Today we are in the final stages of the permitting process. They have really ironed out a lot of the questions and concerns that came back through the DP and the Army Corps. Um they're in the final stages of agreeing on the the
exact design. and it will look something similar to what you've seen, but um they'll finalize that and we really hope to have permits and expect to have permits in the next I'd say 60 days latest. Um so that's really exciting.
In terms of theformational signs, those have been up for a year now. I'm sorry, the next page. Yeah. Um the condominiums along the waterfront bought with their own money signs to ask people to just exercise caution in this fragile ecosystem. Um we see a lot of boats that
are dragging anchors, dragging propellers. Um people tying their boats and kayaks up to the mangroves, hanging their towels up, climbing over them. So we really just I'm sure there's no malicious intent here. It's really about educating people. And so these signs,
we've already gotten some feedback from people that they've seen the signs and they're very interested in what we're doing. The buoys will be the next step. Um and yeah, you just switched. Good. Um the the intention of the buoys is so that
people can really read that for people who can't see what's on the docks. It'll be out in more of the open areas. They won't interfere with navigation because there's really no navigation there. There's just parking. but it's just going to put information out there letting people know to be careful. This
idea came to us through the Jupiter Inlet Foundation. They've done similar kinds offormational buoys and I understand from some scientists up in the Tampa Bay area that these kinds offormational buoys have been very successful in getting people to pay attention. So, we're excited about that.
So, that's the fundamental plan. The cost of it, I'm glad you moved ahead. Thank you. We're targeting about a million dollars. Um, a little less than 20% of that is the engineering cost. The vast the big bulk of that is the materials and installation. And these
estimates were based on what the engineers told us a year ago. We all know that prices have gone up. Um, but we're hoping that the increase in price will be somewhat offset with some economies that we can find through the BLM. So, for right now, we're using a
million dollars as our target. And I'm really happy to tell you, if you flip to the next slide, we've already raised over $730,000 towards this. It really has become a communitywide
and supported effort. The individuals alone um have raised over $340,000. And that is um people along the waterfront, but people in the wider Jupiter to Questa area who use this area, who paddle there, who snorkel
there. Um and they all recognize how important it is to save this ecosystem. I'm going to tell you a little bit more about the Andrew Red Harris Foundation, but they've committed a minimum um we're going to stay on the Let me go back to that one just Yeah, there we go. Um
they've committed a minimum of $175,000. um foundations. We've gotten a couple um conservation foundations, the Fish and Wildlife Foundation of Florida. We um got a grant from Next Era Energy. Um Charlie and Joe's at Love Street has
made a contribution. And um if you keep going up the bar there, we got a nice grant from the IRL NEP, which is the um Indian River Lagoon National Estuary Program, and CCA, which is Coastal Conservation of um uh Association of
Florida, and they're affiliated with the Fishing Industry. So, we're really excited about the progress we're making um and how close we are to the finish line, both from a permitting and a fundraising standpoint. If you go to the next slide, this is
just demonstrating how this circle of or this alliance in this community has been just growing. And so now most recently, we've been focusing on community groups. We've been in to um present to the Jupiter Inlet Colony. We've gotten their
full support. Um we've got the support of recreational groups in around town um who are very supportive. We've had some strong media. Hopefully, you've seen some of the um pieces on TV as well as in print. We've
got local and environmental foundations, municipal and government partners, which you are a big part of. And a big reason why I wanted to come tonight was to thank you for that, and I will get into the specifics in a moment. And we're also getting real traction now with some local businesses. So, we're very excited
about that and um looking forward to completing the project. If you move to the next slide, this just gives you a broad look at organizations that have either written a letter of support, donated money, or given us a verbal
endorsement and references to other organizations, and it's reaching up into Martin County. Um, we've got business that businesses that are very excited about what we're doing. West Palm Beach Fishing Club, which represents over 1,600 anglers. Um I'd like to point out
two um partnerships within this group here and go into a little more detail. First is the Andrew Red Harris Foundation. That's the next slide. So I don't know how many of you are familiar with the Andrew Red Harris
Foundation, but they were founded 10 years ago. Uh Andrew Harris lived in one of the condominium buildings directly adjacent to uh these mangro islands for two years before he was tragically
killed in a boating accident. Um and he was an avid snorkeler and fisherman and his parents in his memory set up the Ander Red Harris Foundation with the mission of enhancing and protecting the marine environment in northern Palm Beach County. So, they're the ones who
you've probably heard have been responsible for installing over two miles worth of artificial offshore reefs off of Jupiter and Juno. And they over the past several years have been talking about finding an
inshore project to work on because a lot of their donors don't snorke or don't scuba dive and they want something inshore to be able to snorkel around, look at um and so forth. And so Scott Harris, Andrew's father, about seven years ago started really looking at how
these mangro violence we're all talking about could be restored. And he decided he just really didn't have the bandwidth to do it. And um so it was very very fortunate that Joe Chason from the Jupiter Inlet District introduced us to
each other because we were doing exactly what they wanted to do. And so um they have committed two years worth of their fundraising directly to our efforts and that's a minimum of $175,000.
And we in turn are working with the state and trying to name the islands the Andrew Red Harris Islands. So we re a wonderful community connection that is um I've heard nothing but wonderful things about Andrew Harris. So we'll
come back to that in a minute. But let me go to the next slide. I want to talk about the partnership that we have had with you all. And again, we are extremely grateful for the support that you've given to Jupiter's Conservation Alliance.
To date, um Jeremy and Jay were instrumental in um uh submitting an application to the D for um on our behalf. Unfortunately, we didn't get the grant because it was federal money that was coming through and it didn't trickle
down. Um but we really appreciate the effort and the consideration and looking for opportunities. Um you all provided a letter of support as did the environmental advisory committee and I have to tell you those letters have been so helpful as we go
out looking for grant money and go out with the permit applications because it really is a testimony to uh what a community effort this is. Thirdly, you've been so generous with spreading the word among residents. So, we appreciate the full page we got in
smoke signals and on your website, and we are hearing from people. People are signing up on our website and telling us they're hearing about it, and they want to know how they can help. So, we appreciate that. And then finally, um I've had a conversation with Lieutenant
Blank about um I know that the Marine Patrol is out there a lot right now, particularly with the speed limit changing, and we're not looking to ticket people at all, but we just need help in trying to educate people. And so I know he was going to be talking to the
marine patrol about the possibility of just, you know, if you see people tying up their kayaks to these mangroves, let them know that that's they're very fragile and we have to be a little more care careful around them. So I appreciate and and thank you for all of
those um contributions. If you flip to the next slide, I want to talk about two other things that I'd like to have you consider. I know you're starting your budgeting process and so I would ask if you would consider making
some kind of a contribution to this effort to restore and and save this ecosystem right here in our backyard. Um the town of Jupiter did make a donation through the Andrew Red Harris Foundation and it would be wonderful to have a donation and and contribution from
Toquesta as well. So that's one of my requests tonight is for you to consider that. The second request um for us to name the islands, the Andrew Red Harris Islands, we have to go through the state and we are working through uh with Senator
Harold and Representative Snyder. But one of the things that we have found really helps is to have support from um from the local municipalities. So, we have a meeting with Mayor Marino from
Palm Beach County in early September and I'm asking you all tonight if you would consider some kind of a proclamation. Let me just show you what um if you go to the next slide and I can't see what's up there. Is that the proposed
>> symbolic re resolution? >> Yes. >> Okay, great. Thanks. language like this that just would suggest that you're supportive of, you know, recognizing that this is an iconic water body in the village of Tequesta and that the mangrove islands are so
important to that. recognizing that Andrew Red Harris lived right next to these islands and was um an avid waterman and a steward of the natural resources and then respectfully com commemorating that the that Harris
tragically passed while trying to rescue a companion right in the vicinity and then affirming that you think it's a good idea. So, I would ask um if you would consider some kind of a resolution like this that we could combine with the
Palm Beach counties um and then take to the state to make a case for naming these islands in perpetuity for Andrew Red Harris. So, um yeah, that's really all I have. Just I wanted to give you an update and
wanted to ask you about those two considerations and I really appreciate your time and attention. >> Okay. Thank you, Sue. Council, I'll open up for discussion. >> Excuse me. >> Bless you. >> Thank you. >> I have a few comments. Uh Sue, this is Jason French. Thank you for the
presentation and all the effort you've been doing on this area. Uh just the speed limit itself has really helped the safety of the Boers and the mangroves that I've noticed. Uh we all navigate through there, anchor there, snorkel, paddle board, and it does make it much safer in that area. Thank you. the uh
I'd like to support the request and we could talk about how much, but I don't think it's proper to have this council as uh respond to this as a charitable donation. I think that it'd be more proper to have this as an investment in
part of our our property, our waterways. I don't think the charitable donation is the right option there, but we can discuss that further. So, I would be in support of donation of $5,000 as an investment into our waterways, but as a
council, I would like to hear what is that for? You know, kind of a clear scope of is it for buoys, is it for anchors, um for kayaks or whatever that part of your project is for. So, that money is direct going directly to that to that item. Um the other part for
naming the islands, you know, I think before I was neutral on that resolution when it came to us in the past. I didn't completely understand the story behind it. Um so that was very interesting story of where it came from and and how it went. I missed that part uh
previously. So I would be in support of discussing how we would go about uh supporting that resolution of naming the an Andrew Red Harris Islands. Uh that's all I have. Thank you Sue for being here. Thank you,
>> Sue. Um, you said you have a dollar mark for a million dollars. Is that correct? >> Yes. >> Can you start any kind of any kind of work before you hit the million dollar mark or do you have to wait until you guys
get to a million to start? >> Um, so I'm quite sure we can start. Well, first of all, we're well underway in the engineering. Um, and I just talked to the engineers today and asked that exact question. Would a contractor sign a contract with us uh before we
have a 100% of the funds in the bank? Um, I'm waiting for that answer, but the fact of the matter is it's going to happen in I mean, it doesn't all happen at once, right? So, we already have money to start. Um, and we've got a
contingency built in there. There was 45,000 in there for monitoring, which doesn't start until the whole thing's done. The mangrove planting, even though we've gotten the donation, we're getting a donation from MANG for all the mangroves. Um, if there's any cost associated, that doesn't have to happen
immediately. So I feel very confident that we we are well positioned to be able to sign contracts to at least buy the you know that the the limestone uh get all the engineering done and put it out to bid. So um I will let you know
more when I hear back from the engineers, but I feel confident we have a good start. >> Okay. So, I say that because I know you guys received the $5,000 donation and just that's such a drop in the bucket,
right? Um, but I mean, it all adds up. I think the village has done a lot of work already supporting you guys and trying to get you guys grants, being supportive with the agencies, staff, you working with marine patrol, and they're being very partnership with you guys. Um,
I struggle with giving more money without having it very specific like Mr. French said, like what's it going towards? Um, especially knowing you guys can start the work. I like that. My other question to you, and it kind of goes because I've gotten to know the main guys. Um, I'm in the marine
industry with my husband. Have you ever gone and had a booth at a boat show? >> We've not. I've talked to Alyssa Freeman. Um, I talked to her about a year ago and she was very supportive of this project and the only reason we didn't apply for a grant is because we
weren't a established enough organization. They have criteria. Um, but the Andrew Red Harris Foundation did get funding from the from the boat show grant program for this project specifically. And I have written to
Alyssa again um just last week actually to ask if we would qualify to apply this year. So, but we have not had a booth there. No. >> Okay. So, I'm asking that because the fact that you have so much raised already, which is awesome. I'm actually
surprised. I wasn't expecting that much. Um I would love to see you guys, if you can't get in as a sole vendor, partner with another nonprofit. I've done that before with other organizations I'm involved with where they partner together >> because there's over there's at least
60,000 people who go to those shows. The Palm Beach one would be the most appropriate. It's in March, so you'd have to wait till 2026, but we've already started planning that. You have a QR code. You talk to people, people scan it, they donate real quick. >> Um, five bucks times 60,000.
