talk real good, but I really bad. Okay. So,
this is what I got. During the process of our charter uh revision commission, we discussed items that were not appropriate for charter change in our opinion. But the commission felt there were a
number of items that would benefit the city for the board of commissioners to review and that is the genesis of these recommendations. Perfect. Is that sufficient? Okay. All right. Um would you accept Merurl's
suggestion for a change with these words to your motion? I do. Do you accept the second? Okay. Good. Uh do we have any further discussion on that? No. All right. Um, motion to motion. Yes. May we have a a roll call on the
vote? M. Yes. Yes. Mr. Yes. Got to hear my name. Yes. Yes. Okay. Moving on. Uh the the other thing we had was a a recommend a summary with our thoughts in
terms of what the marine commerce committee um should look like. All right. We had a suggested preamble, we had a scope, etc. And these were just notes. Um
I did see that on what came from um uh Irene was missing items, six and seven in that that was really the uh the extent of the differences on that and Joan had a suggestion. So um may we go
back and look at the original data 7224. Okay. Um John, what was your suggestion? Um item five under scope. Um I I think a preferable wording would be to require
only require only non-motorized uh watercraft be launched in manatee and migration areas. Otherwise, when you read it, it says require boat launch. And it to me it's just kind of jarring. So it would
be require only non-motorized watercraft to be launched in manatees migration areas blah blah blah the rest of it is well um that's item five middle page it's it's just it's just reworking the
order of the sentence I think to make it a little clearer both log guard manage vibration areas if you want to say be launched and operated in Manatee. Well, is it is this isn't all the Anklo a migration area during certain times of
the year? So if that's the case, then you're saying you can't use the river. Well, it's the way it is now. It's just it's not it's not it's only changing the order. Like right now it says require bombs launched in mandatory be
exclusively non non-motor. All I did was change the order of the sentence. I didn't change the meaning of it. So then now we're talking about changing the meaning of it. No, no. I I I I mean I always thought this affects the uh the use of the boat lift the boat launch
site at Spring Bayou. Okay. And etc. Oh, you mean all right that it doesn't prevent a boat from from operating operating but you can't launch a motorized boat. What you're saying during migration season? John just made
a suggestion to change it to launch and operate. Um, I think I think launch is problematic because you have limited boat launches in Tarpon. So, you would basically be putting a an an
wanting to go fishing, let's say, out of the tennis courts to launch their boat, which happens all the time when the when the manatees are migrating to the bayou, you're basically cutting off that launch. Um although if you if we change this to
be um the aquatic protected areas I mean you already have spring bayou that's off limits November through April. Yeah, I think I think we need to look at the term specifically migration to I think it's
aquatic preserve actually perhaps but we then we need to look at the definition of that to make sure we're not completely restricting all all use uh right well this is this is a summary and a suggestion I would
think when they put the committee together they would I I mean this is this isn't to be adopted directly. I know I I I I just would scratch out number five for the purpose of that. I think some of that it's under state control anyways.
Um I think the state has its its fingers in um what restrictions in preserves and manity migration areas as as it is. Why why don't why don't we change number five instead to say uh look at needs for
protecting or manageation period. That's good. That's good. That that allows whatever is appropriate then. Yes. Look at ways to protect our manity population. Instead of telling them how to do it,
let's have them look at it from a larger perspective. And that becomes number five, right? Okay. Um, any other comments on this side? May I suggest may I request a motion to
adopt uh our manity commerce committee summary dated 7:22 2024 with the J date date change to 627 in the change 2025 and include the change of replacing
uh item five with look at ways to protect our manity population. So move as a summary suggestion to the board of commissioners. So move second. We got two seconds. Okay. Mike second it. All right. Um any
other again we're changing gox to goam. Oh yeah. Thank you for catching that. Uh a number three. We change go of America. Okay. Can um Merl would you accept that addition? No change to your
motion. Yes. Changing gox to go and Mr. Second. Yes. All right. Um All right. Let's call for a vote. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. All right. Uh we have now
completed uh our business on item three. Um item four, acknowledgements. I want to just say from my perspective, the staff has been outstanding. Mr. Salsman, you've been steady and guiding us and thank you for your great insights and
all the action items you took and answered for us. Um, I know that's not always easy to try to pick through what seven people really are trying to ask you. Um, so thank you very much. Welcome. Um, Michelle and Irene,
outstanding job as always. Uh I hope that you know in the greater picture of things everyone recognizes how important your office and your you personally are to the city and how it functions. Um, I'm going to acknowledge uh a great