>> Oh, yeah. So, I think that would be an amazing next step for you guys to really put yourself out there, especially since you've already built relationships with a lot of these other organizations who are at these boat shows. Um, I think that would be the most successful thing for you guys to get the next bump to put
you over that financial goal and then maybe come back and tell us the update and maybe if you guys have a little window or a little gap, maybe we can discuss what that looks like if we help fill a specific gap. the naming. I don't really think that's anything that has to
do with us. It's the waterway, which is always a very sticky discussion. Who owns the waterways? There's so many agencies involved. I think that' be up to you guys. You guys are the one driving the ship for restoring this. And I think it'd be more appropriate for you guys to figure out if you wanted to name
them and who to name them after. That's all I have. >> Thank you. Can I respond to that or >> Absolutely. >> Yeah. So, so um absolutely. I recognize that this is not um within your jurisdiction to name um and we are
working with the state, but just like the letters of support that go to potential funders or the perimeters, it can't hurt for them to know that the local municipalities don't have an objection to this, that they that this is something that would be a good thing for the community. So,
I'm not asking you to name them for sure. I'm only asking for, you know, a symbolic resolution that says we would support the state doing this. >> Um, that's number one. Number two, um, so I don't disagree about getting more
visibility at the boat show, but back to your the money and when it gets raised, I mean, I fully would expect that we'd have these things built by early Q1. Um, so that the money does have to be raised by the end of the year. Um,
>> could always the Fort Lauderdale boat show. It's right before Halloween. >> Okay. Let All right. >> Miami one is in February. So Lauderdale is great. There's a lot of local people. A lot of sequestian people go down there. Um, it's just the Palm Beach one obviously is right there in West Palm, but Fort Lauderdale is a huge one and
it's international. >> Okay. >> Probably has more foot traffic as well. >> Yeah. And in terms of um both of your comments about uh uh a budget line item, um be happy to work with you on making it specific to something. You you have a
very general guideline of where where we need to what we need to raise and what it's for. Um obviously we can make it specific if that's something you um agreed to do. >> Yeah, I think if it was specific, it would just help us even put a dollar amount on it. Like let's say the buoys,
the buoys cost x amount. All right, council. do we want to sponsor the booies? And I just think it makes the conversation more direct and efficient. >> Okay. >> Yeah. My thoughts real quick um just along those lines was uh I agree with what you guys were saying. I was
thinking like we could um commit to like say matching Jupiter's amount for example contingent upon construction starting. So then we actually know it's going towards a construction. So that's kind of where because I felt the same like I really want to make sure like the project actually does commence and and
we know what it's you know going towards something tangible that our residents will be able to to see and utilize um the area. So just wanted to throw that out there for thought. >> I agree. >> Hi Susan. How are you? >> Good. >> Thank you for being here again. Um, I I
grew up around this area and I I just I remember when you were here last, which was I guess probably over a year ago, I'm not sure when you and you were felt like you were just kind of getting it up and running and >> it's tremendous to see how far you've come in that time. Um, but I do remember being just shocked. It's one of those
things you you pass by it all the time, but until you see a picture or a series of pictures comparing what it looked like back then and to now, it's just it was just shocking. And I remember I think the one that really struck me was it used to wrap almost or I think it
went under Ko Bridge at one time. >> Yeah. >> And that I remember as a kid like where that sandbar was playing there and there were mangroves and it just never struck me that they weren't there anymore which is terrible. But um but I I'm personally in favor of doing whatever we can to
save and bring back the mangrove islands. I just had two questions, one of which has already been asked twice. You know, what exactly would the nation from BOT be used for? I think I agree. I think it'd be nice to do some kind of contingency if and when they go forward with construction. Um but the other
question I had I guess was for the village. What is our current position if anything on say donations since that's the way it was originally brought up to a local nonforprofit? I mean if we do we have a precedence of doing this or so
I'm going to give you my interpretation of the history of this is they used to um they didn't have discretionary funds set up. So they when somebody had come they would somebody had asked for a nonprofit or somebody' ask for a donation be like sure let's do it and I think that's what kind of spurred the
discretionary fund conversation that council would get set up a fund and if so if a nonprofit came you as a council member can decide if you want to contribute to that nonprofit or that cause um and so typically there's not I mean in my experience here in my six
years um we we don't specifically donate budget items to nonprofits it would typically be through the discretionary funds. >> Okay. >> Okay. So, if we >> doesn't mean that we can't. It's just that you got to be careful. You know, if you do for one, you might have to do for
another. And are we going to get a whole bunch? And I think that's where the discretionary funds came in is there was starting to get a lot of requests for those. So, just being being mindful of of those that were, you know, well, we have to pick and choose those, you know,
those causes as a council. And so, but we can if the council wants to put a budget to it, we absolutely can. You want to use discretionary funds, you can. But just being careful moving forward what that looks like. And I think, you know, my the suggestions that
came up about having a very specific to a cause, I think that's better. >> Okay. Well, yeah. I mean, in in short, I am 100% in favor of doing whatever we can. And as far as the naming of the islands, I I hadn't even heard of the
Andrew Red Harris Foundation. So, thank you for bringing that to our attention. And I I am also 100% 100% in support of um issuing whether whether it's a letter of support or I don't know if resolution is the right way to do it, but something
um to uh you know, show our support for naming it the Andrew Red Harris Islands. That's all I got. I I also wanted to comment on the um donation versus line item. I I didn't
intend to ask for a donation per se. What I mentioned was for the town of Jupiter, it was a donation. They have a charitable fund that they or charitable part that they u gave the money to the Andrew Red Harris for this project. I was thinking more of a budget line item
since this is in the village of Tquesta. Um, I don't know if that helps or not, but we could certainly work together to come up with whatever. I could give you a list of specific things you could apply it to, and you could pick the one that the amount fits what you think is
appropriate. Um, or however you want to work on that. >> Yeah. And that that is critical. I mean, it is in our waterways. It's in our boundary. So, I mean, it's a little different. Um, you know, I that makes me feel even more
supportive of it and it feels a little more right, you know, that it I know it's it's money, right? $5,000 is $5,000 and um but seeing as though it's in our waterways, that that would make me feel good about it. Yeah.
>> Okay. All right. Vice Mayor Story. >> Um yeah, I'm I like Excuse me. I like Jason's um plan about it's an investment, you know, it's an in and I think that's how I can um support this is because it it is in our waterway.
It's it's a public safety issue. It can't be a public safety issue. I said especially when they extended the no zone, but so know I'm very supportive of the effort. I'm supportive of um a resolution for for renaming and also um a one if it's a onetime
contribution. I just know what that dollar amount is. Um, and if it needs to come from discretionary, you know, I can but I'm in support of it and I just look for staff's guidance to uh, you know, tell us the best way to do it. But, but I am 100% supportive of all the requests
that have come in this evening. >> Okay. Thank you. All right. I think I'll take public comment if there is any and then we can uh, decide. Lori, are there any comment cards? No. Any public comment? Um Jeremy had it exactly right. What
happened was people were coming doing these presentations and the councils were uncomfortable saying no. So that's why the discretionary fund was set up. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Any other public comment?
>> Okay. Um, so yeah, like I said, I am in favor of like potentially just matching Jupiters, but contingent upon construction starting or if we want to even get more specific than that, we could. Um, because it is an investment in the in our waterways. I mean, Sue,
it's amazing what you guys have done in such relatively a short amount of time. Truly, it probably doesn't feel like it to you with all the work you've been doing, but it's very impressive. And, um, I totally support the cause. Um, and then in regards to naming, I kind of I
lean with uh Council Member Brandon. I'm just not comfortable with getting into the naming of the island business. Um, so that that one I'm just not in favor for. Um, so how would council like to proceed then on a donation or a budget
line item in the budget? Jeremy, what do you think between those two would be more appropriate? >> Well, it sounds like a consensus that we do want to do it. We could um we will allocate money out of out of one of the funds and I know we have a budget workshop on the 18th. So we will present
that in in the budget workshop. It'll probably under be under probably the planning department and we'll uh dedicate $5,000 toward that project as a line item if instead of a donation type of thing. It' be more of a line item for um the Jupiter and Arrows project.
>> Okay. And then um does council want it to be contingent upon construction starting or do you want Sue to provide a more specific maybe like itemized list of what 5,000 would buy or would go towards? >> My concern, I'm not saying we need to go higher than 5,000, but my concern is
does 5,000 even cover anything? Those boobies aren't cheap. I'm just using an example. So maybe 5,000 just as a round number, but I do agree it needs it. I wouldn't give 5,000. I would wait for fill in a gap later where they're missing, but specific dates is helpful.
Um, another town just went through something similar and dates weren't met and it kept it clear and concise with what was needed to be the next step. So, I think a date of starting, especially if the donation is going to be a general amount that's just
going towards the overall project. That way, a date would have some sort of specificness to it for the investment. Okay? if we're going to call it an investment. >> So, yes, we'd budget for, but then we would know. We'd have to wait from them to get a confirmed like start date or whatever the case may be. >> It's fine. >> Yeah. >> Agreed.
>> Agreed. Like a pledge, whatever we want to call it, but yeah. >> Okay. Vice Mayor, does that sound good? >> Yes, it does. Thank you. >> Oh, you're breaking up a little bit. I don't I did not get that. I don't know if anyone else I think he's good with it. Okay.
>> Yes. Yeah, that that sounds great. >> Okay. And then consensus was a three to two that we do want to do a support letter for um renaming the islands as well. Correct. >> So just to clarify though, would the letter say that we are agreeing to it
being called the Andrew Harris Islands because that basically says we are naming it and that's what I wanted to avoid. I do support them having the ability to name it whatever they want. That's what my support is. I just don't want it to be specific and put it in writing like we want it to be called
this too because that that right there puts us as we're naming it. But I do support you guys. Maybe the letter for me I'd rather have the letter be more vague that we support them in getting to choose what it's named. >> That's that's exactly how I feel. >> Yes, that's how I took it. Yeah, >> I took it the same.
>> Okay. So I I do agree with that. Yeah. >> I didn't want to specifically say we >> No, I never looked at it that way. >> No, I just didn't want to have the name on >> We're all on the same page. But I support them having the authority and the option of what they want to name. >> We're telling the state we're not going to be in the way. We support
>> against it. We will allow them to do the process that they need to do to get it named. So I think we could draft something of that nature. >> Sue, do you have a timeline? You said I thought you mentioned you were Sorry, I'm asking a question, mayor. I don't. Um, you said you mentioned you were
already in this process. Do you have a time frame that you're looking at? >> We don't. No. I mean, ideally, we'd like to have the state name them, you know, when they when we complete construction. >> Okay. >> But it takes a lot of, you know, building consensus and and that's what
we're working on right now, working with our legislators and um Palm Beach County and you guys and and again, I I agree completely. We're not dictating what they're named. We're we're letting them know kind of why we would like to
name it something to the in some commemoration of Andrew Red Harris, but it at the end of the day, the state is the one who's going to make the decision. >> And so we we will bring this back in September as a resolution for council to vote on uh to move forward, but I'm sure
it'll very look very similar to that language that they proposed. >> Okay, that's wonderful. >> Sounds good. Well, thank you Sue for the update and uh zooming in tonight. We appreciate it and we look forward to seeing this project happen. >> Thank you so much for your support and
if there's anything else you need for me um from me, let me know. >> Okay, thank you. Take care. >> All right, you too. Bye bye. >> Right, moving on to agenda item two, consideration of a ballot question for a general obligation bond for the purchase of the one main street, formerly known
as Paradise Park. Jeremy, >> thank you, Mayor. Uh I believe the staff report uh accurately summarized the issue. I have provided a brief overview of the property that has a history with a village dating back to the late 90s. Uh the workshop item for discussion uh
is the potential purchase of one Main Street Paradise Park as we know it. In discussion with the owner developer um of the property, Phil Perco, he mentioned selling the property. We began some dialogue about the value in which um he provided an appraisal for the
property that is attached with some back and forth discussion. Mr. Proker has offered the village an opportunity to purchase the property at one 1 million less than the appraised value. Um the village does uh does not have funding to purchase at that value. um staff would
be recommending a a bond issue to consider um in in if we were going to move forward with this in return for holding the property for us to go through a bond referendum. Um you know, Mr. Perko would like us to lease the property um in the value of $100,000 for
the year. Um previously, and I think I uh gave sent this to council today. Um previously, we leased the property in 2021 for 42,000. In 2122, we had a rate of 54,000, although we only did it for two months to get us through to Questa
Fest and the Chile cookoff. So, the last time we leased it, it was at a rate of $54,816. We would have some additional maintenance costs such as lawn and landscaping, oak tree trimming, and utility costs probably in the 17
$18,000. I would say $20,000 for maintenance cost for the year. So, uh, all in probably looking at $120,000 to lease the property for one year would give us an opportunity for toquest fest and the chili cookoff to be at at that that location if we do lease the
property for that time. So, there is some benefits as well. Um, I can answer any questions. Uh, I think Mr. Davis could answer any questions on the timeline to put it on a referendum. Um if we do move forward with wanting to
purchase the property, we would need to get two appraisals uh ordered by the village council. Um so additional appraisal then than what we have in the backup. Um it part of the the process. It's nothing against the developers appraisal. It's just that the legal part
is we have to get order two appraisals of our own independent. So u with that I can answer any questions that you may have. Mr. Davis can answer any questions on the on the process for referendum. And at this point, it's open for discussion. >> If uh council, if you don't mind, maybe
have um Keith just kind of give a high level to you so the public can hear about that process. >> Please. Well, so if there is an appetite on the council to proceed, um you're you're going to
need to get uh bond council retained right away. Um, if there's a desire to have this on the March 2026 ballot for the voters to decide,
um, we have to get the uh, you have to adopt a resolution um, establishing and approving the bond issue, approving, proceeding with it. And that has to get to the supervisor of elections sometime I think in early
December. And I don't know the exact date. I put I have a little little flowchart here. I put December 1st um as a placeholder, but at some point in early December that that has to get to the supervisor's
office. So that's your first hard deadline. Um assuming that's met. There's some publication notice requirements that would occur in February and then the March 10th would be the would be the referendum. itself.
If it passes, if the voters approve it, then there's additional process that takes place after that. Um the actual bond resolution um would go to a um a bond validation hearing in the circuit
court. Uh that's a that's a small process that would probably assuming everything continues to flow the way it's anticipated sometime in June or July of 2026 by the time I got
in front of a judge. Um there's an appeal period assuming you know bond validation hearing judge approves then there's a you know 30 days for affected persons or interested parties to appeal. 30 days
goes by. Um essentially you're looking at at um you know then bond council would assist with finance with actually shopping you know for for the financing. you're probably
looking at um October of 2026 before the bond would close assuming a smooth process without any any bumps. So, a little little more than a year is is the process. But the
important immediate issues right now would be um getting your bond council online. It's my understanding the finance director has a recommendation on on who he would like to use as bond counsel. Uh I'm not married to anyone in terms of who I
think it should be. If there's someone that finance is comfortable with, my recommendation would would uh be to seriously consider that person looking at their credentials. Uh, and then you'd have to get that referendum resolution
adopted this fall and get it to the supervisor's office by early December. That that that's your immediate hard uh deadline to keep in mind if there's an appetite to proceed and then everything will flow from that afterwards.
>> Okay. Thank you, Keith Effect. Jeremy, do you have anything else to add? >> No, ma'am. >> All right. Council, open it up for discussion. Um, so question that there probably isn't a readily available answer to, but do we have any idea the cost and I might say this incorrectly, but just to get us
from where we are today to the referendum? I know there's going to be additional costs beyond that, but I mean, and ballpark really. I'm not looking for like a hard cost, but are we talking lots of money? Um, or are we talking
just a little bit of money? >> I mean, I think a majority of your costs probably going to be legal fees and I mean, I think uh staff time. I mean, so those types of cost. I don't think you're going to have um significant hard cost. I think they're all going to be built in through staff and and legal.
But Keith, is there a >> I don't think there's I I don't have a number, but I I think the bulk of your cost is going to occur >> after you know from December forward and what getting the referendum resolution
prepared is not a heavy lift. >> Okay. And then like I said, there are some not some publication notices that have to happen, but you know, then then you actually have the referendum and then you have the litigation, the bond validation hearing. Uh I think that
that's at that point next summer is when the most of the costs are going to happen. >> Okay. And and I I sure we you could get a um a reasonable reasonably reliable
estimate from whoever your bond council ends up whoever it is. I don't remember who um Mr. Snider. >> Yeah. Once >> hang was we did a bond referendum a couple years ago.
>> Isn't that the same process? Like so we should have those costs kind of >> Well, you did the referendum for the charter a few years ago. >> Yes. Was that very similar though? So cost could be kind of >> that doesn't that doesn't have the bond val that doesn't have the validation hearing that goes to the circuit court. You didn't you don't have that
litigation. >> There's a there's a court hearing that will happen if it if the bond is approved by the voters. >> So it's >> there's more process. So after >> with the charter once the voters approved it that was pretty much it. We
codified it, put it in a code book and and we were done. This there's going to be more >> because the bond was on there as well >> with the charter cuz there was errors that the public was very upset about >> which we should not make again this time. >> Do not pass. >> Right. So that that didn't pass.
>> No. >> So that kind of >> died a quiet death. >> Okay. >> With at election day. >> Okay. Uh had that passed and had the council proceeded with that there would have been additional procedures. >> The steps you're talking about come later as a result.
>> So like next summer, right? >> How do we remember how much the appraisal costs? Because there's there's the 100,000 that we would have to put in to lease the park. There's the appraisal and then there's the borrowing council. Those are the three obvious tonight. Do you remember? >> We got we got a quote already for one appraisal for $3,000. So you're looking3
to $4,000. I'm sure if we get another one it'll be some more somewhere in that same ballpark. >> Not bad. Um I mean generally I am highly in favor of this. I whether or not it passes, you know, um that's a whole other question. But to me, this is such
a critical well the the three parcels um together form such a critical piece of our village. And you know, I know we've gotten a fair amount of push back from residents as to what it could be or um in the future. So
to me, this is just putting that directly in the hands of our residents. And I I I think that's it doesn't get better than that. Um and if it doesn't, you know, if it doesn't make the vote, then you know, we we tried, right? But um in my opinion,
there's there are there's no one better to figure out what should happen with our village and the residents, and this is this will do that. So, um and I would love to see it come to fruition. Um and I there's some tools out there. I messed around with that PDF that you sent. a
very easy way to figure out what your annual cost would be if it did go through um per household. Um probably around $300 roughly depending on how much your house is. It it's it's real money, you know. I'm not saying it's not, but it also
would allow us to preserve and do what the village feels is the is the right thing to do with that piece of property. So, um yeah, I'm I'm 100% in favor of it. >> Um Okay. So, I actually have a
logistical question. First, the PDF that Jeremy put together, which is a draft of what could be sent to residents if the decision tonight is to move forward. It is very simple to read and follow, and it has the math
equation written out. So, very simple for I think any age to do it. My 12-year-old could do it, and my next door neighbor who's 94 could do it. So, I'm happy with that. I appreciate that. My question is when I ran numbers for some of our senior citizens, some of their
taxable values before homesteads, the average I got was about actually the highest was about 225. So when I did the math that Jeremy sent out the equation to, it's about f a little over $5 a month for that taxable value property.