appreciation that we had a commissioner here today hearing our discussion because this is going to be going forward to them and uh I think inform commissioners really help the city make the right decisions in terms of city
business and last you guys have been awesome to work for and with um awesome and I'm so glad we wound up having you know the four of us here today so we could actually make decisions. Anybody was missing, we would not have had a
quorum after Mr. Chair Panty left. So, thank you very much for your time. Um, anybody else want to jump in here on an acknowledgement section? I'll second that. Wasn't a motion. No, no, but I it's been a pleasure working with everybody and
and very educational for someone who's it's the first time for And and and for me, I I'm going to triple echo what you what was said. Uh I would just say not only was it my pleasure, but I think it was my honor to be able to serve and
actually being uh uh selected uh you know as a as a member to serve on a committee. So So I have an older cousin, first cousin branch trader. She's very wise and she always told me, you know,
she says, if you saw how laws and and governments were made and controlled and sausage, you wouldn't want to have a part in either of them. power. I have to say that working on the charter revision commission, um we have
entertained comments from commissioners, city manager, um uh department heads. We've entertained uh really thoughtful commentary from the general public. We've had a lot of
people come in. I don't remember this the last time having so much public interaction and discourse with our meetings. Um I think everyone of the individuals sitting on here has brought a unique perspective that has resulted
in um a set of recommendations that for the most part was wildly adop widely adopted by our city. I know there were some um there was some comment about we had too many in there. I don't think so. I think our charter needed to be revised
and I think that the that the voters agreed with that. Um, so, uh, well done. Well done, everyone. Okay. Um, anything else? Yes. Yeah. I'd also like to say, you know, kind of echoing
what John said before he left, uh, we disagreed, but we did it uh with civility and, uh, collegiality. I don't think there was ever any ranker on on this committee. Um everything got done
with uh I mean it was just such a pleasure to serve on this committee as Mike said it was an honor but it was also a pleasure. I really look forward to coming to these meetings because you know uh everybody did bring their own point of view. We've all had different experiences
you know um uh it was just great and I you know again thank you. It's been an honor and fun. Joel, there's one thing I always tell people, especially, you know, um, in my profession, I deal with sometimes attorneys who I think are
jerks, but I always say, you argue with passion, you disagree with grace. Mhm. And if if people remember that and and are that way, then uh, you know, you have a better result, right? I think
that's exactly what the mantra was for this group. really wonderful. Well, I also personally would like to say thank you very much for allowing me to hoist the gavl. Why would
we pick you? It's It's been a great experience. Um, you get to take the gavvel home, too. No, I had to borrow this today. So, no, I'm not I have I have the gavvel from when I was rotary prison. I don't need any more gables. Okay. So, there we go.
Do we have any further public comments from our public? But you have to come to the microphone. Okay. Getting exercise here today. Um, the only thing I can add to this is I do want to thank all of you for your time. Um, my comment would be
it takes a village and that was what I got to see because I did see pretty much all of your meetings. Um, I saw the passion of arguing and uh, you know, as long as we could all come to an
agreement, nobody was bleeding leaving here. So, it was all it was all well worth it. And, you know, we we do the same thing on the board of commissioners. We have passionate, you know, arguing and discussion sometimes even letting
Are you referring to the band-aid? Because this was not No. Um, but all all kidding aside, you know, I do believe that everybody has the passion of trying to make this city better than they found it. And everybody has their own idea on how to do that. And as long as we could
all get along and there's no fist of cuffs, we're uh we're the best city in the world. That's what I would say. We are the best city in the world. Um, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Vice Mayor. I do offer my apologies for titling you as commissioner earlier. I I I you are a
commissioner, but you are also vice mayor. And I apologize for not recognizing that. That's quite a right. I answer to anything, even my name, my title, my it it's it's all just a title. But thank you. I appreciate it. You're welcome. Board and staff comments.
You want to start with Irene? I just wanted to clarify. So, can you microphone it? I just wanted to clarify that I have you tenatively scheduled coming back before the BOC on the 22nd of July. Yes. Yes. Uh that's when uh um I can be here
to do that. Is anybody else around to come and uh show the a sign of support especially if there's any questions asked? I'll be around. Okay. Yeah, it's the second one of July. Okay. That if
you could come that would be great. If you can't I'll do my best. Um, thank you Michelle. Okay, Mr. Salsman. Thank you all for doing a great job. Hard hard our job.
Thank you. And your dedication was shown on not only what you did before, but what you just did. Thank you. Well appreciated. Um, Mr. Seaman. Uh, I think I already already said
was I. Okay. I think I said my piece. I did, too. Um, uh, with that, I adjourn this meeting at 11:05 a.m. Live long and prosper. Um, Georgiana.