That's a lot for some of them on fixed income, but I'm actually surprised it wasn't more. But my question goes to if one of them unfortunately they pass away or maybe they have to be moved to assisted living and the family decides to sell the house,
does the number change when the value of the house changes? >> Okay. >> I know. I just want to make sure that's understood because that changes the goal line. Does that make sense? So,
you know, we start day one and everyone has their amount, but then it changes because houses are being sold. So, like one house literally the value is 272. It's purchased and then it jumps up to 5.88.
So, I'm just curious like how do we account for that because that gets us to our goal faster. Do we just pay off faster through the interest? Okay, you don't have to answer today. I was just making sure that's right that the the amount changes when the house sells.
Okay. Secondly, tonight's I mean I get so much feedback about this property and I I've been here a while now, not up here, but living here and I know some of you have been here since the beginning almost. My next door neighbor is actually in the
original house that was built. She bought that from Pratt Whitney when these little Yeah, she's been there forever. Um, so she even has thoughts on this property. This property is such a hot topic and has so much history, good, bad. It used to be a Publix and I it's
been 100 million things. I do know that and I don't disagree that it could be built on, but factually speaking, every time someone owns that property, and this even goes before the owner who owns it now, even before them, things would come
through and the residents just never liked it and they always had issues with it. And then there's a lot of logistical concerns with the shape of the property, utilities, this and that. So I sit with every time this property comes up and
council whoever sent up here passes or this and that the residents always say why didn't you try? So I'm in favor of going forward with a referendum just because it gives the people as a whole a decision as a group. So if it doesn't go through and those
are upset that the village doesn't own it, that's on them. Literally it's not on any five people that are sitting up here. I've seen other towns in the past few years make very large financial decisions and the people get very upset when it's such a decision based on a few
people. And I've been told too in the past sitting up here that council is up here to make decisions for the people and that's absolutely right but at the same time sometimes the people need to be a part of it like really a part of
it. So, specifically speaking to the agenda tonight with not breaking down who would be paying what, what would we be doing with it, that all comes, that's the next steps. But as far as doing a referendum for the people to decide and have it out amongst
themselves, I would be in favor of that. That is all. >> Thank you, Councilman Brandon. I echo the same. I think this is a very exciting opportunity. we're still far far away from the details, pricing, um, proposals, everything of that nature.
So, I think in short, uh, I do support this. I want to see what happens when we have these discussions and move forward. I do think on pricing for the property, um, and further details, we are off. And I say that because the comparisons that we have received are mostly for uh,
development of residential properties that would see a profit in a short period of time. uh we will never see a profit on this property no matter what we do to it. So I think we have to keep that in mind when coming up with a cost. I think that cost should be significantly lower than we're speaking right now. I do think we need to have a
proposal to our residents where they can visualize what that property will be. We cannot just say we're going to purchase this property. I think that vote would fail. Um so some some options that we were sent by uh Jay Hops not long ago. Phenomenal ideas. you know, some of
these that we've seen, if you've visited Coconut Grove or other places, they've really combined a similar park where residents love it and it's just open accessible. So, I think that if we do move forward, we have to have that proposal or it's going to it's not going
to uh pass referendum. Um, the other part or the other question I had was chili cookoff and Questifest, do we make a profit on those? No. Okay. So the cost is a little bit higher than >> chili cookoff is really not our event. We sponsor the event. I mean so the
money that they make they give back to charities but that is um like Tops would probably be the most I guess responsible party for that but it we just sponsor the event and provide some support. So you know any profit that is made typically goes back to the nonprofits
and goes to a good cause but we don't receive any of those revenues from it. >> Understand. Thank you. Uh yeah, that's all my comments in short. I do support and I'd like to see where these conversations go. >> Vice Mayor,
>> um I too am very supportive of this. Um I do know that um yeah, I'd like to put it to the voters. I know that we can't advocate as a council and as a village, we can't advocate for the passing of this, but we can have a a very robust um
public information campaign, which I think is going to be critical along with, as Jason just mentioned, um you know, something, you know, a park, you know, a a concept or an idea. Um, I do think that I'm glad that we have our policies as get two appraisals because
um, you know, I'm couldn't tell you the value of of vacant land, especially that's land that's going to be preserved. That that would be my intent. So, it's never going to be developed. It was, as Jason mentioned. Um, but we also need to make sure that when the appraisal was done, there is a parking agreement, you know. So, we're not going
to get I don't know if we can get all three parcels because there's a shared parking agreement if I'm not mistaken. So, you know, that's needs to be the appraiser needs to be made aware of that as well uh before we go down that road. But in short, um as it was discussed, I
am 100% in favor of going down this road, putting the information through a very robust public information campaign to the public. Let them decide. Um but I I'm curious to as as to what will happen to the value when this shared parking
agreement I I have not read not read the appraisal yet. Um, but I so I don't know if it even addresses that shared parking agreement because we need to know that we have to still give up anywhere between what 49 and 72 spots we have to maintain if I'm not mistaken. Uh, so we just have to really look look into that
and what the value of that parking agreement, what what what value goes away by having to maintain that shared parking agreement. Those are my comments. >> Thank you. Um, so I know I I was here when the last
bond um went out to vote and I actually was not in favor of putting it out to vote because I felt like it was too open-ended. And so if we want to do this again, um it it we need to be more focused, transparent, and targeted with
what the plan is so the voters know what they're voting for because I do think that's what happened last time and why the voters didn't um ultimately approve it. So I I mean I think we need to kind of have a vision of what would go there.
I we can't commit fully, I think, to one thing, but you know, is there a vision for it to be just full open green space? Is there a vision for it to be more of an urban park? Um, I know I've been beating the drum for a long time up here that I've always visioned it as an urban
park. Um, and you can make revenue off that. We could have an event space, like a beautiful outdoor event space. You could um have a P3 for like a restaurant or something, and they would lease land. And lots of times in those um agreements there's revenue sharing. So we could actually um you know pull in some
revenue on the property as well. So I think we really as a council need to have a clearer picture of of what we vision there. Um the residents I've talked to everyone um does seem in favor of of voting for it and taking on that
cost, but most of them and I was very um neutral with my uh asking. I did not give my opinion of what I envisioned. I just um you know was very neutral and got their feedback and everyone was like we want like something like an event space or something that they can use. So
um the majority or everyone I've talked to actually did not see it as just like a full open space with no actual use. Um but again, I know Vice Mayor brought up a great point with the shared parking like how would that affect anything we'd want to do there? Um so I do think there needs to be a little more discussion on
on what we really envision there before we send it out to vote and then um so the 8 million is just to buy it. then how are we going to raise the money to do anything after and I know we're talking about um which is on our strategic plan for this year our
strategic initiatives is a local bill foresta park and we have um pretty big aspirations there so again like how do we balance it um because once we get it like is it just going to sit for five more years because we can't you know we don't have money to do anything else so I just think it has I know we're kind of
under a time crunch but I do think there needs to be a little bit more discussion. Um, so we're a little more uh focused and and targeted on the ask from the community, you know, from our constituents on what um could happen
there. And then I know the per the park purchase policy is attached to here. Do again it and maybe it depends on what council thinks ultimately we would want to do with that property but I mean do we have to follow that to a tea if it's more if we lean towards like an urban
park thing would the park purchase policy even apply like how does that tie into this whole process? >> Well I attach the park purchasing policy as kind of a guide um as we talk about parks. It allows you to you know I guess assess the value to to the residents or
to the village. It talks about environmental, does it connect? Is it you know the green space? I mean there's a lot of different criteria. So allows council to I guess in their mind if we were just talking about straight park to be able to see if it's valued. Uh there also is a process about purchasing that.
So I I wanted to kind of throw that out there as well. So we know that we have to do have to follow some. It is not a I mean depending on what we decide to do with it. I mean we do not have to follow that purchasing park policy. depend on what council wants this to be. So, I
don't know if that helped her. >> I guess I would love to hear what you know council thinks like what do you vision for that property? What what have residents told you about what they would ultimately like to see? >> A legal question real quick. >> So, historically,
um that property and I think it was discussed last time it was up for sale. Could it be sold in pieces? And the previous owner said they didn't want to do that. But legally, you could sell it in pieces. Like you could sell one one square. Correct. >> As far as I know, there's no
>> They're each their own. I'm not aware of it. >> They're listed as their own parcel. >> They are. >> Right. I'm not aware of anything that that would prohibit the owner from selling a >> portion. So that was just like a more personal choice that they didn't want to
do that. I'm just asking that because that's one of the options I know has been brought up to me of you know if the village were to acquire it >> if there's I don't remember if there are unities of title on these >> they had asked for but they would have to be released but if there's not
>> they they could >> I won't speak for the owner I know there's a representative here or owners here >> that's totally up to >> but I I'll answer my conversations the owner is not interested in splitting the property So, the current owner, we had asked them
a little while back and that owner as well did not. But my my point is like aside from making the property if the Questa had again something unfortunately unfortunately that's another option that could be told to the residences it's possible if the village
acquires it a portion of it sold off or leased out. Um for me there's be a lot of options that could be done with it. I think council should be more focused moving forward if we choose this um a general is it gonna be more open
usage or are we developing buildings? I think we need to kind of lean one one way or the other. So usable park with maybe a small building or we we going to do something grandiose with it >> because I think there's a lot of inbetweens. >> Yeah, that's why I like the urban park idea because I think you can get a
little bit of both. I mean, >> and and the way I >> when we first started talking about selling off the parcel, I thought you meant >> after we purchase it, could we >> That is what I meant as an option. It got brought up to me and >> I mean I I was told it is legal, but I
mean that just for me that just throws another option at the residence like >> it's not a one-time purchase. It's possible maybe as design and shares go that gets Oh, that does make sense. So, I mean, it's going to be hard for me to really go down to one or two options. I
think we need to be more focused on a theme. >> So, it's known to the residents, >> what do you call it? Passive park, which I'm not saying it should be for urban park or full force. >> Yeah. >> Development. >> I think we kind of need to pick a
general theme to go in. >> Yeah, that's it's a big decision. I think I'd love to see it as open space. I'd love to see it as a destination where you could go enjoy the park, grab a meal, you know, all that. And also, please disregard what I said about $300
a year. I was doing it on my phone and it wasn't populating the other side. And my house is definitely does not have a taxable value of a million. So, disregard the $300. Um, it's a big decision. I mean, there there's a lot of options. You could sell off one to make some of the cost back
and then or use that revenue to do whatever you want to do on the other two parcels. But then the question becomes, you know, what do they do with that parcel? What kind of control do we have and how does it affect the other two parcels? Or to me it the question for
tonight is well >> the main question is the referendum, but I understand the point of we have we should have some kind of plan going into this. not just, you know, that's just not the prudent thing to do, but for our residents, I mean, they should know what the thought is. Um, it's a little early
on for that, but I mean, I that's what I would love to see, but I also haven't had a chance to fully discuss with residents and everything what they would like as well. But I do know, you know, I've only sat up here for one um potential development on this
property and it got a tremendous amount of push back. I mean I So I think tonight is about trying to figure out um if we want to put that decision in the hands of all of our residents and I that's the part I'm in favor of
figuring out what we do with it. We got to get there but that might take a little time. >> I as well I'm in favor of putting in the hands of residents because again it just comes back to every time this thing comes up res a majority of residents say wait the village doesn't own that. Why
do we not own that? Why can't we try? And the price is just gonna go up and up. So, I'm gonna let them decide. I'll have to live with it if I don't agree with the decision, which the last bond, you know, it was disappointing, but I had to live with it. I understand why it didn't pass. It wasn't specific. This,
you know, and I actually want to say thank you to this owner, too, because there's two of them. >> Yeah. Because this is what happened last time was it's hard to make real estate purchases with prices being so public and being so public and transparent with
these numbers and information. It takes a very special seller to be willing to kind of work with the village on this. So the fact that that's happening is going to even allow the residents to even get this chance. So thank you. >> I'll second that. And please tell
>> Parkco that as well because I know this probably can't be easy for them. But that's really the magic in this whole situation is now we have someone that is going to allow some time. Residents are getting a chance and without that and
you guys being you know respectful to that manner residents wouldn't even get a chance. We'd be in the same boat we've been in every couple years this property comes up. So thank you. I think the conversations I've had with residents, what I've u formed is it's a
an accessible parks and the closest relation would be West Palm Beach Waterfront. It has an open area. It has a splash pad. It has a small building where you can do events. Uh you could even make it to a full-time restaurant if you wanted to, but it's more for events for for that community. And so I
think between some suggestions here in council and uh some of Jay's magic, we could come up with some proposals the residents would really see they all could enjoy and access um all throughout the year. So that's that's the small vision that I've seen in talking with people that I think that's approachable.
Um again, I do think the price is negotiable where we could negotiate some of that cost to benefit to um benefit directly into developing the park, right? to to already have that in mind within the bond. And in my in my in my mind, we were calculating all those
costs to at least get something going on that property, not just to purchase the property and then say, "What do we do now?" No, we we already have a plan and day one we're we're hitting the ground running. >> The Well, the bond is just for the cost of land, correct?
I mean, I put I mean, as our dollar figure that figure that we're working on, I mean, I just put $9 million. I think the sale price at this point right now is $8.8 million. So, but it's a not to exceed. So, if we want to drop that down to straight $8.8 million, which is
what he's asking for, or whatever we just, you know, work out with them, that's what that's what we can put for a bond. But, uh, all the figures that you guys have seen is for $9 million. >> Yeah. So it doesn't I don't think it accounts for like future development >> and this is an I've never been in a
situation on a negotiations on public record. So this is an odd thing. Right. So the first number we see is eight was 8.8 or right and so I I would I would say no to the 8.8 um I would start at six and let's have conversations at that
point. What's the difference between each party and then where do we stand? I think too that more justification would come from those other appraisals. >> Right. >> Right. That's why we even have to do those because the last time this
property came up the offer was six >> and that was too much. So it's >> Yeah. But it's going to keep going up and up and up. But I think that's that is where the appraisals and that was one of my first questions >> was oh wait we're going to do multiple. Right. Just like we do everything else.
Every department has to get more than one appraisal or estimate. >> Yeah. >> Vice Mayor, do you have anything else to add? >> That's weird. >> Yeah, that's >> No, just want to, you know, come my vision would be um something that is a a
central gathering place for Tquesta where families can walk to and uh you know, some type of band shell is probably the wrong word, but something like Jason had mentioned like the West Palm Beach waterfront with multiple uses. Um but clearly having those things but u you know a vision that we put
forth to the again during that public information campaign let them know what we what we envision but it also should be you know public shares you know five of us shouldn't decide what we're going to build there I think if if you know if all the voters are going to vote they should also have a an an input on what
it's going to look like as well. So, but yeah, I mean we can come up with a an idea type thing and it sounds like, you know, a a passive or a park that, you know, we can entertain it. It's multifunctional, multi-purpose, but I think there should be planning charettes to let the people that are going to pay
for this, let them tell us what it should look like as well. So, that's all I got. >> So, how I mean, what does that timing look like? is I know you said we have to submit we have to approve the language of the bond by September.
>> So there's a so this would be my recommendation based on what I'm hearing tonight. We do have to put a resolution if we want to move forward a resolution in the September meeting. What I would recommend is that we come back September 2nd which is our next workshop. We'll
have a complete time frame based on that date of what each step would be. We will also have Jay put together kind of a process what this looks like for the sharet the public engagement you know kind of his vision on how that will work
out in the next couple months. We also will have uh a lease agreement that you guys can take a look at for this property because that'll be part of him holding the owner holding this property is for us to lease the property. I mean, that's how he can get out, you know,
from the taxes and and um the insurance to help cover those costs. Um and then we can also have our cost for the appraisals. We'll have the two appraisal cost um at that workshop just to give you guys make sure everybody's on board with it. We won't actually do those yet
until uh council's fully on board and we've discussed all these things. So that's that's how I would envision it unless council sees something different that I'm missing. >> And then I guess my concern about having some direction about um what potentially
could be done there is how like how would the bond language be worded? Like is it just flat out to purchase a property and no reason or like I guess that because that's where I got hung up on last bond. I think why I got hung up out to vote too was because it was so
open-ended. So, how how would we word it to where like we don't necessarily have a plan, but we want, you know, we're praying out to vote. Like, how are we gonna even say what it's for, or do you just say it's simply to purchase? >> So, to add on to that, um,
if we were to start a planning process, the bond, the ballot question has to be done earlier than we could even probably do a Sharette. We'd probably still be doing that by the election. So, we wouldn't be able to put a design on the ballot question. My my personal
understanding from last time was the confusion of there was no specific property listed on that bond. It was very abandoned. There was some legal wording in there that possibly might have led to other things that had nothing to do with parks. >> So, I agree like that wording this time
needs to be super specific. Um, I think those are on our side this time just so residents understand and can make a better decision when they vote. Um, but the planning part I think that's my understanding is that's going to be kind of presented to public maybe on the website as we're going, but the ballot
question has to be done like and that was my concern. It's like how do we address on the ballot question? Um, like are we saying it's a park but then if it's a park but we want to do something like say more urban and have an event space or like lease a portion to do a cool restaurant like like would we not
be allowed to do that if we said it it was a park? Like I that's and that's maybe more Keith's question though of how we word it on. >> This is gonna be difficult because you don't have a lot of time right now that that that language. I mean you could talk about
for purposes of acquiring the land for public park purposes. But you know whether you develop it as an a passive park or or a more active with with facilities I
As we sit here tonight, I don't have a good answer for you because you don't have a lot of time to take the temperature of the community on on and decide what you want to do. I have I I can I can have better options
for you when we reconvene. But as we sit here tonight, I mean, that that's difficult because that needs to be done in time to get that language to the supervisor of elections by early December. So, you've only got a few
months to >> Yeah. The resolution doesn't have to be in September. I mean, we could slide it to October, possibly November, but that at somewhere in this process early, we're going to have to decide what we want that to look like. So, we could put the referendum language together. So, we
have a little bit of time, just not much. >> So, I have a question. So, I mean, and Keith as he he's very good once he gets out of here and he can kind of like really think think things through. >> I I would see it as just being very honest. I mean, village owned properties
are basically for the public. So, it would be for the public use and then somehow come up with wording that describes um like a range. >> Well, it would for now. But I'm saying I think it should just kind of lead towards public use. Like it's it would
if you vote yes, it would be used for public use to some degree. I don't know what the rest of that >> probably park purposes. But the question then becomes is how much you want to develop it. Do you, you know, do you want an amphitheater? Do you want a
restaurant? or do you just want a you know grassy area with with trees and benches or a heart trail for people to you? Those are very different things. That's why I'm thinking there's got to be some wording you can come up with that has a
range, but it's still public use. So, it wouldn't be >> purchased and then >> and the tricky part is is to >> I mean, sure, you you could say it could be from this all the way to that, but is that going to give your residents enough
confidence to vote yes? Because, you know, if you're too vague, you're you're going to be right back where you were the last time we did this. Um, >> I think we have to be awkwardly specific and I I hesitate to say we almost have to handcuff ourselves >> to get it done.
>> Exactly. And that's I have I didn't want to use that word, but like I don't I don't want to handcuff to where it's like it's just >> like we need to be smart about this. >> Maybe by the time we have to turn that ballot in, we've already done some outreach to kind of get a temperature of
a scale passive urban full-blown. Maybe we can by and then keep working after the we figure out what the ballot question says, then keep working for the specifics on more of the theme that the residents had kind of leaned towards. There's got to be a way to kind of work
this. >> I don't love the opening and survey either, right? Because then you got to surve like we would if whatever if it's decided tonight to move forward and we we start >> tonight like we start >> doesn't have to be decided tonight. I say September 2nd is when we'll we'll
come back with everything lined up and you guys can kind of give more direction at that point. Maybe we'll have some sample language, couple different options. But between the time that we put the resolution on, I think we can have some public engagement on this after September 2nd. So between
September 2nd, the time we put it on the council resolution, we can work through that process if that's what you guys want. >> Yeah. Maybe that'll just give a better direction and we can tweak that wording if needed. Right. >> I agree. That's what happened last time is it wasn't specific.
>> Yeah. >> Now I feel like they would be able to make a better decision. Yes or no? >> Yeah. >> You tell us. >> Okay. All right. I'll take public comment now. Do we have any comment cards? No. Any public comment? Yes, ma'am. Can you come up and state your name and address?
>> I'm Nancy Harvey, 165 Citadel Circle Jupiter. I am also the owner and head of school of Harvey Academy which is at one main street. And I just am here tonight to represent my students, all 96 of them that have the privilege, thanks to Phil
Perko, who gave us permission to use his field every day as recess. And getting outside every single day is just paramount to the daily experience these students have. So just so you know, my
staff, my students, and most of my families are living in the village of Dquesta would absolutely want some type of green space, urban, you know, whatever you decide, but it's very
important to my little community. So I just wanted to share that with you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Hello. My name is Ryan Frankle. um representative of the property that we were discussing. Uh thank you so much Lori for your comments earlier. We really appreciate them. And I just want
to start by saying although we are developers, we are local developers and we care a lot about the community. Like I grew up jumping off KO's Bridge. I love it here, you know, and I want the best for the community. And I think this is a great way for you guys, the the citizens to really come up with a plan
that will embody what the residents want. Um, and from an economical standpoint, although it's a big purchase price, there are opportunities through land leases if you guys wanted to put a small cafe or restaurant to bring in
some revenue to help offset the burden of the cost. Um, and if you guys have any questions or feel free to reach out to uh, Phil Perko or my father. So, thank you very much. >> Thank you, Ron. >> Any other public comment, Mr. Bradford?
Tom Thomas Bradford 44 Chestnut Trail. I really don't know where to begin except to tell you I think this is the absolute wrong thing at the wrong time. The my math t Well, first of all, let me tell you the rule of thumb on a 30-year go
bond is your your out-of- pocket cost will be two and a minimum two and a half% of the dollar value of the bond. So do your math. Okay. So my math tells me the debt service is $790,000
for 30 years. That's a lot of money. And I'm also concerned about the fact that you want to spend up to $100,000 of taxpayer money to apparently get you to a place where
the public has to make a decision for which they voted you to do. You have a responsibility when you talk to the people on the street and say, "What do you think about a green space in a park?" They don't know what you're supposed to know. And that is you've got
a governor who is saying that he does not want there to be any property tax and he's going to deal with it in the next legislative session and he might win. What in the world are you going to do while at the same time trying to take
annual debt service on of 790,000 97 whatever it was a big chunk of change and you haven't even penciled in the maintenance of Questa Park into your budget yet and now you're talking about adding three more acres downtown when
you can get an urban park for absolutely free if you negotiate with these people properly. Please do your job and find a way to get these things done. That's all I'm asking. It's a mistake for you to do this. And oh yeah, one last thing. What
is it about the Cherrettes that you've paid for and conducted in the past that you don't understand? They said very clearly they want mixed use, open space, retail, and residential.
Very simple. That's what you should be working on and you don't need another sharet because that is the result of the previous chettes. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Tom. >> Any other public comment, Marcia? And then I'll call you up. Marcia, go first and then I'll call you
up. >> Andrea Aken, 35 Bay View Road. And I would just encourage the council to really evaluate if this makes sense because respectfully I want to say that it sounds more like there's so much attention to to making this appeal to
the residents this time because it didn't last time and there all of the conversation seems to be around that prior to does this make financial sense? Does this make sense for the the village and the taxpayers? >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Thank you, Andrew.
>> Marsha, >> that was a nice lead in for me. So, I'm not opposed per se to this acquisition. Actually, I agree with Mr. French, which is unreal. Um, it would be lovely to have a centralized park to enhance
village events and residents access for green space. However, the proposal to acquire the property needs to be looked at in relation to other parks in Tqua. On the board right now is 1.3 million phase 2 for remembrance to Questa Parks
pro proposed improvements might well top six million and as the state who knows I would be more inclined to support this referendum with the following funding for the development of Paradise Park would take precedence over any other
future development of Dquesta Park. to Questa Park would remain as it is unless the state donates it to us. So it would just remain and you would just table all that all that stuff. Phase two and phase three of my beautiful Remembrance Park
would be way on the back burner. And using our experience with Remembrance Park, there should be a cost estimate for the development of both an active and passive park. It was 1.5 million for remembrance and there wasn't a splash pond, a slide, a anything. It was just
trees, grass, and a few benches and a few other a flag pole. So, what I fear the most and what my is what my husband would call a dog and pony show. Pretty renderings of our wonderful park without a price tag. No estimate of maintenance
or development cost. This is how we sell acquisitions by saying, "Okay, it's for my place it was less than $100 a year." But that cost is is fragmented. That's not the real cost. That's the cost to get the property. That's not the cost to develop the property. That's not the
cost to mow the lawn. What we need to have is a realistic price on what it costs, not just to get it, but to maintain it and to development. Otherwise, we're going to have a parcel like we had with remembrance where it sat there for how many years and nothing was done with it.
>> Thank you. >> Thank you, Marson. >> Any other public comment? Mrs. Watkins. >> Hi, Pat Watkins, 167 River Drive. Most of the points I would offer have been mentioned. Obviously, this is an enormous price tag and my concern as
I've expressed to you all before with Tquesta Park and you've added remembrance and what's there is beautiful, but taking this on, you have to look at the impact of the maintenance after the fact that's going to be on the community. This is a lot of
things going on and you have other obligations with the roads and the sidewalks and all of this. It's just it's just a lot. Um, yes, the village certainly needs green space. I would agree. But the price tag, I don't understand. I'm very relieved to hear you're going to get two other
appraisals. You should always have the buyer appraisals because that parcel is going to be difficult for any developer. Whoever buys of that property is going to have the same sort of issues that Mr. Perko has had in the past with the uh code you have now, the overlay, cross
parking agreements, whatever it is. it's going to be difficult and I can't imagine that won't impact an appraisal. So anyway, that's my comments. I'm glad I don't have this decision to make, but I understand you want the residents to do it. You don't really have time to um
figure out even to give them three choices. You don't have time. Look at all the time that Sharette took for Questa Park. You don't have that. I think you'd almost have to do two issues. A referendum, do you want to buy it? and then worry about a shared or the
into what after. But again, you've got a lot of car costs involved no matter what you do with it. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Any other public comment? >> Go for >> Piri. I live in the country club. Um I'm
in favor of the referendum. I'm in favor of the purchase. Um I would like to point out that the previous bond failed because it was a blank check. it this won't be um I think you have a very strong pitch to make to the residents that we're doing something specific with this money. Um I appreciate that the
mayor had voted against the previous bond and it was for that reason and that's the reason it failed. Um so I just want everybody to keep that in mind. Um we are being this would be specific and people would know what they're paying for. Um the other point I would like to make is be very careful
with maintenance costs. We have seen heavily inflated maintenance costs on prior um prior proposals for development um which and sometimes grossly underinflated or under um valued amounts for intensive developments. So that I
would pay special attention to. Um the other point I wanted to make was there is a way to fairly effectively and quickly survey some of your residents. you've got the EAC and the planning zoning board and we we meet every month. So, um I would encourage you to ask
those residents because we talk to other residents here and we'd be happy to provide um at least speaking for me as an alternate on the plan zone board, I would be happy to provide you information. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Any other public comment?
>> Okay. So I think uh consensus was bring it to our next workshop with a little more detail so we can make up our final decision. >> Yes. Vice Mayor, do you agree? >> Yes, I agree. Thank you.
>> Okay, staff, are you guys clear? Do you need anything else? Okay. All right. Uh just a reminder, we are skipping three because we removed that from the agenda. And our final agenda item four today is the legislative update from Keith. >> All right. Thank you, Mayor. I'm
told I'm not allowed to take the time, the FPL time to add to my time. So, I was joking. I >> I I'll uh be as succinct as I can here, but but a lot happened this session. Um
first, um I'm going to give you um a number of uh new laws that sort of require us to do to do things. they're so these are probably the the most important in terms of staff having to
bring you back changes to our codes and and uh policies and and things like that. Um so Senate Bill 784 is the first one I I will um remind you of and that has to do
with platting. Platting is now an administrative process. it no longer comes to a public hearing or the governing body. Um plat approval happens uh will now for the village happen um in community
development. So you won't see um plats anymore. Um House Bill 551 has to do with um permitting for for um sprinkler systems
and fire alarm systems. It requires the village to implement a simplified and accelerated permitting process um for those um for permits for for those systems and that has to be in
place by October of this year. Uh applies to projects where there's 20 or fewer um devices that that are being applied for. But if it's 20 or fewer uh we have to build building department will have
to um come up with a accelerated process. Um, Senate Bill 954 has to do with certified recovery residences, also known as sober
homes or or um group homes that um so the village has a reasonable accommodation policy, but we are going to be required under this new statute to make sure that that's codified in our
code. Um, a reasonable accommodation process essentially is is a process that allows anybody with a recognized disability under the Fair Housing Act or the Americans with Disabilities Act
um to be able to enjoy housing um at the same level that people without recognized disabilities can enjoy housing. even if it means that we have to um allow that to happen contrary to certain
portions of our code. Um so the pro there's the person with a disability or their representative applies for a reasonable accommodation, explains what their disability is, explains what code section they want an accommodation from, and then there's a
process. there's a there's a fairly established best practice for how these these hearings are handled or these requests are handled. But all that to say is we have to uh make sure that our process is codified and and that it complies with
the ADA and FHA requirements. >> One question on that one. >> Yeah. >> Just so I don't forget all the way to the end. You said sober home and and group disability home. To me, those are two different >> Well, group home can be You're right. Group homes can be all sorts of different things. Uh but this this is
for recovery residences is is the statutory term. >> Um >> but you said that's different. You said disability and I'm thinking >> well a big somebody who is a a recovering
substance abuser is considered someone with a disability under the Fair Housing Act or the ADA. a recovering alcoholic, a recovering drug addict, not using anymore, but someone who is in recovery, >> that person under the ADA and the FHA is
considered somebody with a disability. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Yeah. Um, let's see. House Bill 913 has to do with condos and co-ops. requires adoption of an ordinance
um which requires condos and co-ops that are subject this has to do with the milestone inspection, the Surfside issue. Um so we have we have to amend our code. So if if a condo that has to
have a milestone inspection, um we have to require them to schedule or commence their repairs within a year uh after they receive what what what's the law calls a phase 2 inspection report. Typically there's a there's a
phase one inspection and if the phase one inspection reveals certain structural deficiencies then they have to go to a phase two inspection and and that's a little more in depth. But all that to say, this this statute requires the local uh permitting authority to
have code that requires uh within a year of that phase 2 report that um the repairs um have been scheduled to commence. Um the uh that bill also requires each
local uh enforcement agency uh to provide uh we have to report to the department of to BPR business and professional regulation uh certain information on on milestone inspections that occur within the
village and and that begins um December 31st of this year. Um, Senate Bill 1730, it deals with affordable housing. Beginning November 1st of 2026, so it's
it's a little it's a year out. Municipalities must provide an annual report to the Department of Economic Opportunity, including information relating to live local act projects. So, so far we haven't actually had a live local project, but
um so this last one is uh a big one, Senate Bill 180. And everybody's probably heard of Senate Bill 180, which was adopted as a a change to the state's emergency response
statute. Um, so one of the big things it did, um, going back and let me let me find my other notes on that one. Give me one
second on Senate Bill 180. Here we go. So, uh, each county, um, that was listed in the federal disaster declaration for Hurricane Milton, which is us. Palm Beach County was in the Hurricane Milton
um disaster declaration. Um may not impose more restrictive or burdensome comp plan amendments, land development regulations or procedures uh regarding
um review, approval or issuance of development orders. Now, this is important for the period. This goes back retroactive to August 1st of 2024 through October 1st, 2027.
I I don't remember the date that we adopted our overlay code. >> So, this affects our overlay. Our overlay cannot be uh implemented because of this bill. We adopted our overlay districts in October >> of 2024. So, this bill prohibits us from
doing anything with our overlay district that we passed. And so, we cannot enforce our overlay district. I will say that there is uh there is some movement uh and even some petitions floating around to try to take to the state to try to get them to look at this bill
again because I think it has some unintended consequences. But it does severely impact uh what what we have done with the overlay district >> and that >> how do we adopt the quarter plan though because even if it's not codified as a overlay district like we can still use
that plan as a guideline with people but we just can't like enforce it >> right I mean we can ask for you know Jay can work with you know developers or people who are doing that but we can't enforce any of that's on there so we can't like I think there's some some
requirements for special or um special exceptions like we can't require them to come in for special exception now. And so there's some of that that which was going to trigger that we can't trigger any longer. So but I mean as far as some of the architectural or something we can
we can ask but >> yeah like trying to get civic because that that plan was adopted well way before that. So at least we have that plan we could try to work with like Jay could try to work with developers on some of that stuff. Anything that was adopted before August 1st of 2024 is
outside the scope of this preeemption. So it begins August 1st of 24 and it goes through October 1st of 2027. So on October 2nd of 2027 basically in two years all of that stuff will be coming. We can and start
enforcing it again under the current status of this law. There's nothing to say it won't change between now and then. >> So, I know, sorry to interrupt again, Ken's going to be here next week. Can we like talk to him about that one? And I
mean, I I'm I'll pull the rest of council. Like, that's for me very disappointing. I mean, is that something we'd want to advocate and like let Ken know like, hey, we're not a fan of this. We want to see what you know and if there's anything we could do to >> That makes me wonder why we were even here
>> sometimes. Yeah, >> all that hard work. >> Do we focus more on home rule as a general or do we pick off those smaller ones? >> I would start specific now because we've been fighting home for a while. >> Yeah. Yeah. Both, right? We're always fighting home rule. That's a prime example of it.
>> This was one of the biggest home rule, one of the biggest bites out of home rule this past session, this part of Senate Bill 180. It's it's it's significant. It's very significant. Vice Mayor, do you agree
with bringing up with Ken next week? >> 100%. >> All right. All right. Um, so that those are probably the worst of the worst. Um going to hit you with the worst news
first and then go through kind of go through. Um >> sorry, one more thing on 180. That one that was a laundry list bill. There was so much stuff. >> That's not the only thing in that one. You are >> our I think the building department has to do a lot with like plans for
>> permitting during an event. Like our like our staff is working on all that. Yep. That was a really big one. Okay. Um, where did I find it again real quick? >> Maybe the people in Tyler House, you should go to the beach more.
>> What? >> Yeah. You know, other things it does. It bans local moratoriums on construction or redevelopment on property damaged by a hurricane during that same time frame. Um it requires
uh designation of a a emergency contact person that's we have to notify department of emergency management by May 1st of each year. Uh it adds a local government requirement to provide online access to
substantial damage/substantial improvement determination letters. It requires uh local government emergency response contracts to include a provision requiring uh that a contractor pay damages and a
penalty for breach of contract. Um there's D inspection uh language um regarding uh infrastructure um with risk of flood. So yes, there's a whole bunch of things in this. the the
the biggest and most painful one is the um the retroactive application of of the land development comp plan uh regulations. But um
some other so here's some additional um under preeemption and home rule. Uh, House Bill 683 is the one that prevents us going forward from regulating the installation, maintenance, or use of artificial turf
on single family residential properties of 1 acre or less. Uh, the bill requires DP to um establish rules and requirements for artificial turf installation, maintenance, and use. Um,
this bill also generally had a provision that requires local government to promptly process contract change orders within 35 days of receipt. Um, it it does a few other things with
building permits. U, but but this the big one on on uh Senate House Bill 683 was the artificial turf. Uh so we're going to need to look at our artificial turf code as well and uh make some decisions on how to
bring that into compliance. You know, we have artificial turf regulations. Um but they won't be able to be applied to residential single family residential properties of 1 acre or less in size. >> Question. >> Yeah. >> Does that include rightaways or just
inside the property lines? So mo in my opinion it it is the it is the property the right of way uh is is the village's right of way. It's not it's it's not um
owned by the adjacent property owner. The other one with that, just as a note, you know, we still enforce our artificial turf because that that law does not go into effect until the D issues that those standards. So, all of
our artificial turf is still in play. We still notice of violations. Anybody that's, you know, in violation of that, obviously you guys know there's been some that have put in artificial turf without permits. Those have gotten notice of violation, especially the ones
that are in our rideway. So um so we're still working through all that until this is adopt the the regulations are adopted by FD. We're still you know we still have our code in place. >> So can we I mean would adopting
say the DP regulations get adopted will we just revise our codes our code to that spec and then can would we still issue permits still or are we not even permitting it anymore? I it's not clear to me on what that bill >> not for one acre or less single family
residences. >> It's not even permitted. So it really doesn't >> I think I think they still have to get permits submission of a building permit applications so that way we can make sure they're meeting those requirements of FD whatever FD puts out. But as long as they meet those requirements, we
can't deny that permit. So I believe I'm I'm like 99% sure that they still have to submit a a permit application. Um, but as long as they meet the requirements, we can't stop them, but we need to make sure that they're meeting those requirements. I think there's some permeability
um, you know, requirements for this artificial turf. Hopefully that whatever rules are promulgated will, you know, we have a pretty robust code that talks about quality of the turf and and how it's installed and how it's maintained.
Those were based on best practices at the time the code was written. So hopefully what the state does will be at least in the same ballpark. Um so that's artificial turf. Um th this one next one's interesting. You know
these laws are supposed to be single subject. I I don't know how these two things got put into the same bill, but Senate Bill 700 does of note does two things. is it preempts the regulation of electric vehicle charging stations to the state
and it also prohibits the addition of fluoride into the public water system. I have no idea how that's a single subject but um other than they're both preeemptions but uh both of those um passed.
>> So for the EV charging stations, does that mean like even at is that at a residence or is that like a charging station a parking lot? Like what does that mean? Because I know right now we like if someone does um has to do the electrical work for a charging station. >> No, I don't think Yeah, I don't think it's like if you have an electric
vehicle and you want to put the thing in your garage to charge your car. That's not what this is talking about. This is more like if you know a Wawa came back and they wanted to have a whole row of EV charging stations that that's what I'm I believe this has
to do with um this is next one's almost just a fun fact as opposed to anything we probably have to worry about. But Senate Bill 118 preempts the to the state all regulation of the establishment, maintenance, and
activities and operations of any presidential library within its jurisdiction. True story. Um so beach use Senate Bill 1622.
Um this sort of dialed back a portion of state law. There's a common law concept called the customary use doctrine which basically and this is a very high level explanation
generally an a oceanfront property uh owns to what's considered the mean high water line for purposes of this discussion and this is by no means scientifically accurate. We'll call that the dry sand
and they could prevent people from using or going on that as private property. Uh public is generally allowed to traverse uh below the mean high water line or the
wet sand. Customary use doctrine says that if for a significant period of time there is historical o open and obvious evidence that people
have used that dry sand for public recreation and we're no nobody ever made an issue of it. The customary use doctrine says, well, this has been this is a custom. It's been going on for a long time. Local
government could adopt an ordinance that says we're going to say that we're going to we're going to say that the public can continue to use that as public beach even though it's privately owned. uh a few years ago, I don't remember exactly what year, the legislature
passed a law that required local government to have a judicial review of any ordinance that attempted to invoke the customary use doctrine. This bill, this Senate bill 1622, repealed that and basically returned to
the old common law uh procedure where the government can simply declare the existence of customary use and adopt the ordinance without the judicial determination. Um doesn't require us to do anything, but it's it's uh something to be aware
of. Um ebikes, Senate Bill 462. This was actually one of the few changes in the local government's favor. So this bill, this law amended amends
the current ebike statute. Under this new law, local governments are now allowed to set a local minimum age requirement for operation of ebikes um as well as motorized scooters
uh and micromobility devices uh within the jurisdiction. So you're now able to put in your code, you have to be at least x years old to operate a ebike in the village of Tquesta. The law also
allows us to require operators of ebikes uh to have governmentissued photo ID on them when they're operating the ebike. And the bill authorizes local governments to provide
training on the safe operation of of ebikes, which I mean seems like I don't know why we couldn't do that ourselves anyway before this, but but that is um what this statute does. So, it gives you uh
the ability to adopt age restrictions, require that the operator carry a governmentisssued photo ID, and provide training on safe ebike operation. >> Question. >> Yeah. >> If any municipality, let's say they
chose an age of 13, they don't have IDs. >> So, is that like a new thing? They'd have to go get an ID. Well, that this doesn't change the government ID process. So, that that would that code would be problematic. >> Just curious.
>> Yeah. >> Just make sure I heard that right. >> Yep. >> Okay. >> Your in your example, I think that would certainly be problematic, but but that is what the new ebike law does. So, just as a update with that, the chief uh was recently at a chief's meeting and uh at this point, we don't
know of any Palm Beach County municipalities that are are taking an additional step. I think everybody's kind of in the wait and see stage. So, um, we're obviously tracking this with other mun municipalities and obviously if council wants to, uh, take action, we
can, but, at this point, um, I know the chief's looking at how do we enforce some of these things and looking at what our municipalities are doing to enforce these things, and nobody else right now is doing them. So, or or has intentions of doing them that we know of. >> And the state statute is still the same.
They didn't change that. They're just giving the municipalities and counties a flexibility to do something different, right? >> Yeah. You can still either have them on the roads or the sidewalks or both that you have to allow them, >> right? The only change is the age and
the ID and it specifically says we can have safety training program. Um, all right. Moving on to building, zoning, and land development issues.
Senate Bill 1080, not 180, but 1080, um, prohibits municipalities from limiting the number of quai judicial hearings held each month if such limitation causes a delay
in the in the development review process for any particular application. also requires municipalities to confirm receipt of an application uh for a development order within five days of the receipt. Um so there's a couple of things community development
and building department will need to keep in mind. I don't think we have to change our code on that one, but there's definitely some procedural things we need to keep in mind on that. Um so we had live local 3 this session and that was Senate Bill 1730.
Um, so the revisions to live local this year, uh, they added what's called, and I'll quote, any flexibly zoned area permitted for commercial, industrial, or
mixed use. So, this would be like a PUD that's added to the list of zoning categories where live local development could be commenced. Um, it prohibits local government from requiring more than 10% of the total
square footage of a mixeduse project to be used for non-residential purposes. Um, let's see. It now awards attorneys fees to prevailing party uh in a in a uh in
litigation in a civil action filed against the local government for a violation and an amount not to exceed $200,000. Um, it approves affordable housing projects on property owned by religious institutions
and requires local governments to wave 20% of the impact fees associated with those projects that are on religious institutionallyowned property. Those are the high points on the live local amendments. um you know but again
this is we haven't seen any and I will tell you uh I just came out of a seminar last week and one of the topics was live local there is there is not a no nobody's seeing a lot of this it it
did not take off I guess the way some people thought it might it so that's interesting I already talked about platting um is now an administrative um it's an administrative act. So, we're
probably going to have to look at our um our uh I think it's chapter 66 of our code and our procedures to conform any contrary ordinance uh to this new law. We already talked about certified recovery residents. Uh we have and there is a
time frame on that I don't think I mentioned before January by January 1st of 2026. So we have a little bit of time to adopt the ordinance establishing um the reasonable accommodation procedures.
Um it also the local governments have to provide a written determination on the reasonable accommodation request within 60 days after receipt of a complete application. So there is time frame on that. Uh, let's see. I already mentioned
the um building permits for alarms and sprinklers. Um, one of the other I I didn't mention um there there's a really short fuse. Um,
it's only a couple of business days after this complete application is submitted uh to issue the permit for that. Um, so that's really tight and and the billing department's going to need to be aware of that. Um,
let's see. Moving on to grants, finance, and taxation issues. Senate Bill 738 authorize municipalities to exempt public and private preschools from certain special assessments levied by the municipalities.
Um, >> that's probably the only one I really need to go over in this workshop. Code enforcement and emergency services. Um, Senate, I'm sorry. House Bill 929 dealt with firefighter health and safety, mandates that firefighter employees are
to be provided with notice that firefighting gear may contain chemical hazards or toxic substances, and requires firefighter employees to be provided with chemical hazard-free protective gear when readily available on the commercial market. Uh, it
encourages firefighter encourages firefighter employers to limit normally scheduled shifts to no more than 42 hours per week. Um, non-compliance can subject local
government to fines of up to $50,000 per violation. So obviously fire chief needs to be aware of those policies and make sure that we're in conformance with them. Um
already talked about Senate Bill 180. Um let's see some ethics and public records issues. Senate Bill 268 created a new public record exemption for the home address, telephone numbers, uh, and
and personal information for current congressional members and public officers, including municipal elected officials, uh, and their spouses and adult children, and the names, addresses, telephone numbers, and dates of birth, and schools of minor children
of of such officials. So, that was a new public record exception. Um, Senate Bill 348 prohibits candidates, elected officers, appointed officers, and public employees from
knowingly misrepresenting their armed forces of the United States service records. Um, calling the next couple of things social and political issues. Um,
let's see. Well, actually, I already went over ebikes. So, um, House Bill 209 passed, and that's the one that that that most notably and locally affected Jonathan Dickinson
State Park. This is, uh, Senator Harold sponsored the bill that prohibits installation of golf courses, tennis courts, and other sporting facilities, as well as hotels within state parks. Um
couple of utility issues. House Bill 703 created a thing called the relocation reimbursement grant program within the department of commerce. Uh it assists communication service providers. So, you know, like T-Mobiles and and AT&Ts of
the world uh with financial um assistance for when they have to relocate their utilities when the lo when the municipality requires them to move their facilities. The money appropriated to this grant fund comes from the local government halfcent sales
tax clearing trust fund which thereby reduces the available revenue to be distributed to local governments and municipalities from that fund. So there's some shifting of money uh that may negatively impact what you
get from the state on that. Um utility service restrictions. House Bill 1137 uh adds local government authorities to the list of utility providers who are restricted from regulating the types of fuel sources used for energy production
in the municipality. Um, so like you couldn't mandate that people can't have natural gas or or or have to use electric electric appliances, that sort of thing. It also
prevents the building commission and the fire marshall from adopting uh codes into those codes that deals with that. Um but the you know high level short answer to this one is the bill prevents local government from prohibiting natural gas appliance through building
and fire codes. Um so the last thing uh this isn't really a a statute but Florida doge went into effect uh this year. Um, Department of Government Efficiency. Basically, you can use publicly
available data to identify and report unnecessary spending within county and municipal governments and recommend legislative reforms to promote efficiency, maximize productivity, and eliminate waste in state and local government. And we've already received
one or two, I'll just call them public records requests from Doge for a variety of different things. Um, and uh, you know, I'm sure I know we've complied with those, but uh, so yeah, I
mean that that's happening as we speak. We've gotten a couple. All the municipalities in Palm Beach County have gotten similar. Um I think there are certain jurisdictions in other parts of the state that are being targeted a little more heavily
than I think Broward County is being hit pretty hard with with uh additional requests for information. But um basically when a Doge request comes in, we have seven days uh to comply. There are financial
penalty provisions in in the uh the Doge order, executive order that that can be brought to bear. So, that's sort of the high points on the things that did pass. I have a whole list of things that didn't pass.
I'd be happy to go through those if you'd like to hear the high points on that um tonight. That's totally up to you. Um, >> I don't need to hear that not pass. I'm pretty engaged with that. >> Good news is that, you know, they'll
probably be back next year and and and we'll hear all about them again in and in in the 26 session. Um, but, you know, th those are the ones that that I think will have the most direct impact on the village uh going forward. So, we we
definitely have a few things to do in terms of some code updates and policy revisions and so forth. And I don't expect next year to be any better. >> Thank you, Keith. Council, do you have any questions for Keith?
>> I already asked him as we went along. >> I'm good. The I believe 30 days our state committee start for what we're going for the following year. And I guess not a question or statement. I'm concerned of
uh short-term rentals and home uh home rule. Those are two things that I know we've been battling for a while, but I think they affect us extremely directly inquest. >> Yeah, vacation rentals has been under I know the municipal
administration policy committee has been fighting that fight for as long as I've been going to those committee meetings. I mean, for years. there really wasn't any vacation rental legislation. 2025,
you know, 2024, as you recall, there was a huge u bill that ended up not going through. Um, so I I don't know if if everybody's finally gotten tired of of it or if the vacation rental lobby is
happy with where the legislation is. I I don't know if there's going to be a um push from the other side, from the local government side to for some relief in 26 or not, but uh yeah, that it's a that is a constant. That's one that's always
on the radar one one way or the other. >> Thank you. A lot a lot of the ones that did not pass are probably going to like a lot of them will be on deck again in some form, but I've always heard like the rule is like it like once it's gone through three time and three times and it doesn't pass it goes away. But I feel
like that's not the case. There's certain >> that's always like the rumor out there, but I feel like things continue even after three years like there's still >> Well, and and and you know that came up during your workshop. Um you know, next
year the the property tax issue is going to be explored at the legislature. And that that's a very kind way of saying that that's we're going to war over that one. I think I I don't I I I don't know how that's going to play out, but it will be
a certainly will be a feature next year. Uh you know, and and the list of bills that didn't pass. Um, couple of the things I have in there is, you know, there were attempts to put things on the ballot to to
put exorbitant homestead exemptions on the books and and other cuts and slashes to property tax, doing studies to find ways to repeal property tax completely. uh you know th those were some things that happened this session that that
didn't pass uh but they certainly will be back in 2026 uh and that that that's going to probably be a big fight next year. >> Vice Mayor, do you have any questions for Keith?
>> Nope, I'm good. Thank you. >> Okay. Is there any public comment? Mr. Bradford? I think we'd all be hardressed to actually call any aspect of Keith's uh presentation as high points. Um we might
as well just take up a collection and build a funeral p out in the village green and light the concept of home rule and cremate it right there on the spot because if this keeps going there will be no such thing as home rule. But I I
my question is this is S SB 180 the bill that said more or less you can't do any zoning changes or lander development rag changes until I don't know >> yes >> October 2027 >> that is that is Senate Bill 180. Yes.
>> Is this is it possible to do the following? Can you adopt a zoning ordinance andor a land development rig ordinance now that takes effect on October the 2nd, 2027? It's a good It's
a good question because um looking for um I I don't have the language of the bill, but I have my my um memo notes and and what I wrote is that these
amendments apply retroactively with any more restrictive actions or moratorium ordinance deemed null and void. abnio. So you could you could try it and make an argument. There's no there's no judicial
guidance on on doing that right now. >> I think it certainly complies with the spirit of what the statute the new statute's doing. >> I would recommend to you guys that whenever you feel there's something that needs to be changed in relative to zoning and land development racks, do
it. just make it effective uh October the 2nd, 2027. At least you got it on the books and it's there and that might even help you relative to some modification to SB80 that comes down the path. And I I'm going to tell
other governments that I deal with, same thing. Just go ahead and do it. Do it. It is in keeping with the spirit of the law. Thought I wanted to bring that up. So, thank you for listening. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Thank you. Any other public comment?
>> Okay. Can I get a motion to adjourn the meeting? >> So moved. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I. >> Thank you, Rick. >> Rick, great. >> Oh, yeah. I heard your ros go.